Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Similar Are The 707 And The 720?  
User currently offlineDuke From Canada, joined Sep 1999, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6155 times:

The Boeing 720, which was produced from 1959 to 1967 (more or less) in 154 examples, was going to be called the 707-020 (or -000), but the name was changed, it is said because United Airlines didn't like it. It was almost the same length as the 707-100 short body (Qantas' -138), but had modifications to the wings, lower fuel capacity, and apparently other changes in gross weight. That is about all I know about what was different (later, the 720s wing changes, or some of them, I don't know exactly, were incorporated into the 707-100B).

What I am really interested in is, if you compare all the physical changes that were made to the 707-100 to produce the 707-300 with all the changes to the 707 to produce the 720, which would be physically more similar, the 707-100 and the 720 or the 707-100 and the 707-300? I don't mean externally only, I mean inside parts and materials as well. I get the feeling that, at the extreme, a 707-138B and a 720B would be very, very similar physically. Or am I wrong?

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThecheese From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6107 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 707-100 series is more like the 720 than it is the 707-300/400 series.

The 720 is basically a 707-100 with a "wing glove" added to the leading edge of the section of the wing inboard of the engines closest to the fuselage (to increase low-speed performance) and smaller overwing fuel tanks for decreased range, and I believe a shorter fuselage than all but the Qantas 707-100s (Qantas got the shortest-bodied 707s, to maximize their range on trans-Pacific routes).

Later 707s (the 300s and RR powered 400s) had a much longer fuselage, and a completely redesigned wing.

720 was designed to compete with the Convair 880, which United was strongly considering over the other short/midrange 1st generation jets. In fact, United and Convair had agreed to 18 of 19 selling points in their sales contract, when Boeing offered United the 720.

Much to Convair's consternation, United went with the Boeing product.


User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6039 times:

Hi!

The 707-100 and 200 versions had exactely the same lenght, the only difference was the fact that the 200 version used the 300 P&W engines! The 720 was smaller than the 707-100/200 and was LONGER then the 707-138!!! So resuming we have:

707-100/200 - 144 feet and 6 inches
720 - 136 feet and 2 inches
707-138 - 134 feet and 6 inches

Regards


User currently offlineFanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1983 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5929 times:

I also heard that the 720 used lighter-weight structural components than those found on the 707 family. There were more differences between the aircraft than met the eye.

On the outside, the easiest way of distinguishing between the two types is that most (there were a few exceptions) Boeing 720s had one overwing emergency exit on each side, whereas the 707 family passenger jets had two.



The aeroplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2438 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5803 times:

There have been numerous threads on this topic.

Here are some good ones:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ech_ops/read.main/70257/6/#ID70257
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ech_ops/read.main/70225/6/#ID70225

.



Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 722 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5640 times:

Much more information here:

http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/showthread.php?t=21531



"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5630 times:

To tell the dif at a quick view, the 720 had one exit window over the wing vs. two with the 707. The Eastern 720 was the lone exception. Eastern had their 720's delivered with two exit windows over the wing because Eastern planned to use the 720 as an all coach airplane. It never did and went with two classes like most of their other aircraft.
NW did use their 720B's in one class after utilizing two classes after delivery.
The all coach was 116 pax....I know, I was there.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineCF-CPI From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 1058 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5563 times:

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 6):
NW did use their 720B's in one class after utilizing two classes after delivery.
The all coach was 116 pax....I know, I was there.

I understand it was 5 across throughout the aircraft, which would make it a 1-class economy plus of sorts. They used 'warm and welcoming reds and golds'.
Does anyone have a pic?


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5413 times:

As far as aircraft systems are concerned, the differences are....

Electrical....none.
Hydraulics....none.
Pneumatics...none.
Except some 707's have high pressure air bottle(s) for engine starting where no ground pneumatics are available.

Pressurisation.
Most all 720's have only 2 turbocompressors, whereas most all 707's have three.
A few 707's have four.

Air Conditioning.
2 packs on both.
However, most 707's have air cycle machines (2), however some have freon systems, both old and newer versions.
Freon systems have no alternate bleed air selection for pressurisation.

Yaw damper.
Earlier airplanes have parellel system yaw dampers, later airplanes have the series type.
Some have been converted from parallel to series, at customer request.

Flight controls.
Same.

Fuel.
720's have no provision for center tank fuel, nor reserve outboard tanks.

