Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Slat Question For The 707 Pilots & Mechanics  
User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5298 times:

This is without a doubt the first time that I have come across a photo of a JT4A-powered 707 "Intercontinental" model that clearly has full-span slats on the outboard portion of the wing. As those familiar with the 707-320 variants will know, the turbojet (JT4A-powered) and RR-Conway (-420 series) did not have full-span slats; only a small section inboard of the outer engine pylons actually contained a small slat.

This is the leading edge of the typical JT4A/Conway wing:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Art Brett - AirTeamImages


And here is the anomalous one:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bill Sheridan


My question is: Was this a later modification? How many of the old Intercontinental 707's actually had full-span slats added?

Many thanks in advance.


May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5253 times:

There were in the 707-320, a few step by step variations.
These included the tail skid (size... or even absence), and, the leading devices.
We NEVER called them "SLATS"... they are not slats, they are leading edge flaps.
The early airplanes, 320 and 420 (JT4 and RCO12) had only 1 surface/wing.
xxx
Later airplanes had full span leading devices (the 707-320B)...
There was a variance in types.
Some had 17 degrees takeoff setting, and had a tail skid, full LE flaps.
Some has 14 degrees takeoff setting, no tail skid, also full LE flaps.
Stop this with your hard questions, I can hardly remember these details.
I am just a former 707 pilot, not an aircraft spotter...
xxx
I got a saucy one for you spotters to confuse YOU further, my turn now...
There were the 707-320B... the ones with fan engines JT3D-1 or -3B...
There were the 707-320BA... or B Advanced we called then at PanAm...
There were the 707-320BAH... or B Advanced Heavy...
Then there were the 707-320C... cargo door...
The 707-320CC were convertible passenger or freight... PanAm had these.
The 707-320CF were freight only, no windows, Flying Tigers (+ others) got some.
Happy contrails  Smile
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5247 times:

Thanks Skipper! And where I got confused was with the "slats" vs. "flaps".

This must be the first picture on Airliners.net of a JT4A -320 model with full-span LE flaps; at least it's the first one I've ever seen.

Happy Flying



May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5190 times:

Happy-flier,

These particular -344 aircraft were new build for SouthAfrician Airways, and had no LE flaps inboard of the inboard engines. Not full span.

In addition, note the 39 inch ventral fin. ALL original build JT4 powered aircraft had these due to the fact that the vertical fin had not yet been lengthened, as on later models.


User currently offlineDrJetMech From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5156 times:

First there is a difference between leading edge flaps and slats. If you look at a pick of a 737 you will see that inboard of the engines they have LE flaps and outboard the have LE slats.
The difference is that flaps swing outwards, almost like if you make a fist and roll your fingers to make an open hand. Slats basically just slide forward. I hope you get what I mean. They both serve the same purpose.
The 707 did not mix LE flaps/slats. It had LE flaps the route of the wing.

[Edited 2004-02-28 15:25:52]

User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5124 times:

Thanks guys. I confused the terms "flaps" and "slats", though I am aquainted with how they function. And I certainly did not know that the -344 series had just the outboard LE flap section! That is certainly news to me.


May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5121 times:

Ahh! But check this one out, guys:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mel Lawrence


This picture seems to tell the whole story. The -344 series actually had small LE flaps across all sections of the wing - kind of like the -130 series (though they don't seem as large as those on the 720 or the -320B/C series). Interesting!



May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offlineDrJetMech From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5119 times:

The wings on the 720 are smaller, hence might need bigger LE flaps to help on takeoff. But all 707 series aircraft have LE flaps across the whole wing.

User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5081 times:

DrJetMech,



Your information is so WRONG as to be laughable.

Question...how many SPECIFIC models of the B707 have YOU flown?


User currently offlineB747Skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5064 times:

Dear 411A -
xxx
Laughable, I do not know... or maybe yes.
What I worry about, is, unless people like you (or me) point to erroneous statements of others, their statements become "facts"...
xxx
Aviation enthusiasts should, again, realize that Mr. Boeing had many types of 707s, and that they were far from being similar in engines and options. One day you and I should attempt to make a list of the separate versions of the 707 and their differences... and I am convinced we will forget a few.
xxx
Friends, please, especially in this Tech.Ops forum, let us try to be fully correct and accurate.
Thank you 411A.
xxx
Happy contrails  Big grin
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineB747Skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5050 times:

