lat41 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 447 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3925 times:
The later production versions of the 722 and 732, in OAG speak of the day 72S and 73S, were called advanced. What was the distinction that made that moniker. Although these birds have long passed on to second and third tier carriers (if not the scrapyard) and out of this country, does and "advanced" have any more value on the used market?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18815 posts, RR: 64 Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3704 times:
Quoting lat41 (Thread starter): 72S and 73S, were called advanced. What was the distinction that made that moniker.
While not fully detailed or comprehensive, there is some data about the advanced versions here on a.net:
"First flown in March 1972 changes introduced on the Advanced model included increased fuel capacity, and thus range, the option of more powerful engines, quieter engine nacelles and strengthened structure. The Advanced remained the primary 727-200 production model until production ceased in 1984."
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5929 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3478 times:
The original 737-200's (non-advanced) were merely stretched -100's, and turned out to be slower than the -100 (more drag). An easy way to tell a non-advanced 200 from an advanced is that the pylon fairing on the -200 is "fat" (almost as wide as the section of nacelle that touches it) an the -200ADV has "skinny" nacelles.
Also, a huge design change was the lap joints in the fuselage. This played a factor in the Aloha 737 "convertible" accident, as the old design allowed a catastophic failure if cracks and corrosion were allowed to continue unchecked.
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Mortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3228 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
I remember I flew with Pan Am and their B727 200 "Stretch". Anyone know why they put the "Stretch" in the typename ? Was there anything different about these at all or was it just a gimmick ?
cvg2lga From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 590 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3280 times:
Mortyman,
I could be wrong, but I think the "Stretch" refers to the fuselage length differences in the 727-100 & 727-200. And I believe this also went for the DC9 series i.e. D9S
Tchau
DA-
They don't call em' emergencies anymore. They call em' Patronies.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15869 posts, RR: 66 Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3058 times:
Quoting Mortyman (Reply 5): I remember I flew with Pan Am and their B727 200 "Stretch". Anyone know why they put the "Stretch" in the typename ? Was there anything different about these at all or was it just a gimmick ?
"Stretch" was not a Boeing designation. Just Pan Am marketing like other airline nicknames for aircraft. One horrid example is the appaling "Jumbolino".
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Yep, there are a few, mostly flying freight. I'll be flying a 727 around tonight and there is a 737-200 out on the ramp where I am right now too, I saw it fly yesterday.
Check these links once in a while, you'll see a few flying throughout the day and night.
CanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3371 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2850 times:
Not sure about the 727, but I know for the 737-200 when the Advanced version came out the main highlights were:
-Fuselage was constructed using slightly different bonding methods
-Higher weights
-Optional higher thrust engines
-Slightly better engine nacelles
-Slightly modified leading edge flaps and a few other aerodynamic tweaks
As for numbers still in service I don't know about the totals, but in this corner of the world the standard -200s went away long ago, as far as I know there's been nothing but Advanced models around here for several years now.
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5929 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2711 times:
Also, didn't the thrust reversers on the 732 go from being pneumatic & wimpy to being hydraulically activated and powerful? Seem to recall that difference, too
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Aeroweanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1600 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2699 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 4): An easy way to tell a non-advanced 200 from an advanced is that the pylon fairing on the -200 is "fat" (almost as wide as the section of nacelle that touches it) an the -200ADV has "skinny" nacelles.
Are you sure? I've never seen anything but one common pylon width.
One change was to eliminate the blow-in doors on the nacelle. The engine spinner was also changed, both changes being made to reduce noise. T-43s have/had the blow-in doors. I've been near one during a ground run and can testify to the noise the doors produce.
timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6465 posts, RR: 8 Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2693 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 4): An easy way to tell a non-advanced 200 from an advanced is that the pylon fairing on the -200 is "fat" (almost as wide as the section of nacelle that touches it) an the -200ADV has "skinny" nacelles.
On the #1 and #3 engines, you mean? No difference on #2?
I always thought the interior change about coincided with the "Advanced".
732 reversers all got changed, didn't they? Even on the unAdvanced 737s?
737tdi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 464 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 2634 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 11): Also, didn't the thrust reversers on the 732 go from being pneumatic & wimpy to being hydraulically activated and powerful?
Yep, those air operated reversers were a freaking nightmare. Nothing but problems. Hell, what air did they use? Nothing but dirty, oily, crappy jet engine air. You can figure out what that means. Valves, actuators, everything getting clogged. It was horrible. They were on the JT3 as well. Sure glad Boeing went primarily to Snecma on the later ones.
CanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3371 posts, RR: 10 Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 hour ago) and read 2287 times:
Just a note about the 737 reversers, that wasn't related to the Advanced model. The newer and better hydraulic reversers and the four foot tailpipe extention that went with them was introduced about a year after the 737 first entered production, long before the Advanced models came along. Shortly after indroducing them Boeing also offered a kit to convert the -100s and the first batch of -200s from the original pneumatic reversers to the "normal" ones, which I believe they all got.
113312 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 536 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2249 times:
The original B727-200 "Stretched" added 20 feet of length to the basic 727-100 series but retained the JT-8D-7A engine and weights. Many also retained some of the original systems like pneumatically controlled pressurization. Many airlines operated this first stretched version including Eastern and PSA.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 447 posts, 
From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3228 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3371 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21461 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2452 posts, 
The ADV has the "fat" pylon fairings, and the -200 original has the skinny fairings. See: 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
