Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
External Fuel Tanks On Airliners - Ever Used?  
User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 7046 times:

Hi guys.

I was looking at the 2 photos below of a South African Air Force B707-328C that has external fuel tanks between the outboard engines and the wingtips. This got me thinking .........

Has there ever been a commercial airliner anywhere in the world that used external fuel tanks?

It appears to me that no commercial version (and there are many!) of the 707 ever used external fuel tanks to extend it's range, but, perhaps there was a European, Asian, or Soviet, airliner that did.

Even though the 707-328C in the photos prove that it was a possibility. I wonder why the commercial version of this aircraft never utillized this feature? Was it an option?

Here's a military version of the 707-328 with external tanks.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Johannesson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Johannesson



The commercial version of the 707-328.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank C. Duarte Jr.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rolf Wallner


I
wonder if the USA Air Force ever considered this option for "Air Force One" when the Presidential aircraft were 707s ?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pedro Aragão



PS, how many US gallons of Jet fuel do you think those external tanks can hold? I'd say around 400. Big grin

Chris  Smile





"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6964 times:

>>>I wonder why the commercial version of this aircraft never utillized this feature

Mainly because of the inevitable "ramp rash" incidents with ground service vehicles such as tugs, baggage carts, belt loaders, lav carts, and catering trucks. Ramp accidents happen every day, and most are minor, but if the aircraft had external tanks hanging off the wing, they'd just become additional vehicular targets. Hit one of those tanks, fuel leaks, and you could easily have a potential "boom" on the ramp.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 6844 times:

Are those fuel tanks or refueling pods?

Fuel tanks are draggy.

I heard that the Herks with the drop tanks are significantly more draggy then those without them.

Of course that lowers efficency and airlines don't like that.


But that being said, I do recall reading somewhere that there was a proposal to "wet" the carrots on the trailing edge of the CV-990 wing.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently onlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2395 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 6843 times:

They are pods for the inflight refuelling drogue, not fuel tanks:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Craig Murray



User currently offlineSlamclick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 6737 times:

There used to be a Gulfstream II seen around LGB a few years ago that had Lear 23 tip tanks. The buzz around the airport was that the drag of the tanks actually shortened the range of the G II. Don't know if it is true, but "wetted area" does add drag.

When AF1 was a 707 it probably had all the range it needed. Remember that in its executive configuration it carried far fewer passengers and therefore a lot less luggage than its airline counterparts. There have always been aux fuel tank systems available that fit in the bag pits.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 6710 times:

Basically, those pods will let Hornets or other jets with an IFR (In Flight Refueling) probe, come up to the tanker simultaneously, instead of waitin for gas from one boom. On the Air Farce KC-135, it just has a boom, which has to have the hose and basket adapter to mate to a Navy jet...with capability for one jet at a time. This passes the gas faster (no pun intended lol)

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 6687 times:

The only commercial airliner that I know of that used external fuel tanks was the Lockheed L-1049G Super Constellation. It had provisions for external tanks under the wing tips and I only saw these installed once, on an airplane in Kuwait.

User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 6671 times:

Hi guys.

Thank You for your replies.

OK, so these are not external fuel tanks, they're refueling pods. The angle of the 2 photos that show these pods doesn't allow us to see the aft part of them (which would be verticaly flat instead of tappered), so my mind instantly thought of fuel tanks ........ like the kind used on the C-130 Hercules.

The thought of extra drag never entered my mind. I thinks that's because of all the fighter jets out there that use external fuel tanks. However, I understand that's a different situation.

I also never thought of the inevitable "ramp rash" that OPNLguy mentioned. If those were fuel tanks on that 707, they could very well be an "explosion" waiting to happen.

Last month wasn't to good for a few CRJ's in the USA. On December the 2, a COMAIR CRJ was struck by an unoccupied belt loader at JFK in New York. The operator of the loader fell off it as she was driving it towards the CRJ. The right side of the jet was substantially damaged.

On December the 14 at Miami, a WISCONSIN Airlines CRJ was struck by a tug after the driver jumped off of it after the tow bar shear pin broke. There were 9 ribs broke along the bottom of the fuselage!


Chris  Smile



"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6657 times:

Hi guys.

> Broke, here's a photo of a Lockheed Super Connie which just happens to be at my city's Intl Airport ....Toronto's Pearson Intl Airport (YYZ). I've taken many photo of it myself. It's located beside the entrance road for the corporate jet hangars on the north side of YYZ. It used to be located miles away near the south east corner of the airport where it stood on the front lawn of a hotel called The Constellation. When it was there, on the lawn, it had steps leading up to tail doors because there was a instant teller bank machine inside! ............ I hate what's been done to this beautiful aircraft.