To you again - 411A -
xxx
I am just trying to scratch my old mind and memory about our dear 707 and 720s... facing these details, for now, years of so many questions, which are relevant or not here in the A.Net, and particularly in our Tech/Ops forum...
xxx
I remember, joining PanAm, initial 707 training, we had to study (listing them by size and weight) the 720-030Bs, the 707-121Bs, the 707-321s, the -321Bs, the 321Cs (some in pax configuration, some cargo) then some difference of odd airplanes that PanAm inherited from other sources, I can recall the few 331s originally meant for TWA.
xxx
Coming from the Air Force KC-135 tankers, was already quite a bit of difference (I originally got a 707-720 rating on my pilot's license) to learn that there were differences with civilian machines.
xxx
Then, in hotel bars around airport, we the good guys who wore "white hats" met our buddies from AA, from TW, from NW, from Continental or from Western, to realize they had more differences between "their 707s" and ours.
xxx
Even our check lists were sometimes different, our books were completely different. During a layoff from PanAm, I joined Saudia, to learn that they did all by the TW bible, new differences, new options, new engines.
xxx
Just to mention the FAQ in the A.Net about the 707-720s...
- The HF antenna "is that on the 720"...?" to mention that one...
- The 100 short body and long body (138B and 131Bs...) -
- The tall tails, the short tails, the tail fins (large, small, or... none) -
- The 320C with windows, without windows, with extra aft emergency exits -
- The "hump" on the engine for the TCs (how many, a favorite A.Net one) -
- The 720-025 ex EAL with 2 L and 2 RH overwing exits -
xxx
Shall we mention to them, for pilots -
- Airplanes with air cycle air conditioning, others with freon -
- The parallel or series yaw dampers -
- The fire handles located on glareshield, newer airplanes, overhead panel -
- Planes with tiller steering on LH and RH side (Qantas) -
- Planes with hydraulic ground interconnect permitting gear retraction -
- The various antiskid systems, Mk.1 or Mk.2 -
- Variances in flight instruments and navigation systems -
xxx
And how many things did we forget...?
Oh, yes, the HF antennas located on wing tips of the VC-137s...
Let us go back to the museum, one day maybe.
xxx
Happy contrails  Smile
(s) Skipper



User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5028 times:

Indeed Skipper,

If we look back in time, a LOT of different models.
In one company where I worked (a small international carrier then, a LARGE one now) they had five different models of the B707...aircraft from Qantas,Continental, Braniff, TWA, PanAmerican.
Different weights, switches all in various odd places...indeed switches that moved in the opposite direction (TWA, for reasons known only to them, i'm sure), different flap settings (14/17/10/20) for takeoff, the list goes on and on.

Just think, if it wasn't for folks like us, who actually FLEW these aircraft, some here would have absolutely NO idea that there actually were such LARGE differences in the various models, even tho they look more or less the same from the outside.

Getting back to the original -344 models that were new build for SouthAfrician, they had additional LE flaps for a very specific purpose, takoffs from JNB, with 10degree flaps, where the ground run often exceeded 12,000 feet. Special high speed tires were fitted as well.
Having personally operated from JNB (with Lockheed TriStar equipment), you roll a LONG way, for sure, at heavy weights.

The 707 was/is a remarkable aircraft, and just think, still soldiering on in some parts of the world, while much newer types are sliced up for beer cans.


User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6835 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5012 times:

"In addition, note the 39 inch ventral fin. ALL original build JT4 powered aircraft had these due to the fact that the vertical fin had not yet been lengthened, as on later models."

You're not saying they all had ventral fins as built? Judging from the pics PA-TW-Sabena-AF all flew 707-320s in late 1959/early 1960 without ventral fins.


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4998 times:

Timz,

No, some did not come from the factory with the large 39inch ventral fin, but were fitted with same later for a very specific reason.

When BOAC wanted to put the B707 -300 series in their fleet, the aircraft needed to be certified by the UK ARB (Air Registration Board, now the CAA) and the chief test pilot of the ARB at the time DP Davies, insisted that the directional control of the 707 was sub-standard, and insisted that it be improved before he would certify it.
So, Boeing developed a fix.
Additional Q feel for the rudder, and a large ventral fin to aid with directional control/spiral stability.
In comments after he retired in 1986, Davies suggested that convincing Boeing to improve the 707 was the most difficult experience he had as head of the ARB (CAA) certification branch.

David P. Davies wrote a book in the late sixties...."Handling the Big Jets" and is superb reading to anyone aspiring to fly large commercial jet aircraft.
Davies passed away last November, and will be sadly missed by many people, and did more than anyone else (IMO) in improving the flying qualities of large swept-wing jet transport aircraft.


User currently offlineB747Skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4992 times:

Did not know that D.P. Davies passed away...
"Handling the big jets"... is a masterpiece, my bible...
I recommend every pilot to read it, and re-read it when needed.
The last edition includes outstanding chapters about the 747 as well.
xxx
Bye, D.P. and happy contrails, up there...
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4988 times:

Thanks to everyone for all the informative answers so far. This has turned out really well and I'm learning a lot of previously unknown stuff.

Something I've wondered about for a long time: Did Boeing make any kind of documentary films showing the early JT4A and RR Conway 707's doing engine run-ups, takeoffs, landings, and in-flight procedures? I would imagine that not just the flights of the Dash-80 were thus recorded.

