Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Model 40 And The 787  
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 12292 times:

I came across this photo sequence on Pprune today.

http://www.airlinereporter.com/2010/...boeing-787-flying-with-boeing-40c/

How the world of commercial aviation has changed in less tha 90 years!


Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21417 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 12293 times:

And how people have shrunk in that time, too. Those 1920s people were HUGE!


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 12275 times:

As a Seattle native, I think that is just flat awesome. Thanks for sharing.


Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineWarpSpeed From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 577 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 12155 times:

Thanks for posting. Must be awesome to be able to fly with the upper half of your body outside the plane.


DaHjaj jaj QaQ Daghajjaj !!!!
User currently onlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5254 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 11915 times:

The only thing I am bummed by is there isn't a picture with both entirely in frame.
(But I do understand the problem being that one flies 3x - 4x the speed of the other.)

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineCaryjack From United States of America, joined May 2007, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 11796 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Thread starter):
I came across this photo sequence on Pprune today.

Thanks for the photo. It would not be wise for the little guy to get too close to a large jet airliner. What speed do you think they're flying and how close could they be? Oh, and while you're at it, what altitude do you think they are flying?  
Thanks,  
Cary


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 11772 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 4):
The only thing I am bummed by is there isn't a picture with both entirely in frame.

Click on the thumbnails and you'll get full pictures, some of which have both entirely in the frame.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently onlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3321 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 11391 times:

Quoting Caryjack (Reply 5):
Thanks for the photo. It would not be wise for the little guy to get too close to a large jet airliner. What speed do you think they're flying and how close could they be? Oh, and while you're at it, what altitude do you think they are flying?

The 787 is almost certainly flying faster and so the photographer only has a limited time to get a "formation" shot off as the 787 flys past. With a top speed of 128mph, there is no way the 787 is flying in static formation flaps up. There is also a huge amount of lateral separation between the two. The Model 40 has a 44ft wingspan and the 787 is 197ft, so that gives you some idea of how much closer it is to the camera. In fact the 787 is taller than the wingspan of the model 40.


User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 11325 times:

Really neat pictures! Thanks for sharing!


/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently onlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5254 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 11188 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 6):
Click on the thumbnails and you'll get full pictures, some of which have both entirely in the frame.

   Thanks!
My bad for not going further.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10960 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 7):
With a top speed of 128mph, there is no way the 787 is flying in static formation flaps up.

It appears that the 787 is in takeoff flap configuration with the leading edge in the "no gap" position and a small trailing edge deflection.

Quoting Caryjack (Reply 5):
What speed do you think they're flying

I'd guess it's about Flaps 20. The transition speed for going from Flaps 20 to Landing Flap is Vref + 20 kts. If the 787 is at a light weight, Vref could be around 125 kts, so Vref + 20 = 145 kts.

I suspect that the Model 40 is probably not flying at 100% power, so it's speed is probably around 110 kts, making the speed differential on the order of 35 to 40 kts.

Quoting Caryjack (Reply 5):
Oh, and while you're at it, what altitude do you think they are flying?

Based on western Washington weather on May 8 when I believe the pictures were taken, I'd guess it was about 5000 - 8000 ft.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineAnshuk From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2009, 485 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 10101 times:

Woow! Awesome pics! Thank you so much for sharing  

User currently offlinezainmax From Pakistan, joined Jul 2009, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 9788 times:

I m glad to see the Boeing's oldest aircraft still flying perfectly !
Great honor to see the oldest and newest flying together.



ZAINMAX APPRENTICE MECHANIC - PIA
User currently offlineSLCGuy From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 9489 times:

Cool! What would be great, the model 40, 80, 247, 307, 377 Stratocruiser and the 707-787 series together in formation! Too bad that there probably aren't any of the 80 thru 377 still airworthy.

[Edited 2010-05-15 03:28:17]

[Edited 2010-05-15 03:30:15]

User currently offlineDAL1044 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8011 times:

http://home.comcast.net/~biplane0/

Much more information on the Boeing Model 40 and its rebuild at the above link.


User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7622 times:

Quoting SLCGuy (Reply 13):
Too bad that there probably aren't any of the 80 thru 377 still airworthy.

