Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 6869 times:
As Greg alluded to, for many years it sat in Florida.
A few years ago Hiller purchased it and moved it to California as a centerpiece to the Hiller Aviation Museum at KSQL (San Carlos, California). They have the nose section indoors and are slowly restoring it.
It's very impressive especially when you realize the size of it (as compared to the Concorde or the B-70)
Fanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6774 times:
Cool photos, Richard. Thanks!
A flight engineer's station - wow, that's a blast from the past! Actually, I'm old enough to remember seeing the black-and-white photo of Boeing's new creation in the newspaper. I also had a Revell kit of the Boeing SST, complete with Pan American markings....
The aeroplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Flygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6601 times:
I remember seeing photos of the mock-up sitting in an overgrown field in Florida years ago. It was a mess. This was before the Hiller brought the nose section to the museum. I am not sure but I think the musuem only acquired the nose section.
SuperG From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 58 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6579 times:
The Boeing 2707-300 metal mockup was in a scrapyard near the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. I happened upon it in while visiting there in October, 1998. It was in several large pieces, but was easily identifiable. I don't know if it's still there.
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8336 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6514 times:
The Delta picture is not the same SST design, it looks more like a McDonnell DOuglas proposal. It doesn't have the sexy swing wing design (which was one of the main things that killed the programme, so much $$$). Anyone got any more artists impressions in airline livery? Love to see Pan Am, United, maybe a bit of JAL or Qantas action?
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
UALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6432 times:
UAL had a large wooden model of the Boeing SST in UA Livery located in the lobby of EXO back in the 70's when my father worked there. Does anyone know what happen to it? UA must still have it, is it at DENTK now?
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13370 posts, RR: 77
Reply 22, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6411 times:
Many were surprised when Boeing got the SST contract in 1966, Lockheed's experience with high-speed flight had made them the front-runner in many people's opinion, and their delta L2000 design looked less risky, even allowing for the Mach 2.7 speed.
They were proved right, the VG 2707 proved an impractical design, the weight of the huge swing-wing mechanism was excessive, and early tests with models indicated the wings would need strengthening.
The second 2707 VG design moved the huge GE4 turbojets to the massive horizontal stabiliser, a bitter Lockheed engineer commented 'I guess they had to put 'em there to prevent them from burning the tail off!'
With the swing wings, the complex triple slotted trailing-edge flaps, leading edge flaps, all the other flight controls plus the complex droop nose, the 2707 had 59 moving surfaces, concerning to some potential pilots.
In 1969, Boeing changed the 2707 design to the -300 tailed delta.
Much more conventional, but the Mach 2.7 speed required extensive use of titainium, and those GE4's, each with some 60,000lbs of reheated thrust, would have been much noisier then even Concorde's engines.
As we all know, aircraft noise and pollution had become serious issues by 1970, the 2707 had enemies, though some were more concerned with 90% of the 2707 development coming from tax $.
Must have been quite a sight to see right-wing republicans allied with enviromentalists!
Finally, in March 1971, Congress voted by a majority of one to stop funding 2707 development, the wrong-headed initial designs had lost too much time and money.
Lockheed's design probably would have flown, though whether it would ever had entered service is another matter, the Boeing SST, though much bigger than Concorde, (230 pax), had about the same range.
I think the L2000 would have been similar.
Apart from the remains discussed previously, there was a legacy from the 2707 programme still with us, late in the project, Boeing were looking at cathode-ray tube displays for the 2707, though a flight engineer would still be required, along with plenty of conventional instuments for the Capt. and F/O.
4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 3081 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (13 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6367 times:
Thanks so much for the info!!! I do wonder if the funding was cut off when the Boeing design became more impractical and expensive. Had the more realistic Lockheed design gotten that last vote to OK the funding, I wonder if the environmentalist complaints would have mattered. We'll never know.
BTW, I remember having a toy Boeing SST when I was a kid. It was steel and had the variable geometry wings. I'd love to have that today!