Anyways, in this photo of it, you can see that it has wing tip tanks. I'll have to go and have a look at her some day to check if you can see where provisions have been made for external tanks that would hang under the wing tips.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Bulas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner



> Slamclick, did the "Air Force One" 707's ever have mid-air refueling capabilities, like the 747 does today?

You can see the refueling receptical in Air Force One's nose in this photo.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



Chris  Smile



"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineJan Mogren From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6643 times:

Don't forget this beauty



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kjell nilsson



the Comet 4C
/JM



AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
User currently offlineJETSTAR From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6628 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There used to be a Gulfstream II seen around LGB a few years ago that had Lear 23 tip tanks. The buzz around the airport was that the drag of the tanks actually shortened the range of the G II. Don't know if it is true, but "wetted area" does add drag.

They were not LearJet tip tanks, wing tip tanks were offered on G-II’s as a factory option. The original design concept was to make them removable in the field and install them when needed for additional range by carrying more fuel.

The removable tip tank idea concept never reached production and they were permanently installed on the wing tips. It was not a success and not many wing tip tank G-II’s were sold.

The additional drag from the tanks almost offset the additional fuel carried and the additional range was not that much more. This option was dropped when the G-III was introduced.

Gulfstream offered a G-II rewinging program where the original wings were replaced with the more efficient wings from the G-III, including the blended wingtips. This modified Gulfstream is known as a G-IIB.

Most of the wing tipped G-II’s were modified to G-IIB’s, so a wing tipped G-II is probably a rare sight.



User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6623 times:

>>>I also never thought of the inevitable "ramp rash" that OPNLguy mentioned. If those were fuel tanks on that 707, they could very well be an "explosion" waiting to happen.

Although there are exceptions (which others have noted) you just won't see such tanks on an everyday-use airliner, as if they had them, you might as well paint "HIT ME" or bullseyes on them, because eventually someone would...  Big grin


User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6602 times:

With respect to fighter jets, it is said that roughly half the fuel in a drop tank will be used just to compensate for the drag added by the tank.


LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6590 times:

Hi guys.

>> Jan Mogren, Thank You, for pointing out that the Comet 4C has external (bullet like) fuel tanks. She is a Beauty!

The reason it's taken so long for me to reply to you is because I've been searching the web while trying to find out the specific difference in fuel capacity between the Comet 4B (without external tanks) & the Comet 4C (with external tanks). Then I got all caught up in reading about the Comet and it's history. There's some really good info out there about it.  Big thumbs up

The Comet 4B had a fuel capacity of 9,150 gallons (35,460 L). The Comet 4C could carry 1,290 gallons more, with a capacity of 10,440 gallons (40,450 L).

The Comet 4B & 4C.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stephen John Rendle
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Marmet



http://www.neam.co.uk/comet.html
http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/comet/index.shtml

>> JETSTAR, Thanks for all of that info. It sounds like spotting a wing tipped G-II would be a rare sight indeed.

>> OPNLguy, I agree with you. Eventually, there would be a lot of smoke in the air!

>> LY744, That's pretty interesting info to know. I guess the extra drag is worth the extra fuel/range though, or they wouldn't be used.


Chris  Smile



"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6573 times:

There have been several other aircraft with slipper tanks (ala Comet) for example, the Lockheed Jetstar and even the Turbo Commander had them as an option.


User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6562 times:

Hello Jetguy.

Thanks for letting me/us know that the tanks on the Comet & Jetstar are called "slipper tanks."

Fifteen years ago I worked on the ramp for a corporate FBO at Toronto Intl (YYZ), and there was only one Jetstar that I got to refuel a few times a month. I don't think I ever asked back then what those tanks were called.

It was neat to have a G IV or a Falcon 900 and the Jetstar on the ramp side by side ........ the old & the new! Big grin


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © F. de Ruiter
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rudy Chiarello




Chris  Smile





"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6540 times:

A lot of pilots called the Jetstar's slipper tanks "canoes"  Smile By the way Mr. Spaceman, I ate many meals in the Connie in Toronto - really crummy food, really great atmosphere.
Jetguy

[Edited 2004-01-09 04:21:32]

User currently offlineXXXX10 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6420 times:

I know its not the same but some airliners -A310s and some L1011s could carry extra fuel in tanks stored in the rear cago hold.

This way there was no extra drag or safety issues


User currently offlineJETSTAR From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 6355 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The JetStar “slipper” tanks are called Auxillary Fuel Tanks by Lockheed, each tank held 565 gallons and were used after takeoff during climb. Most pilots called them the “Aux” tanks.