Quite a mixed bag, depending on original customer specification and mod status later on.


User currently offlineDuke From Canada, joined Sep 1999, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5363 times:

Good info guys, so what were the "lower weight structural components"?

User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 722 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5346 times:

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 6):
To tell the dif at a quick view, the 720 had one exit window over the wing vs. two with the 707. The Eastern 720 was the lone exception.

I used to think that was the case, and in terms of production configurations it was. However, several 720-051B aircraft were modified to have two overwing exits after Northwest sold them. These photos show the same airframe with Olympic Airlines both before and after the additional exits were installed:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Marcel Walther




"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlineDH106 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5331 times:

One question I've always wondered about and not answered by a quick scan of the above links was why the change in nose gear door design when the -300 was produced from the earlier -100/-200 series, and yet the -400 which was essentially a RR Conway powered -300 but reverted to the earlier single trailing door rather than the -300's small door each side.
Anyone any insight?



...I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate....
User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5274 times:

One thing not mentioned; the 727 was the replacement for the 720. Like the 720, the 727 was used for shorter range-high performance applications. But unlike the 720, the 727 was designed to cut deep into "propeller territory;" the smaller airports that could not receive jetliners such as the 707, DC-8, or the 720 of this matter.

The 727 was originally going to have 4 engines, like United wanted, but Eastern, wanted a more economical 2 engine setup, so Boeing compromised with 3 engines on the 727.


User currently offlineIrish251 From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 973 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 5201 times:

DH106

The spade-type nosegear door also featured on some early 707-320B/320C but was superseded by the later version with two side-opening doors which remained open with the gear extended. This design was also used on later production "short" 707s but not on any 720s, as far as I know. The -420 series, despite the high model number, was produced fairly early in the 707's life and that's why it featured the early door design.


User currently offlineDH106 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5175 times:

Quoting Irish251 (Reply 13):
The spade-type nosegear door also featured on some early 707-320B/320C but was superseded by the later version with two side-opening doors which remained open with the gear extended. This design was also used on later production "short" 707s but not on any 720s, as far as I know. The -420 series, despite the high model number, was produced fairly early in the 707's life and that's why it featured the early door design.

Good info - thanks.

I've never seen a -300 with the spade type door, but having said that I made a point on another thread recently about -300s/-400s versions - in that some 707s nominally being referred to as -300s seem in fact to be -400s in disguise Big grin !!
What I mean by this is that even though they are referred to as -300s, they have the spade type nose gear door, a large under-tail ventral fin and engines that look like Conways with all FOUR engines having a compressor above them (not 3 as the -300s have). All features of the -400 series.

Checkout these for examples:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1093104/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1093097/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1071985/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1052918/L/



...I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate....
User currently offlineDuke From Canada, joined Sep 1999, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 5169 times:

Since the discussion has moved onto these external details, I will contribute what I know about one 707 technical detail. It's something that's practically unique to the plane among commercial airliners, the horizontal monopole antenna sticking out from the tail tip. It seems to have been a standard feature on all 707/720 and KC-135s (and the 367-80 prototype which originally didn't have it, was fitted with it early on) with the following notable exceptions:

-The 720 was originally delivered without it, as it was considered not to be needed on domestic routes. Then some airlines asked for it and became standard. I think the 29 United Airlines 720s and American's first batch of 10 720s (all the turbojet ones, later converted to B standard with turbofans) were the ones, and the only ones, so delivered. Interestingly, however, American later sold some of these 720s and switched their tails with the tails of 707s (all -100s?) because the airlines buying them wanted the antenna. So, some American 707s ended up without the monopole.

-TWA's first turbojet 707-100s had the monopole. But all the airline's turbofan -100Bs were delivered without it EXCEPT ONE. Why this was so is still a mystery to me.


User currently offlineDH106 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 5161 times:

Quoting Duke (Reply 15):
-TWA's first turbojet 707-100s had the monopole. But all the airline's turbofan -100Bs were delivered without it EXCEPT ONE. Why this was so is still a mystery to me.

Checking through the database looking into Duke's point, it's also obvious there's a mix of nose gear door types on the fan -131B's . Some have the rear single door like the earlier turbojets, some have the later twin side doors.



...I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate....
User currently offlineDH106 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 5159 times:

Quoting DH106 (Reply 14):
What I mean by this is that even though they are referred to as -300s, they have the spade type nose gear door, a large under-tail ventral fin and engines that look like Conways with all FOUR engines having a compressor above them (not 3 as the -300s have). All features of the -400 series.

