The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

doulasc · Sun May 10, 2015 1:51 am

When the Boeing 707 first came out they were 120 series,the intercontinental 320 series came out in 1959.Was the 120
series design for long haul or was it more a domestic aircraft.Pan Am had the 121 and flew it to Europe but required a
a fuel stop unlike the their 707-321s.
The only airlines to order the 707-120 series were
Pan Am
American Airlines
TWA
Continental
Cubana(NTU delivered to Western Airlines)
Braniff(theirs was considered 707-227s due to the engine option of the 320)
Quantas(707-138s had a shorter fuselage than the standard 120).
How many 707-120s were built compared to 707-320s. Is my list the only airlines that had the 120 series.

karadion · Sun May 10, 2015 2:08 am

AA - 56
Pan Am - 8
Qantas - 13
TWA - 56
Continental - 5
United States Air Force - 3

[Edited 2015-05-09 19:30:39]

maxpower1954 · Sun May 10, 2015 2:14 am

[quote=karadion,reply=1]AA - 56
Pan Am - 8
Qantas - 10
TWA - 56
United - 5
[/quote

United operated 29 720s, never the 707. You must have meant Continental.

karadion · Sun May 10, 2015 2:27 am

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 2):

Right. Wasn't looking at the right column. You can blame the merger for that.

Viscount724 · Mon May 11, 2015 2:28 am

Quoting karadion (Reply 3):
Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 2):

Right. Wasn't looking at the right column. You can blame the merger for that.

Boeing for some strange reason merged CO and UA orders/deliveries data after the merger, so you can no longer tell which aircraft (for example 727s and 720s) were delivered to each carrier. They all appear under "UA". However, they didn't do that for DL and NW which still has a "NW-merged with DL" carrier entry which lets you search for aircraft delivered to NW in isolation. For CO it shows everything under UA, which as already mentioned, makes it appear as if UA ordered and took delivery of 707s and DC-9s which of course they never did.

I hope they use the DL/NW procedure with AA/UA and keep their historic orders/deliveries separate. I sent an e-mail to Boeing after noticing a year or more ago that you could no longer obtain any former CO orders/deliveries data, suggesting that they continue to show them separately as they do for many other carriers that have long since merged out of existence. I never got a reply and nothing has changed.

With their recent website update, they've also removed the ability to use the "user-defined search" tool to search in as much detail for historic types/operators etc. Now you have to wade through much more data and compile it yourself which the old site did in a few seconds. For example, if you wanted to know how many 727-200s UA took delivery of between any two dates you could do it with one quick search entry. Now for historic types you can no longer search for individual model series, only for all models in one long list. And, as mentioned above, for UA it all now includes CO so you have no way at all of identifying which were UA aircraft and which were CO where both operated the same types long before the merger.

Not sure why they had to change this when it worked so well for many years.

eastern023 · Mon May 11, 2015 2:40 am

Quantas is my biggest pet peeve I decided.

TW870 · Mon May 11, 2015 3:33 am

Quoting karadion (Reply 1):
AA - 56
Pan Am - 8
Qantas - 13
TWA - 56
Continental - 5
United States Air Force - 3

I never realized that TW and AA got the exact same number.

Those two batches of -100s are different from the others in that most of the AA and TW batch were delivered as -100Bs. These were not taken simply because they were the first available off the line (although both AA and TW had a run of JT3C-6 powered birds at the very beginning of 707 production), but because the -100B fit both carriers' mission. The transcon business was bread and butter for both companies, as fares were based on mileage during regulation - which delivered a huge revenue premium even as transcons generated economies of distance. No other aircraft fit the mission as well as the -100B, as the 727 didn't have the legs and the trips didn't require the long-haul capability of the -300B.

Both companies got -100Bs in the late 60s. They rotated the aircraft on transcons and on shorter trips, which worked economically until the 1973 oil crisis that made the 727-200A the only game in town.

karadion · Mon May 11, 2015 3:43 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 4):

Well I can tell. I just wasn't looking at the right column. Ascend also keeps this data.

sparky35805 · Mon May 11, 2015 4:19 am

American and Pan Am converted all of their 707-120s to 120B's as Qantas did their 138s to 138Bs.TWA did not convert theirs.All of TWA's 707-131Bs were new deliveries.Their early 707-131s were operated as such until they were retired.

BoeingGuy · Mon May 11, 2015 4:35 am

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 2):
United operated 29 720s, never the 707. You must have meant Continental.

A 720 was a 707. It walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, looked like a duck. Therefor It was duck, so to speak. The 720 was intended to be called the 707-020 except for a play of politics by United who wanted to save face and not make it looked like they now wanted 707s after having already selected the DC-8.

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 5):
Quantas is my biggest pet peeve I decided.

Agreed. It's an acronym. QANTAS.

Gemuser · Mon May 11, 2015 5:46 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
It's an acronym. QANTAS.

It is NOT an acronym and has not been so since 1949. The name of the company is Qantas Airways Limited.

Gemuser

BoeingGuy · Mon May 11, 2015 7:00 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 10):
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
It's an acronym. QANTAS.

It is NOT an acronym and has not been so since 1949. The name of the company is Qantas Airways Limited.