I don't think there are any airworthy 80's but I know there is at least one flyable 247, 307 and 377 (if you count a C-97).



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7371 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Thread starter):
How the world of commercial aviation has changed in less tha 90 years!

As much as I hate to say this, you can blame the rapid growth of the aerospace industry directly on war, and the cold war. If those things weren't going on, who knows where we'd be today. Particularly, without the cold war. The cold war kept us going in terms of practical new aviation designs.

UAL


User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7181 times:

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 16):
As much as I hate to say this, you can blame the rapid growth of the aerospace industry directly on war,

While you have a case, we went from the Model 40 to this:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/KLM--...d=d26b428b0aeacceb693e73a16af96b60

in about 10 years on the basis of commercial enterprise (mail and passengers). The change is pretty radical, particularly in the areas of structures and aerodynamics. Also consider this happened during the Great Depression when military spending in the US was greatly reduced and commercial activity was significantly curtailed.

Military spending hasn't been responsible for all the change we've seen in commercial aviation.

[Edited 2010-05-15 07:41:25]


Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4256 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6234 times:

Excellent post, thanks so much for showing us these pics!

User currently offlinechrisjw From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4244 times:

If only there were some hi-res ones then I would have a new background on my laptop.

Thanks for the share


User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4120 times:

Quoting chrisjw (Reply 19):
If only there were some hi-res ones then I would have a new background on my laptop.

You have to click again on the photo to get the hi-res.

Even then though, now that i Look, it's not really hi-res enough. Perhaps you could just center the pic on your desktop.

[Edited 2010-05-15 17:01:23]

User currently offlineAirport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4095 times:

It's so bizarre. I've seen so many in-flight 3D computer renderings of the 787 flying that when I see REAL photos of the 787 flying, it looks like an animation!   

Cheers!
Anthony/Airport


User currently offlineDrewski2112 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4069 times:

Ha! I remember BOE001 talking to three airplanes on their company air to air frequency doing multiple passes around Mt. Rainer last week on a photo flight, but I had no idea what the other planes were. BOE001 was telling the planes their airspeed and counting down from five. This must have been it.

User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

I had personal mail from the gentleman who took the pictures giving some followup through the link provided below.

http://www.airlinereporter.com/2010/...reamliner-and-boeing-40c-pictures/

Thanks David.

Interestingly enough, I was pretty close on the 787 flaps down speed while the Model was traveling a bit slower.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 10):
I'd guess it's about Flaps 20. The transition speed for going from Flaps 20 to Landing Flap is Vref + 20 kts. If the 787 is at a light weight, Vref could be around 125 kts, so Vref + 20 = 145 kts.

I suspect that the Model 40 is probably not flying at 100% power, so it's speed is probably around 110 kts, making the speed differential on the order of 35 to 40 kts.

I really blew the altitude estimate though as the pictures were taken at 12,000'. I was basing my guess on the clouds and the local weather conditions. Since I live in the San Juan islands, it may have been a little different near Mt. Rainier.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 10):
Based on western Washington weather on May 8 when I believe the pictures were taken, I'd guess it was about 5000 - 8000 ft.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA Livery And The 787 posted Sat Dec 13 2008 14:24:29 by 1337Delta764
Boeing Aero: Preparing For The 787-8 posted Sat Aug 2 2008 19:14:36 by Pmg1704
CO And The 787 posted Thu Jul 31 2008 04:49:02 by NicoEDDF
Qantas And The 787-3 posted Mon Jun 9 2008 04:13:48 by Dkramer7
Air Canada And The 787 Delays posted Thu Apr 10 2008 05:38:23 by CF105Arrow
AA And The 787 Vs 777-200LR posted Wed Feb 20 2008 07:48:22 by Flavio340
Will Boeing Display A Mockup Of The 787 In PAS? posted Thu Jun 14 2007 11:48:46 by LY777
Delta And The 787 posted Sat May 19 2007 00:38:00 by Mustang304
LH And The 787-3 posted Sun Oct 22 2006 19:07:01 by 1337Delta764
Qantas And The 787 posted Tue Aug 29 2006 04:52:07 by Boston92