Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Supersonic Lufthansa (redux)  
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8464 times:

This thread was originally posted in Polls and Preferences, but I think it's more appropriate here...

Hello, all.

Keeping it brief, my grandmother - Trudy Marx - was a hostess for Lufthansa and mostly served on Super Constellations. Late in her career, one of the projects that Lufthansa was apparently looking at was the supersonic service. Trudy was a 'model' for their advertising, and here she is with a jet which looks a lot like the B-2707.

Can anyone please shed any light on it? Was it just a 1960s propaganda piece? Trudy is not sure, but please don't predjudice your answer (if you have one) just to be nice. We think that this photo was no more than a fluff shot of the sort that car manufacturers put out to get people interested. To me, the idea of hauling 200 passengers/cargo/fuel over Mach 1 with a pair of J57s seems a little absurd, though I haven't looked at the figures. Anyway, please have a look;





Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17039 posts, RR: 66
Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8444 times:

Lufthansa did in fact place an order for 3x B2707. They also placed an order for 3x Concorde in 1965.

Having said that, the model she is holding doesn't quite look like any of the proposed US SSTs. It has similarities to some of the designs, but it is no exact match for any that I know of. See here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/systems/aircraft/b2707-line.htm. Of course the design went through many iterations so...

[Edited 2009-05-12 16:46:56]


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 41
Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 8296 times:

All the big airlines genuinely believed they were about to go supersonic at that time. At that time it was going to happen - it was only various "unforeseen circumstances" that foiled most of them. You might call it propaganda because nothing was finalised but it's no more propaganda than current airlines "boasting" about their upcoming 787 and 380 services.

User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8175 times:

Thanks guys - I appreciate the answers.

Starlion, I like the the idea that it might have been an early design iteration of the 2707 and will research further.

Above all, Nan has been curious about this whole thing for years and it will be lovely to give some sort of closure for her.

[Edited 2009-05-13 13:12:08]


Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7496 times:

Hi everyone,

I can't find a single design that looks like the picture in any of the resources I have found. Even the non-swing-wing 2707 had a completely different empennage.

Trudy says that the photo was taken in 1964 - does that help any? Are we looking at something else entirely (maybe even a different manufacturer like NA?) or should we draw the conclusion that it was an imaginative mock-up?

Thanks again for all your help.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7485 times:

The wing, nacelle and landing gear design the remind me of the Convair B-58.

User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7237 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 5):
Convair B-58.

You know, you're right. It was tickling at my hindbrain all this time but I couldn't quite put the name to the shape.

I can't find anything that suggests there were plans to make an airliner out of the thing, but might ask this guy;

http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13208 posts, RR: 77
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7201 times:

To be a bit pedantic, all these airlines, including LH, had options on both SST's.
The only firm orders (for Concorde of course), was from BOAC and AF in 1972. Each frame being about 30% more expensive than a 747 back then.

Boeing was selected, controversially, to build the US SST in December 1966.
They had a very radical swing wing design, Lockheed-their supersonic experience making them the presumed front runners, had a more conventional tailed delta design.

The model shown is therefore completely unlike the Boeing 2707, but if in 1964, that is not surprising.
But it's still fascinating and thanks for posting it.


User currently offlineN234NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 80 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7192 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It bares some resemblance to the North American NAC-60 SST, but the cockpit window configuration and wing look different in the drawing I found. There is an illustration/painting of the NAC-60 in the google image search that looks super close to this model.
(The NAC-60 is the only SST design I could find with a large canard).

Regardless, the model in this photo it must be an early mockup.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7177 times:



Quoting GDB (Reply 7):
Boeing was selected, controversially, to build the US SST in December 1966.
They had a very radical swing wing design, Lockheed-their supersonic experience making them the presumed front runners, had a more conventional tailed delta design.

Then after Boeing won the contract, they redesigned their proposal to have the double delta wing that Lockheed proposed.


User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6899 times:

I just thought I would let you all know that I had a really lovely set of replies from the bloke I mentioned in reply 6, who is an ex-B-58 driver and something of a wonk (in a good way) about it. He has provided some fascinating material that shows proposed airliner designs based on an expanded version of the platform.

I have asked him for permission to reproduce them here.

Quoting N234NW (Reply 8):
The model shown is therefore completely unlike the Boeing 2707, but if in 1964, that is not surprising.
But it's still fascinating and thanks for posting it.

It took me a while to see it, but you're quite correct. What's more, the images I have now and hope to be able to post are very illuminating.