Uh, the name was invented as an acronym. Something like Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service. If Qantas has chosen to rebrand their name, then so be it. But I was correct.

That's like saying that UPS and KFC aren't acronyms. They may not now, but that is their origin. Someone didn't just make up the word Qantas.

Gemuser · Mon May 11, 2015 7:06 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 11):
They may not now, but that is their origin. Someone didn't just make up the word Qantas.

Yes it started out as an acronym, never said it didn't BUT it is NOT NOW an acronym, so you were right up to 1949, but wrong from then to now. Not that it really matters but it's not now an acronym.

Gemuser

Wingtips56 · Mon May 11, 2015 7:16 am

Regardless of all that .... repeat after me, boys and girls:
There is no U in Qantas!

That aside, how many 720's did Western operate, and were they factory-direct or second-hand?

karadion · Mon May 11, 2015 7:44 am

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 13):
That aside, how many 720's did Western operate, and were they factory-direct or second-hand?

24 as a delivery customer.

musang · Mon May 11, 2015 8:51 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 11):
That's like saying that UPS and KFC aren't acronyms

I don't think they are acronyms. They're initials. Acronyms are initials which form a word. Like Radar, Laser, Scuba, pre-49 Qantas (learned something new!) and Taser etc.

Regards - musang

maxpower1954 · Mon May 11, 2015 1:21 pm

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
A 720 was a 707. It walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, looked like a duck. Therefor It was duck, so to speak. The 720 was intended to be called the 707-020 except for a play of politics by United who wanted to save face and not make it looked like they now wanted 707s after having already selected the DC-8.

Not as identical as you might think. The 720 had many significant differences from the 707. The structure used a smaller gauge of aluminum throughout for a considerably lower empty weight. The landing gear, tires and wheels are smaller. And while having the same pilot type rating for both, the Aircraft Type Certificate - the specs that spell out exactly what the aircraft to conform to - is different for the 720. It's enough of a variation of the 707 design to warrant a separate ATC. Same situation for the Cessna 310 and 320. They look alike, but aren't the same airplane in the eyes of the FAA.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...penDocument&Highlight=boeing%20707

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...penDocument&Highlight=boeing%20720

longhauler · Mon May 11, 2015 1:31 pm

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
A 720 was a 707. It walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, looked like a duck. Therefor It was duck, so to speak. The 720 was intended to be called the 707-020 except for a play of politics by United who wanted to save face and not make it looked like they now wanted 707s after having already selected the DC-8

In my opinion, UAL bought the 720 because it was different from the 707. It filled a narrow slice of requirements that was eventually replaced with the B727-200. That UAL bought a huge number of DC-8s after the 720 shows which of the two airframes better suited their needs.

To me, the 720 is like the 707, as the A321 is like the A318. Same type rating, very different beast.

The airline with the oddest quirk with regard to the 720 was American. Flying a large number of 720s with B707 labled on the fuselage. As a young lad, watching from the roof of YYZ T1, it was very confusing!

timz · Mon May 11, 2015 6:37 pm

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 13):
how many 720's did Western operate, and were they factory-direct or second-hand?

WA's only 720s were the Pacific Northern ones. (Guess all their 720Bs were bought new?)

ClassicLover · Mon May 11, 2015 8:16 pm

Quoting sparky35805 (Reply 8):
as Qantas did their 138s to 138Bs.

Correct - the first 7 aircraft were converted in 1961 to 138B standard. The other 6 aircraft were delivered as 138B.

This web site has all the information on the Qantas 707s -

http://www.adastron.com/707/default.htm

It has a fleet list with aircraft histories, lots of photos (even colour interior cabin photos from 1959) and a ton of information on getting VH-EBA (VH-XBA) back to Sydney in 2006. Great site!

Viscount724 · Tue May 12, 2015 1:05 am

Quoting Karadion (Reply 14):
Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 13):
That aside, how many 720's did Western operate, and were they factory-direct or second-hand?

24 as a delivery customer.

27 Western factory deliveries for the 720B, not 24, unless Boeing orders/delieries data is wrong. Western was the largest customer for the 720B. That doesn't include the 2 standard 720s inherited from the merger with Pacific Northern.

karadion · Tue May 12, 2015 3:10 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):

My info isn't from the public website. Anyways been doing a little bit of research. It turns out that Western actually was the delivery owner of 29 720's but operator of 26 720's. 3 went to delivery operators which was Pacific Northern (B0401/18376 and B0402/18377) and the other Avianca (B2201/18061). B2201 was considered part of the 27 based on the data from Ascend but didn't go to Western as an operator. That operated with Avianca until it crashed in 1976 in Mexico City.

The reason I came up with 24 was because 2 of 26 Western 720's are still active today which my search string didn't pick up "active" aircrafts. B2205 and B2207 both which used to be Western now belong to an operator JR Executive which is a charter company in the Middle East.

[Edited 2015-05-11 20:14:21]

UA444 · Tue May 12, 2015 6:14 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 17):

UA bought the 720 because it fulfilled the original requirements UA wanted from the 707 that Boeing did not initially do. That's when UA went to Douglas. UA didn't want to look as if they were unhappy with the DC8, so had Boeing change it from 707-020 to just 720-022.

The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

RE: The Boeing 707-120,how Many Airlines Used Them

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net