Jetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7441 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4741 times:
These were exclusive to UA for their High Density 727's. UA was the only carrier to operate them. They were configured to 189 passengers, and needed the extra exits mandated by the FAA for the minimum number of exits requirements. UA used them most on the trunk routes from ORD-LGA, BOS, DCA. They were later converted to standard 727's and the exits were sealed. Another oddity with UA's 727, were that many of UA's 727-200's had rear doors that differed from most 727's. The viewing ports were small compared to those operated by most other airlines. If you look closely at the 2L on this one, it has a passenger sized window on it,
YukonTrader From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 207 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4704 times:
as far as I remember, that door was a pecularity of the early, non-advanced B727-222 of United (all of them pretty early -200 models) of which the airline had close to thirty units, give or take (N7620U-N7647U?). The much more numerous B727-222 Adv. in the N72xxU and N74xxU range that United added to the fleet later on didn't feature it.
Unfortunantely, I cannot remember the exact reason for sure. A voice in the back of my head whispers United might have equiped the early -200s with a galley in mid-cabin (similar to the B727-100 which had a galley ahead of the wing, accessible via a service door on the right hand side of the fuselage only). But I'm not sure whether this is the reason, or whether it was actually an emergency exit that Boeing or United initially considered necessary to meet the required evacuation time limits in emergency situations.
Sorry, just some guessing on my part, but I'm sure we'll quickly stand enlighted by a more knowledgeable person...
Edit: Seems from Jetjack74s parallel posting that the second possibility (evacuation) is the probable cause.
SR100 From UK - England, joined Dec 2005, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4604 times:
...and the rear starboard service exit is the same size as the front starboard service exit, a configuration only United had.
Just check United's DC-8-61, they also had an extra rear wing emergency exit on both sides, bringing the total number of exits on each side to seven instead the regular 6.
During the late 60s, both Boeing and Donald Douglas adjusted the layout of the exits to the requirements of their customers. Donald Douglas much more with their DC-8-61/62/63, e.g. door 1R on the DC-8-61/63 can be right after the flight deck and the two lavatories and in front of the first row of seats (DL among others), or door 1R can be after the first few rows right in front of the wing (UA, KL among others). Then the larger aft wing emergency exits could also be a full size door either closer to the overwing emergency exits like AC or CP, or closer to the last exits like EA. Not to mention the layout of the windows... Another interesting aspect is that only the DC-9-31s for Eastern had a much larger starboard service door than all the other DC-9s and MD-80s. Boeing offered different sizes of service doors on the 707/720, you will find airlines with two regular small starboard doors, some will have the front door large like AA or Western - and the same size as on the B-727, or both being large like United on their 720s.
I remember that United wanted to introduce a high-density configuration on the B-727-222 used for intra Californian flights. But it was also the time they went for a five abreast coach seating on the DC-8s, but I do not remember whether the B-727s had also this configuration. The latter delivered B-727-222s didn't have the extra exits. During the 80s, all the extra exits on 727s and DC-8s were blocked as seen on your picture, where the exit no longer is marked.
RampRat74 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1556 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4542 times:
UA had their rear galley on the FO side of the aircraft. Most carriers had them on the Captains side. This made working this type hard. We had to always close the rear cargo door and pull the belts, so the food truck can get in. I don't understand why United didn't have the galley on the otherside?
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4504 times:
Quoting RampRat74 (Reply 5): UA had their rear galley on the FO side of the aircraft. Most carriers had them on the Captains side. This made working this type hard. We had to always close the rear cargo door and pull the belts, so the food truck can get in. I don't understand why United didn't have the galley on the otherside?
Braniff (v1.0) also had the aft galleys on the F/O's side, and they were just as much as a pain in the arse as United's were. From a catering perspective (ex-Dobbs House) approaching the aft galley involved more reliance on your guideman, since it wasn't as easy to see things for yourself since the wing was on the opposite side of the truck as you (the driver) were. Backing out was even more problematic, and I'd suspect that UA/BN 727-200s had more cases of wing strikes than did airlines that had the galley on the captain's side.
At IAH, BN got so tired of the wing strikes that they made us cater from the captain's side, and dragging their big meal carriers (with the one-piece doors that were always popping off) which was no fun...
LGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1149 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4466 times:
I remember touring a UA 722 when I was kid probably around 1969 when the extra door was still active. I remember instead of the normal three ABC seats the A seat was missing next to the door and the door had a large compartment protruding from it for the evacuation slide, seemed like it was larger than a normal slide. I was around 9-10 years old but I can still remember that walk thru surprisingly. I also remember it had a colorful interior !
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8251 posts, RR: 54
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4414 times:
Thank you so much for excellent replies. Can't believe I started a thread about 727 exit anolamies without remembering those Dan Air 727-100s. Where the hell did they spring from? The exits were retro-fitted when the aircraft came onto the British register, right? The British CAA used to be real bastards (the 707 owes the stabiliser under it's tail to the CAA) and I think they insisted on the extra exits being fitted.
Going back to the United machines, it's interesting that United or the FAA deemed the extra exits necessary on 727s if they were carrying 189 passengers; but I'm sure plenty of charter airlines around the world, and certainly in Europe (Dan Air with their own 727-200s, Sterling, Condor et al), flew 727s with 189 passengers.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
Crosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2614 posts, RR: 57
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4207 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8): The British CAA used to be real bastards (the 707 owes the stabiliser under it's tail to the CAA) and I think they insisted on the extra exits being fitted.
I remember reading that Boeing liked the improved handling qualities of the ventral fin which was insisted on by the ARB (now CAA) so much that they incorporated it into new-build 707s, which they were under no obligation to do since the ARB only had jurisdiction over BOAC's G-registered fleet.
