Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Surprized By Military 707  
User currently offlineGround From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 32 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2609 times:



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Derek Pedley - AirTeamImages




i saw today this kind of aircraft while i was doing the pushback at my home-airport frankfurt, first i couldn't identify it because it was on the other side of the airport( u.s air base) and very far away. the shape of the fuselage was clearly a boeing 707 (never seen before in F R A since i work here).....but these MASSIVE engines.i thought : 707 and these kind of engines= no way....
i asked the captain via headset if he could identify the aircraft and he said that this is a military version of a 707....

does anybody know something more about this mightymighty aircraft?

thank you
FA

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStarrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1126 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2576 times:

The -R KC-135's have the newer engines on them. They undergo a huge refurb, which is needed because of how old most of these birds are.




Knowledge Replaces Fear
User currently offlineVorticity From United States of America, joined May 2004, 337 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2575 times:

They re-engined a lot of them with high-bypass turbofans. One reason being fuel efficieny.


Thermodynamics and english units don't mix...
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6489 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2552 times:

Yeah, they have GE CF6s in them now. They're thinking about doing the same thing to the B-52. The Department of Defense has lots of CF6 units in use -- they even power Navy ships! Though there they're called LM2500s, but they're the same thing.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineExpratt From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2543 times:

The engines are CFM56, not CF6.

User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6489 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2531 times:

Whoops. You're right, they are CFM56s. Four CF6s would be a lot of thrust, now that I think about it.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineTrekster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2520 times:

us and uk Air force fly the up graded 707 as the E3 D sentry. A very nice looking plane with a radar dome rotating on the top.

707 Being my fav plane, its nice to know there is a sqd of them based a few miles down the road.


User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2508 times:

Trekster- The US E-3s are B/C  Big grin yours are D, and much nicer with the new engines and good galleys  Smile though you have fewer consoles. I flew on a Brit E-3 in OIF once. Good guys.

The KC-135 is actually a tad smaller than the 707, it came from the Dash 80 also, but is about a foot narrower, and a tad shorter than the 707s in military use.. E-3, TC-18, E-6, VC-137 etc

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Houston-First word spoken from the moon


User currently offlineGround From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2489 times:


how difficult (or easy) is it to put a whole new type of engines to a 25+ year old aircraft????...i remember that Douglas improved the DC-8 with new fan-engines too.


User currently offlineTrekster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2478 times:

What are ur ones named after. I laughed when i found out about the waddington base ones

There named afterthe seven dwarfs

I think i have been on sleepy 2 times


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 978 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2472 times:

Yes, the 707 and some DC-8s feature CFM engines-

http://www.cfm56.com/engines/cfm56-2/index.html


User currently offlineTasha From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

The Reserves fly them from GPT as well. There are normally several of these sitting on the military side of the airport.

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2933 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2338 times:

Relax, you didn't see a 707. You saw a 717. the C-135 line is 4 inches narrower than the 707 (the 717/C-135 was 12 inches wider than the dash 80, the 707 was 4 inches wider than the 717/C-135 so that it would be wider than the DC-8). The 717 also has a completely different wing than the 707, although it has been retrofitted with 707 tailplanes.

How many different types of engines have the 707/717 been fitted with? not counting the 720 testbeds, I can think of at least 5... J-57, Conway, JT3-D (TF-33), JT8D-200, and CFM-56.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineMiamix707 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2297 times:

I think people are surprised because 707s didn't fly in airline service with those engines. Its still a great looking machine, but with those thick engines it looks more like one of those airbuses you see nowadays  Yeah sure

User currently offlineTungd From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 103 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Please correct me if I'm wrong....

The Dash-80 was the "prototype" of what eventually became the 707, and was only used for demonstration and testing. The military -135 was the first production model of the basic design, with the 707's following later as the "final," and improved, passenger type.

Since the -135 family is still the backbone of the U.S. military's tanker/AWACS/airborne command, etc., fleet, the new engines are a way to keep the old planes flying for another couple of decades.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2170 times:

Your just a bit outside.

The -80 was a narrowbody "Technology demonstrator"

The original idea was to build the 707 as a wider cabin aircraft, with 5 across seating. This is the cabin width the KC-135 has.

Douglas then was working on developing their DC-8 with 6 across seating. After loosing a number of orders to Douglas (Who's airplane was still only on paper) Boeing relented and redesigned the 707 with th 6 across seating we know today.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2114 times:

But the JT8D-200 series was just for testing purposes, right? There haven't been any 707s that've actually had four JT8Ds, have there?

Yeah, it does look kind of like an A345, now that you mention it.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2114 times:

Sorry, didn't read Spacepope's last reply before posting reply 15.

His numbers for the widths sound about right.

Althought I think I might disagree with him to a point on the wing.

My understand was that the early 707's used the KC-135 wing. But when the "Intercontinental" versions came up Boeing had to design a larger wing for the mission.

But correct me if I am wrong.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2090 times:

This has been hashed out before but the C-135 is NOT a B-717.

This

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Cary Liao


Is a Boeing 717 The FAA has only issued one type certificate for a Boeing 717 and this is it.
* * *

The prototype was a Boeing 367-80

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ted Miley






Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2087 times:

The FAA doesn't issue type certificates to miliary aircraft Slamclick.




OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2933 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2069 times:

Samclick: does the FAA register have the model number for the B-52 listed either?

