Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Differences On B707 Types.  
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31692 posts, RR: 56
Posted (7 years 8 months 6 days ago) and read 2224 times:

Is it correct to state that the only difference between the B707-120 & B707-220 was the Powerplant ie JT3 & JT4 so cruise speed would be different.
And B707-320 & B707-420 ie JT4 & RR Conway but no difference in Cruise speed.
regds
MEL


Think of the brighter side!
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDH106 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2215 times:

The -300 & -400 series have many minor differences,

To name a few:

-400's always have the large size ventral fin under the rear fuz.
-300's seem to have none, small or large - depending on exact version (but even then there doesn't always seem to be a corrolation)

-400's have the early single trailing secondary nose gear door
-300's have the 2-doors, one on each side arrangement.

-400's have pylons arranged for 4 turbo compressors
-300's only have 3 (no comp. on #1 engine)



...I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate....
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2178 times:

Other differences as well, if you look on the FD, between the JT4 and RR Conway powered models.
The Conway powered airplanes had no EPR gauges, as the Conway power was set by N1 and EGT only.

Ventral fin.
Two varieties, the 13 inch and the 39 inch.
On the 707's with parallel type yaw dampers, the larger 39 inch ventral fin was fitted.
The smaller ventral fin was fitted to the airplanes with the series type yaw damper....which did not apply to the Conway powered airplanes, as they all had the parallel type.

On later long body models, the ventral fin was eliminated, as the vertical stabilizer was higher.

Cruise speed.
No difference in the JT4 or Conway powered airplanes.
Most were cruised at M.82, however if very long range flights were undertaken, long range cruise was used...M.81.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31692 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2171 times:

Quoting 411A (Reply 2):
The Conway powered airplanes had no EPR gauges, as the Conway power was set by N1 and EGT only.

Any Numbers Stats on How much percentagewise of the Engines on the B707.

Also why were the Dash numbers reffered to as -120/220 etc & not the normal -100/20 etc.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6886 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2117 times:

Quoting DH106 (Reply 1):
-400's always have the large size ventral fin under the rear fuz.
-300's seem to have none, small or large - depending on exact version

The first -300s didn't have a ventral fin, but after a few years didn't they all get the larger one? Anyone find a pic of a JT4A-powered 707 with no ventral fin after, say, 1963?

Quoting DH106 (Reply 1):
-400's have pylons arranged for 4 turbo compressors
-300's only have 3 (no comp. on #1 engine)

JT4A-powered -300s?


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2104 times:

Some long body (-300's) were delivered with no ventral fins.
This all changed when the Conway powered airplanes were brought onto the UK register, for BOAC.
The UK Air Registration Board (headed by DP Davies) insisted that the rudder power and spiral stability of these airplanes was not up to ARB standards, and Boeing fitted a 39 inch ventral fin to accomodate the UK requirements.
Then, if I recall correctly, ventral fins were retrofitted to existing models and the rudder power system was changed as well.
DP Davies passed away several years ago, and an article about him appeared the the London Sunday Times.
In the article, Davies mentioned that the hardest experience that he had was getting Boeing to change the 707 rudder power system.
Now, having flown these old airplanes, I suspect he was right.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25696 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2068 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 3):
Also why were the Dash numbers reffered to as -120/220 etc & not the normal -100/200 etc.

The correct generic terminology for 707 models is -120/-220/-320/-420, not -100/-200/-300/-400. Boeing's own 2-digit customer number is "20". For some reason -100/-200 etc. became the generic model terminology for Boeing types after the 707. The customer numbering system was the same for all Boeing models, i.e. the first number assigned to a customer was -21 (Pan Am) and when they reached -99 they continued with -01 through -19, and then used alpha-numeric designations (-A0, -A1, -A2 etc.) for subsequent customers.

Quoting Timz (Reply 4):
The first -300s didn't have a ventral fin, but after a few years didn't they all get the larger one?



Quoting 411A (Reply 5):
Some long body (-300's) were delivered with no ventral fins.



Quoting 411A (Reply 2):
On later long body models, the ventral fin was eliminated, as the vertical stabilizer was higher.

Only early production -320s had a ventral fin (or were retrofitted with it in the case of a few very early production -320s). I believe only the long ventral fin used on the R-R Conway -420 was used on the early production -320s. I'm not sure how many early -320s were originally built with the short vertical stabilizer and no ventral fin; I don't think it was very many. The ventral fin was eliminated on later production -320Bs and no -320C models ever had a ventral fin to the best of my knowledge.