And you're very welcome. I thought it would be nice to see something just a little bit different with some genuine 1st hand history behind it. The hunt for facts has been really fun.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineJush From Germany, joined Apr 2005, 1636 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6800 times:



Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 10):
It took me a while to see it, but you're quite correct. What's more, the images I have now and hope to be able to post are very illuminating.

I hope you'll get the permission to show them here. I am highly interested

Regds
jush



There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6580 times:

Lovely bloke that he is, he did grant me permission.



As you can see, the proposals are closer in resemblance to Boeing's offering than what Trudy was holding. Trudy's model was therefore a likely publicity shot of a design that was never intended to fly. Darrell is of the opinion that it has too few engines, not enough wing, and some possible drag/performance issues because of area rule - though to be fair we can't see the entire model.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh166/orion4000_cjp/B-58small.jpg

Disclaimer: This scan is obviously from a book, so I hereby claim fair use on the basis that it represents less than 10% of the publication, includes images that don't appear to be available anywhere else and which may the property of the US government. If the copyright holder disagrees, I will apologise and remove it immediately.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineBOACVC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 613 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6328 times:



Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 12):
Disclaimer: This scan is obviously from a book, so I hereby claim fair use on the basis that it represents less than 10% of the publication, includes images that don't appear to be available anywhere else and which may the property of the US government. If the copyright holder disagrees, I will apologise and remove it immediately.

Do you have the name/ISBN of the book which looks very informative and could be an excellent addition to a student of aerospace designs ?


BOACVC10



Up, up and Away!
User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 2 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 5767 times:



Quoting BOACVC10 (Reply 13):
Do you have the name/ISBN of the book which looks very informative and could be an excellent addition to a student of aerospace designs ?

Hello chap, I'm afraid not. The scan was sent to me by the guy I was talking about above. He probably wouldn't appreciate me publishing his email address here, so please visit his website and contact him that way.  Smile



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineBraniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 2984 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (5 years 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5556 times:

Well, I have no idea about the plane. I looks like a LH thing that combiened diffrent things from diffrent A/C?

Now for the important thing: Does she have the model? Big grin  Wink



The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6451 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5174 times:

To me Trudy's SST immediately reminded me about some drawing I saw as a small kid - probably early 60'es - of a (fantasy?) US project for a nuclear powered bomber plane.

I tried to google it, but found nothing similar to what I saw back in those days. The closest thing is the WS-125 project, which is totally different in plane configuration. And it also incorporated ordinary fuel burning turbojets for takeoff and landing, most likely to minimize radioactive exposure to the home base. Those nuclear powered projects only aimed at minimum protection of the flight crew, and therefore only had a shield in front of the reactor. Complete shielding of the reactor would be far too heavy.

Wings and canard configuration are identical, as well as the relatively long fuselage.

As far as I remember it also was a twin engined configuration.

I cannot imagine that Trudy's SST was a viable project anywhere. There never was a project to produce an SST engine capable of powering a fairly large SST in twin configuration. Where should it accommodate the fuel to produce some range?

But I could easily imagine a Lufthansa sales manager, seeing the drawing which I remember, and converting that into hopes for new business.

It was a crazy period. Everything changed so fast. Nobody was in doubt that by 1975 (or maybe 1980) subsonic airliners would be something belonging entirely to the past. Even if trains were still largely steam powered. And grandpa's 1931 Ford A was supposed to continue for at least 20 years more.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Supersonic Lufthansa (redux)
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...
Supersonic DC-8 posted Mon Apr 20 2009 15:35:39 by PGNCS
Need Some Quick Help: Supersonic Airofils posted Tue Mar 24 2009 14:34:07 by Sovietjet
Are Airliners Capable Of Going Supersonic In Dive? posted Thu Nov 20 2008 10:36:54 by Hypersonic
Lufthansa A32X Engines posted Fri Sep 19 2008 14:14:39 by FlyDreamliner
Supersonic Inlets / Number Of Shockwaves posted Tue Aug 19 2008 19:13:49 by Blackbird
Supersonic Compressor Blades Vs Ram Compression posted Tue Jun 17 2008 15:54:48 by Blackbird
Lufthansa Pilots posted Fri May 9 2008 13:57:57 by THEENGINEER
Shockwave Position And Subsonic/Supersonic LE Flow posted Wed Apr 23 2008 19:04:29 by Blackbird
Supersonic Flight - SR-71 posted Tue Jan 8 2008 00:31:16 by BoeingOnFinal
Supersonic Flow, Kinetic-Heating And Sturdiness posted Mon Dec 31 2007 18:22:53 by Blackbird

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format