L-188 I think the wings were totally different. I'm looking for evidence on the web, but here are a few pics from a.net.

707 (E-3)
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © EDDL Photography



717
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Urbild



Notice the trailing edge of the inboard section of wing here:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Freight-Dawg
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Derek Pedley - AirTeamImages


on the KC-135, they meet at an angle. Blow up the 707 on the right, and you see that the trailing edge is perpendicular when it meets the fuselage.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2063 times:

So if the FAA does not issue type certificates for military aircraft just exactly WHAT authority would make the C-135 be a B-717?

  • Boeing? No, they are the ones who designated the re-worked Douglas design a B-717.

  • The FAA? Nope, L-188 himself ruled that one out. Besides if they did then the former Douglas product would have been called something else.

  • Old wive's tale? Bingo!


  • And BTW L-188 the FAA does issue type certificates to military aircraft when the manufacturer makes the application.

    C-130 became L-100 and L-382. There are other examples of military-first types, but you get the idea.

    And so, if you can get an FAA type rating in a KC-135 (and you can) what would it say on your license? Certainly not B-717. It will say B-707. I have friends who have done exactly this.

    There are two Boeing fables that people have been passing along for as long as I can remember. One is that the 707 is called the 707 because the sweep angle of the wings is 45o and .707 is the sine/cosine of 45 degrees. Problem is, the sweep is more like 35o The other one is the B-717 thing. There may even be some internal papers at Boeing that refer to it that way, but there is no official designation making it so.




    Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
    User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2933 posts, RR: 1
    Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2049 times:

    Sam, you are flat wrong. This is from the Boeing website:

    "Following that pattern, the other offspring of the Dash 80, the Air Force tanker, was given the model number 717. Since it was an Air Force plane, it was also given a military designation of KC-135.

    After 717 was assigned to the KC-135, the marketing department made the decision that all remaining model numbers that began and or ended in 7 would be reserved exclusively for commercial jets. (After the Boeing-McDonnell Douglas merger in the late 1990s, the model number 717 was reused to identify the MD-95 as part of the Boeing commercial jet family.)"

    http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2004/february/i_history.html

    And tell me if you find the Boeing model 454 on the FAA website while you're at it.




    The last of the famous international playboys
    User currently offlineF4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 11
    Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2050 times:

    I was on a trip recently with a former tanker pilot. As we talked aviation, he mentioned how the tanker community didn't like Boeing calling the McD airplane the 717 since that was the original model number of the C/KC-135. I don't have specifics at hand but thought it a coincidence that I had this converation a couple of weeks ago and the 717 issue pops up in this forum. I hadn't hear the 717 reference to the tanker before then.

    Gary
    Cottage Grove, MN



    Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
    User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2015 times:

    Tungd- The 135 is not an AWACS, the E-3 is from the 707-(320) ariframe, two rebuilds of 707 airliners, the rest new build E-3s. The E-6. , E-8, E-3, TC-18 and VC-137 are all 707s. The 135 airframes (KC, EC, RC) are all from the Dash-80, 717 series mentioned above.

    Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
    Capt-AWACS, Uncle Sam's AWAX, The best shine for your jet


    User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
    Reply 25, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1967 times:

    WoW.....a slightly heated debate on what Boeing 'really' calls the 717.

    To add......from what I remember reading, back in the very late 1950's when Boeing came out with the 707 from the Dash-80 program, they also gave the military equivalent the design designation '717'..which quickly became the C-135 family. It was given its own designation due to the fact the aircraft was slightly different (as mentioned above). Now.......the 7*7 designation was really only meant for the commercial side of Boeing, so......back several years ago when Boeing acquired McD and the MD-95, they renamed it the 717. I remember much debate about this by the 'purists' as they claimed "Boeing already has the 717....its the C-135"



    "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
    Top Of Page
    Forum Index

    Reply To This Topic Surprized By Military 707
    Username:
    No username? Sign up now!
    Password: 


    Forgot Password? Be reminded.
    Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
    • Military aviation related posts only!
    • Not military related? Use the other forums
    • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
    • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
    • Do not post copyright protected material.
    • Use relevant and describing topics.
    • Check if your post already been discussed.
    • Check your spelling!
    • DETAILED RULES
    Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

    Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


    Similar topics:More similar topics...
    Iranian Military Plane Crash posted Mon Nov 27 2006 13:40:18 by 7of9
    Military Cargo A/C In CLE? posted Sat Nov 18 2006 21:14:43 by Dan2002
    Is The U.S.C.G. Considered "Military" posted Sun Nov 12 2006 19:19:37 by UH60FtRucker
    Military Flights Into BHX posted Thu Nov 9 2006 14:18:21 by DC10BHX
    Fighter Jet Fly-by Question posted Mon Nov 6 2006 05:37:12 by Chi-town
    Fastest British Military Jet posted Thu Nov 2 2006 17:36:49 by N215AZ
    Tornado Display Filmed By HUD Camera posted Wed Oct 18 2006 20:12:33 by Columba
    Toilets On Military Planes? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 05:18:27 by LimaNiner
    Unusual Military Designations posted Wed Oct 11 2006 21:52:50 by Broke
    Military Presence At PDX? posted Wed Oct 11 2006 19:14:58 by IFEMaster

    Sponsor Message:
    Printer friendly format