The JetStar had 4 main wing tanks and with the 2 aux tanks there was a total of 6 fuel tanks on the airplane. Fueling was done using only the wing fuel ports, single point fueling was not available until the JetStar II. If the airplane was being fueled from one truck, care had to be taken to prevent the airplane from being unbalanced on the ground. First one inboard fuel tank was fueled, then the other inboard, then one outboard and then the other, and then the aux tanks were filled, if needed. On short flights, the aux tanks were never used unless fuel was being tankered for the return flight.

There is a STC available to install single point fueling on the earlier models and this was usually done if the JetStar was updated to the 731 engines.

One the earlier JetStars the tanks was split with half the tank above the wing and half below the wing.

On the reengined JetStars with the 731 engines and on production JetStar II’s the tank was lowered to below the wing, hence the nickname “canoes”. This was done because the 731 engines had a wider inlet and the airflow over the older aux tanks interfered with the airflow into the engines.


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2934 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6333 times:

Some USAF KC-135s have the refuelling hose drum pods in addition to the flying boom. The problem with the -135 is that it can either give gas from the center by flying boom or by basket, but not both during the same flight. the basket and hose are fitted on the center position on the ground The wingtip pods have a slower flow rate than the center position, but they allow for both boom and probe & drogue refuelling on the same mission. The KC-10 can do both from the center position, but some have the wingtip pods added so that it can refuel 2 aircraft at once.

T.J.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6232 times:

Hi guys.

> L-188, you said ...... "I do recall reading somewhere that there was a proposal to "wet" the carrots on the trailing edge of the CV-990 wing"

Here's some photos of the Convair CV-990 Coronado. In the first photo, you can clearly see what appears to be a red fuel cap. So I guess these canoe fairings (carrots) are "wet" on the CV-990. Unfortunately I couldn't find any hard facts about these fairings/tanks, so I don't know how much fuel they can hold.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Charles Falk
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johan Ljungdahl



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Markus Herzig
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lars Söderström



Notice that these fairings/fuel tanks are only on the top surface of the wing.

Chris  Smile




"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 21, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6199 times:

Hi there spaceman.

I do agree that looks suspicously like a fuel port on that CV-990 carrot.

But that being said, I know that Modern Air did try and retrofit the carrot on one of their CV-990's with an APU. The only 990 that ended up with one.

Don't think they would have done that if they displaced fuel for it. Those 990's where thirsty enough as it was.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6148 times:

Hi guys.

> L-188, if that isn't a red fuel cap, then what is it?

Also, if the idea that they might be canoe fairings for covering flap actuators is mentioned, well, why are they so big, and why are they located on top of the wing when most fairings for flaps actuators are located on the bottom surface of the wing and flaps?

> Spacepope, check out this photo of a UK Air Force Handley Page Victor K2. As you can see, the Victor can refuel 3 fighter jets  Big thumbs up (in this case Lightnings), although maybe not all three fuel lines can pump fuel at the same time. I don't know.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Canciani




Chris  Smile



"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2934 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6120 times:

Mr Spaceman: Correct you are! I count 3 Lightnings as well. From my understanding, with 2 aircraft (especially anything larger than a lightning) the center position is quite bumpy from the wakes of 3 aircraft. The center station does have a flow rate advantage compared to the wingtip pods. I strongly suspect that photo was taken of a manouvre done for display only.

T.J.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5963 times:

It is an impressive picture, though. Nice formation flying.

25 Vc10 : Mr Spaceman, Nice pictures, but just to remind everybody the basic Comet 4 as operated by BOAC also had fuel pod tanks. I spent hours in them during t
26 Neil49 : Re the fairings on upper wing surface of CV-990: These were called "anti-shock bodies" and were designed to delay the onset of the shock wave from the
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic External Fuel Tanks On Airliners - Ever Used?
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...
Freezing Jet Fuel On Airliners And Temperatures posted Wed Dec 28 2005 19:41:42 by Julesmusician
Weighted Patches Inside Tires - On Airliners Too? posted Sun Aug 6 2006 17:31:42 by Mr Spaceman
"Easter Eggs" On Airliners? posted Sat Jun 3 2006 23:17:13 by FLY2HMO
Pax Oxygen On Airliners. posted Tue Jan 31 2006 04:44:58 by Tg 747-300
Fuel Insert On Startup posted Mon Oct 31 2005 14:58:45 by Taguilo
DHC-2 Beaver Fuel Tanks? posted Sun Oct 30 2005 21:10:46 by Mr Spaceman
GPS Usage On Airliners posted Thu Oct 27 2005 17:50:50 by Modesto2
Fuel Dumping On Ground? posted Mon Oct 3 2005 16:35:46 by 2H4
737-200 Number Of Fuel Tanks posted Wed Sep 7 2005 20:16:12 by ArniePie
Foldable Seats On Airliners. posted Sat Jun 18 2005 18:59:58 by HAWK21M

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format