Early production -120s and the five -220s built for Braniff (only 4 of which went into service as the first one crashed on a pre-delivery acceptance/training flight), built without the ventral fin and with the short vertical stabilizer, were retrofitted with the 3-foot longer stabilizer and short ventral fin. Later production -120s and all 720s were built with the longer stabilizer and short ventral fin. I believe the majority of all 707s built fall into the "late production -320" category and thus never had a ventral fin.

Following the modification of early-build 707s to lengthen the vertical stabilizer, all 707s (and 720s) eventually had the same longer stabilizer.

Good description of the Boeing customer numbering system:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0048.shtml

This site, although mainly devoted to a very detailed history of the QF 707 fleet, also has a good general description of 707 development and models here:
http://www.707.adastron.com/history/707-history.htm


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31692 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2057 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6):
For some reason -100/-200 etc. became the generic model terminology for Boeing types after the 707.

Any Particular reason why,or was the -100/200 etc preferred tonewise.
Very Interesting links.Thanks.

regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 722 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2056 times:

Here's another link with lots of descriptions of the differences between models of the 707:

http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/...raft/21531-ultimate-707-guide.html



"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6886 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

Quoting DH106 (Reply 1):
400's have pylons arranged for 4 turbo compressors
-300's only have 3 (no comp. on #1 engine)

As expected, he seems to be talking about fanjet -300s. Looks like #1 and #4 nacelles are the same on all JT4A-powered -300s.


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2002 times:

Ah, not really, Timz.
The -320 JT-4A powered airplanes that I have flown, both the -321's (PanAmerican) and the -331's (TWA) had 3 turbocompressors.
A standard fit, direct from the factory...unless modified elsewhere.


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3806 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1995 times:

Not to overlook another one of a kind 707 variant ordered by and delivered new to only one airline, the 707-138 (became 707-138B when converted to fan engines). Based on the 707-120 with the fuselage shortened by 6' (?) the variant was designed especially for QANTAS for their very long range routes. Ironically, some of QANTAS's 707-138Bs were picked up secondhand by Braniff who were also the only customer for the other 707 type ordered by and delivered to only one airline (Braniff), the 707-220, or 707-227 as the variant as delivered to Braniff was known.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25696 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1983 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 7):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6):
For some reason -100/-200 etc. became the generic model terminology for Boeing types after the 707.

Any particular reason why,or was the -100/200 etc preferred tonewise.
Very Interesting links.Thanks.

I expect -100/-200 etc. was considered simpler and less cumbersome for marketing and promotional purposes.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25696 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

Quoting Justplanesmart (Reply 8):
Here's another link with lots of descriptions of the differences between models of the 707:

http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/....html

Thanks for the link. One of the best I've seen on 707 differences.


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6886 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1916 times:

Quoting 411A (Reply 10):
both the -321's (PanAmerican) and the -331's (TWA) had 3 turbocompressors.

Oops-- I didn't write carefully. I meant to say the #1 and #4 nacelles on JT4A-powered 707s look the same, from the outside. No idea which ones are empty.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Differences On B707 Types.
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...
Propeller Types On Saab 340s posted Sat Jan 13 2007 21:38:28 by Strathpeffer
Types Of Light On An Aircraft posted Mon Dec 5 2005 16:39:36 by ArcticTern
Types Of Thrust Reversers On Engines posted Fri Oct 14 2005 02:56:31 by CcrlR
Questions On Some Differences Between B737 And A319/320 posted Wed Jun 8 2005 06:15:55 by DCAflyboy
Types Of Circuit Breakers On Commericial Jets posted Mon May 30 2005 10:08:56 by HAWK21M
Aircraft Types Progression For Pilots On AA posted Wed Aug 18 2004 19:55:08 by N62NA
Two Types Of Door Configuration On B767-300 posted Tue Jun 3 2003 16:13:50 by SAA-SAL
Unusual Buzzing Noise On DC9-50 Flight - Cause? posted Mon Feb 26 2007 23:50:54 by MikeM2648
How Much Do All The Avonics Cost On An Aircraft? posted Mon Feb 26 2007 21:06:50 by CoolGuy
On The 737, What Are Those Things Sticking Out... posted Mon Feb 26 2007 07:39:32 by CoolGuy

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format