I would love to know what sort of music the Conways made when spooled up, for example, and if it was recognizably different from that of the JT4A's. Such minute details may not be everyone's cup of tea, but they've been haunting me for ages (I was too young to ever have seen the JT4A's and Conways in service).

Thanks again.



May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offlineB747Skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4987 times:

I do not remember if the JT4s and RCos sounded any different.
They smoked the same, back in these years...
Further, one could not guess which one which, nacelles were the same.
If it was BOAC, Luthansa, or Air India, I knew it was a RCo...
Other than that, their power was exactly the same, 17,500 lbs of thrust.
Never flew with the RCo equipped 707s...
But I have to say the JT4s were great at high level FL370 or 390...
Unlike the JT3D fans, which lost a little of their "breath and punch" up there.
xxx
Happy contrails  Smile
(s) Skipper


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Happy-flier,

Interesting about the JT4A and the Conway engines.
Like the Skipper mentioned, the nacalles looked the same and the performance was similar.
Having said this, once seated in the flight deck, it became instantly obvious if the aircraft was Conway or JT4 powered.
The Conway powered 707's had no EPR gauge, they used N1 only, to set thrust.
In addition, the Conway (like the JT4), was a very thirsty engine at lower levels. Got 'stuck' on one flight at FL280, and the fuel flow was an astounding 17,000 pounds/hr....sucking it up like a very big Hoover.
Having said this, these engines performed very well at high altitude, as the Skipper mentioned previously. So well in fact that a few pilots climbed well above the aerodynamic ceiling (for the present aircraft weight), and in so doing, had a very small maneuvering margin between low/high speed buffet.
Definately not good.


User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4930 times:

Actually, I just wanted to point out that the nacelles for the JT4's and the Conways were different, not only in that the Conways used the "daisy petal" sound suppressors, but that they also lacked the lower "chin scoops" that the JT4's had (to cool the oil, is that right?). These pics show the differences:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Keith Bradley



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Schaefer


Viewed from the side, though, I agree that they might not have been immediately distinguishable.



May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17039 posts, RR: 66
Reply 19, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4923 times:

I could type in the comprehensive list of variants and subvariants from the appendices of "Boeing 707 - Pioneer Jetliner" by René J. Francillon, but it's so long I would get carpal tunnel before I got a third of the way. I shall, however, give you the highlights:

Production numbers
367-80 1
707-120 63
707-120B 78
707-220 5
707-320 69
707-320B 250
707-320C 353
707-420 37
707-700 1
720 65
720B 154

So that's complicated enough even without the engines. Then you have all the mods after the planes rolled out of the factory. Still arguing? I bet you can all find a plane with the specific config you want.

The book is really great, so if you care insanely much  Big grin order it from Amazon. UPC code is 7 52748 30675 2.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineHappy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4920 times:

Thanks for the book reccomendation. I have George Walker Cearley's book, which covers pretty much all the same info I would think.


May the wind be always at your back . . . except during takeoff & landing.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17039 posts, RR: 66
Reply 21, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4918 times:

This is one of those small but hideously expensive ones  Big grin


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4898 times:

Variations within sub-types.
Take for example the 250 -320B's built.
All had JT3D engines but some had...

39 inch ventral fin
14 inch ventral fin
old cowl
advanced (improved) cowl
fillet flaps
no fillet flaps
3 (or 4) turbo compressors...

Well, you get the idea.

Then we have the 353 -323C's.

Some had the auxiliary emergency exits (max seating 215) and some did not (max seating 189),
some had the old cowl, and some had the advanced cowl...etc.

But ALL were a delight to fly!


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Slat Question For The 707 Pilots & Mechanics
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...
Question For The Pilots posted Sat Mar 31 2001 00:52:23 by 36r
Historical Question: The 707-420 & The 707-320B/C posted Thu Mar 1 2001 16:33:38 by Happy-flier
Question For The Aeronautical Engineers ... posted Sat Jul 15 2006 01:03:42 by Sesd97
Question For AA MD80 Pilots posted Wed Sep 28 2005 05:37:49 by MrSTL
A Question For The Airbus NG Drivers posted Sat May 1 2004 00:40:44 by CPH-R
Question For Heavy Aircraft Pilots posted Mon Dec 8 2003 13:04:57 by MCPILOT
Quick Question For Any European Pilots (eyesight) posted Mon Jun 9 2003 02:57:35 by FSPilot747
Another Question For All Those Pilots posted Fri Nov 23 2001 23:15:31 by Funny
For The Pilots: Checklist Question posted Mon Jun 7 2004 08:06:07 by Cancidas
For The Pilots, An ATC Question posted Wed Aug 13 2003 05:37:42 by Cancidas

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format