The ventral fin came into being because in certain situations (one engine out or crosswind landing) the 707 had marginal lateral stability because it's tailfin was too short. Pilots had a tendency to apply aileron inputs which could lead to overcorrections and a Dutch roll. Boeing test pilot Tex Johnston, backed up by several aerodynamicists, recommended a taller fin and ventral fin to increase the keel area of the aircraft (as well as fully-boosted rudder).
These fin first appeared on BOAC 707-400 aircraft to meet ARB certification rules.
As for the question, I asked the same one 5 years 9 days ago here under my old username. See, the airliners.net search engine really does work - I didn't think it would but it found it first time!
Here's the reply from Buzz - who's also still an active member.
Hi Jet Set, Buzz here. I'm a Line Mechanic for UAL and i know about those doors.
In the mid 60's there were concerns that with airliners getting bigger, people would be trapped inside during an accident. Since congress-people ride on airliners, they changed the FAR's (Fed Aviation Regs). This required more hatches to be designed into the cabin, the DC-8-61's had them too. We always called them Type 4 exits, guess that's what the FAR's classified the differenet hatches as. They were for emergency use only, parts were made to shear as the door opened. But it saved a lot of weight since it didn't have to take the everyday abuse.
Later the manufacturers were able to show that enough people could escape in a certain number of seconds, so the Type 4 doors were bolted closed. FAR's come, and FAR's go. It's a legal thing that i don't understand.
When i was in overhaul we'd pop the hatches (they swung down) for access, but they never got used much. Notice, we don't have those "Stretch" model 727's anymore. They were built in the late 60's and had small engines (JT8D-7's). We're still running the Advanced versions. They are long, have bigger engines, and were delivered in the late 70's. So you won't find a Type 4 door on them.
If you see some of the DC-8's we had that Emery, or BAX bought you can see the Type 4 door forward of the mid galley door.
CVG2LGA From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4166 times:
Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 6): and I'd suspect that UA/BN 727-200s had more cases of wing strikes than did airlines that had the galley on the captain's side.
If I recall correctly I read a thread here just the other day about that sort of thing (not flaming you).
Just the other day I was fortunate enough to board a Boeing 727-222 through the rear stairs and even more so fortunate that it was operated by Pan Am. Yea i know that its not the REAL Pan Am but I was only 10 years old when they went out of service (1991 right?) and so I never was able to even see a real Pan Am aircraft much less board one. So it was a treat and I was telling my friend that it was ex-United and all about the rear stairs and the re-design because of DB Cooper and he was just staring at me cause thats odd for someone to know (to him anyway). But this aircraft N349PA did have the exit door on the rear left and there was not a galley in the middle of the aircraft.
*Off topic but does anyone know if Pan Am originally ever operated from/to CVG.
They don't call em' emergencies anymore. They call em' Patronies.
Jetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7441 posts, RR: 50
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4092 times:
Quoting Crosswind (Reply 10): The ventral fin came into being because in certain situations (one engine out or crosswind landing) the 707 had marginal lateral stability because it's tailfin was too short. Pilots had a tendency to apply aileron inputs which could lead to overcorrections and a Dutch roll. Boeing test pilot Tex Johnston, backed up by several aerodynamicists, recommended a taller fin and ventral fin to increase the keel area of the aircraft (as well as fully-boosted rudder).
That's partly true, but the other part was that stablilty problems were also tied into the fact that RR-powered 707's experianced a higher degree of wing flutter, because the smaller pylons and the high-bypass nacelles, gave a little less control at the altitudes it was cleared to fly at on it's transoceanic crossings. The recommedations to the 707-400's led to the extention of the vertical stab at the top for all 707's as well as the ventral fin. The first -400 built with the taller stab, was G-ARRB
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4081 times:
Quoting CVG2LGA (Reply 11): If I recall correctly I read a thread here just the other day about that sort of thing (not flaming you).
It was probably the recent thread on Menzies hitting the AS MD-80 and not reporting the damage. I related a story about someone hitting a BN 727-200 wingtip (which is what drove BN's decision to have us cater from the captain's side) and not telling anyone that aircraft had been hit...
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3970 times:
Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 9): For the longest time until I started working for DL that some 727-200's had another cargo door in the rear. That's two cargo doors at the rear end of the aircraft.
we used both back doors when i first started way back when...it was used mainly when we had to load a bunch of mail on a quick turn....easiest way to tell the difference back then between a adv vs non adv 27 was the beacon....rotating was a non-adv and the red strobe was adv....if any one remembers when we had the 27 lhr operation..those were all non adv 727s config in a f-24 y-106
The only difference I see is that the pax windows go right up to the door and behind, while on the other US majors...except for Continental...they don't because of the galley...
Have a close look again at the photos in the thread starter...
On all United B727-222 aircraft;
Door 2L is the same as found on most other B727-200 aircraft (emergency exit/service door with a passenger window)
Door 2R on United B727-200s is an entry/service door with a small wide angle viewing lense (as found at 1L/1R) unlike other 727-200s
Have a look at these photos
Standard door 2R on the American B727, and the Entry-type door 2R on the Pan Am (ex-United) B727
Hiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2180 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3788 times:
Interesting thread and some conjecture as well. UAL ordered their original 722 with the center galley door to match their 721 fleet but that option was quickly dropped in followon orders. The galley doors were oversize due to UAL using modules...not just carts...originally. Also UA put the water service port at the right rear door as their original in house catering trucks also supplied the water. And yes having catering on the right in the rear slowed the turns of the aircraft tremendously buit was considered a standardization within ual with all fleet types.
As for the rear cargo compt's with the second smaller 721 door several carriers had that option to speed turns though it did add some weight and loss of space for netting to keep the door swing area clear.