Answering my own question here - but I think the -300 I mention above are early turboJET JT3 powered -300s, not Conway -400s (but the engines are very difficult to tell apart).



...I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate....
User currently offline113312 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 572 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5102 times:

Some of the above info was incorrect. All B720 aircraft, both fan and non-fan versions, had 2 turbocompressors. Most B707s, 120-320 series had 3 turbocompressors but some, notably -123, -123B, and 323B/C had 2 turbocompressors.

Many people, looking at pictures of tubojet powered 707-120, 220, 320 and 420 think that these have 4 but that simply isn't true. Although all of the pylons look the same, turbocompressors are only installed in 3!

EMC


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5040 times:

Wrong.

The former Presidental aircraft had 4 turbo-compressors.
In addition, many of those 707's with 2 mentioned, were later converted by other operators to 3.

'Tis a fact.

Original build many times means nothing, where 707's are concerned.
MANY mods carried out later on.


User currently offlineIrish251 From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 973 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4978 times:

Here are some 707s with JT-3B turbofans and the early nosewheel door arrangement.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pedro Aragão



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Marmet



User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4961 times:

Generally speaking (there are some exceptions, but only a few, IIRC) when the later -320B advanced models were introduced, these were fitted with fillet flaps and the later style nose gear doors.
A design improvement, as were the fillet flaps and indeed the larger fan inlet bypass doors.
However, there are some -320B models with the small inlet doors, yet had fillet flaps.
Quite a mixed bag, depending on original customer option.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4956 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting 411A (Reply 21):
Quite a mixed bag, depending on original customer option.

Would you say the airliners back then were more "custom-built" to the specifications of individual airlines than modern airliners? It sure seems to be the case.




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4950 times:

No, not especially custom built, 2H4.
The original 707 was a basic design in many ways, and as engines improved, the body lengthened, weights increased, changes had to be made to the design, to accept these changes demanded by the various airlines.
In addition, the British (D.P. Davies in particular as he was head of the ARB certification office) insisted that the rudder power be increased, the artificial rudder feel improved, and various other changes for the aircraft to be accepted onto the British civil register, for BOAC.
All of these improvements were then incorporated into the basic design along the way.
Also, South Africian Airways, operating from JHB, required full span leading edge devices on their early 707's, to enable reasonable fuel weights to be uplifted, for their longer range flights from the higher altitude of JHB.
These changes as well were incorporated into the basic design of the -300 series airplane.

In short, customer requirements drove the design, and other operators benefited as a result.


User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4851 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Fanofjets (Reply 3):
I also heard that the 720 used lighter-weight structural components than those found on the 707 family. There were more differences between the aircraft than met the eye

The whole structure of the 720 was of a different weight than the 707 series. Part of the reason you see hardly any left airworthy.

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 6):
NW did use their 720B's in one class

Correct. Called the "720B Special" with much fan fare (sales department hyperbole) towards the end of their career with NW.

720B was HOT,HOT,HOT. Flew on many of NW's. If you had the good fortune to be on board one with a light load, it was like the launch of a Space Shuttle" on take-off----awesome!



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic How Similar Are The 707 And The 720?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops 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...
How Big Are The Overhead Bins On The E-Jets posted Thu Jul 6 2006 02:17:23 by Tangowhisky
How Similar Are 757 And 767 Cockpits? posted Tue Dec 6 2005 18:17:46 by Mozart
How Tough Are The Space Shuttle Cockpit Windows? posted Fri Oct 1 2004 08:20:50 by KDTWFlyer
How Often Are The Pilots Really Flying The Plane posted Mon Jul 15 2002 22:41:15 by Cmchardyfl
The 707 And 720 Compared posted Mon Jun 19 2006 12:46:45 by Duke
RR Conway 508 Vs. 550: How Similar Are They? posted Tue Jun 14 2005 03:17:10 by Happy-flier
How Are The Autobrakes Engaged Is It When posted Fri Feb 11 2005 23:35:00 by Allpress
How Are The Reversers Engaged? posted Wed Mar 10 2004 00:31:39 by N243NW
How Are The Engines Counted... posted Wed Feb 27 2002 01:06:21 by Hoegenfroegen
How Does A Pressurized A/c Door Get The Seal? posted Wed Feb 1 2006 23:07:55 by Bio15

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format