I'm not sure what the tail number is but a former UA Boeing 247D, supposedly the world's oldest flyable all-metal plane, took its final flight to the Boeing's Museum of Flight on Tuesday.

Quite a year for MoF....

http://www.sfgate.com/local/slidesho...le-Boeing-128688/photo-9901952.php

Quoting United1 (Thread starter): Boeing's Museum of Flight on Tuesday.

Just one small note here that I am sure you know but the Museum of Flight isn't Boeing's Museum of Flight. They exhibit all types of aircraft and even the homepage shows Concorde.

Thanks for posting this. Anyone locate a video of the flight?

tortugamon

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1): Museum of Flight isn't Boeing's Museum of Flight. They exhibit all types of aircraft and even the homepage shows Concorde.

oh...thanks for the correction.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):

They may not be a "Boeing" museum but the fact they've seemingly made no effort to get an Douglas or Airbus jet aircraft speaks volumes.

some more info is here:

http://www.boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2016/04/final_flight_2.html

Quoting UA444 (Reply 3): They may not be a "Boeing" museum but the fact they've seemingly made no effort to get an Douglas or Airbus jet aircraft speaks volumes.

McDonnell/Douglas Aircraft at the Museum: A-4F, DC-2, DC-3, AV-HC, Mercury Capsule, F-4C...

How do you know how much effort they make? There are dozens of Russian and European aircraft on display.
~95%+ of their aircraft predate Airbus itself....maybe that has something to do with it?

http://www.museumofflight.org/aircraft

tortugamon

Beautiful airplane, I hope I look that good when I'm 83!

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 5):

Yes and I said jet aircraft, which aren't DC-2/3 and a Mercury capsule. No DC-8, DC-9, 10 or MD-11. No A300 or A320. They had the chance to take BGs final DC-10 and turned it down. Yeah, real effort there.

Quoting UA444 (Reply 7): Yes and I said jet aircraft, which aren't DC-2/3 and a Mercury capsule. No DC-8, DC-9, 10 or MD-11. No A300 or A320. They had the chance to take BGs final DC-10 and turned it down. Yeah, real effort there.

Again, this museum is a typical museum in that they heavily consist of aircraft that are not seen in the air today. I count less than 10 (7% of their collection) that were jet powered commercial aircraft.

The second to last DC-10 doesn't exactly sound like a show stopper but it sounds more interesting than an A320 but neither are no-brainers given the limited space at BFI.

tortugamon

Very graceful, she looks like she belongs in the air and not stuck on the ground. Shame she is not a flying exhibit.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 8): Again, this museum is a typical museum in that they heavily consist of aircraft that are not seen in the air today. I count less than 10 (7% of their collection) that were jet powered commercial aircraft.

Which is one of the reasons why I love MoF....I just never realised they were not part of Boeing.... 

Interesting footage of UA's very first international flight (the return trip) YVR-BFI on July 1, 1934 on a Boeing 247.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgBf4QJK73Y

Vancouver-Seattle remained UA's only international route for another 33 years until they obtained Chicago-Toronto rights in 1967 (possibly 1966).

The 50 minute block time in 1934 was about the same (faster in a few cases) than YVR-SEA schedules today, 82 years later.

[Edited 2016-04-27 17:23:14]

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 8): Again, this museum is a typical museum in that they heavily consist of aircraft that are not seen in the air today.

Which makes the 787 display over the BG DC-10 perplexing since the DC-10 is fast disappearing from the skies, whereas the 787 will be flying on for decades to come!

The 787 was a test plane that couldn't be economically converted to a commercial plane.

NC13347. She's beautiful, and I've got a special place in my heart for her. My dad was hired at UAL in 1937 as a co-pilot on the 247, and has this plane in his logbooks. Almost 80 years later I'm a captain myself on an A330, and it's wonderful to see the connection across the years with the 247 still flying.

HAL

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 12): Which makes the 787 display over the BG DC-10 perplexing since the DC-10 is fast disappearing from the skies, whereas the 787 will be flying on for decades to come!

A test 787 vs the second to last DC-10 is perplexing? Which aircraft will be more important to aviation in the long run? Let alone meaningful locally. Not even close.

tortugamon

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 15):

The DC-10 is an iconic aircraft with a storied history. It deserves to be preserved.

Quoting UA444 (Reply 16): The DC-10 is an iconic aircraft with a storied history. It deserves to be preserved.

Agree. My earliest DC10 flight was on CO, IAH-LAX, Summer '74. This bird does have a storied history and a very unique appearance.

It is certainly worth preserving.

Even though UA, AA, and CO have disposed of their DC10 frames (sent to the desert, broken up, parted out, perhaps sold to freighter companies like FX), I'd like to think that one could be found somewhere that could be preserved in the Museum of Flight, maybe one coming off current FedEx duty.

That #2 straight-through engine -- commandingly and strangely perched on the tail -- should be something future generations should be able to see with their own eyes!

 

And the L-1011, too! Hopefully, they haven't all been busted up.

Quoting Schweigend (Reply 17): ven though UA, AA, and CO have disposed of their DC10 frames (sent to the desert, broken up, parted out, perhaps sold to freighter companies like FX), I'd like to think that one could be found somewhere that could be preserved in the Museum of Flight, maybe one coming off current FedEx duty.

The Orbis DC-10 N220AU will be replaced by an MD-10 in June. It's the second DC-10 built and has been doing good work helping those with eye problems. That is definitely worthy of preservation.

The museum is in Seattle, and that is the home of Boeing. However, Boeing claims the legacies of McDonnell, North American/Rockwell and Douglas and includes information on those companies' products on its web pages. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the products of those companies to be well represented at the Museum of flight.

I certainly think that a DC8, DC9, DC10 and an L1011 would be appropriate for a comprehensive museum. I would also like to see a C-54/DC4, DC6/7 and a Constellation in such a museum, as these airplanes helped make passenger flight mature enough to spur the jet age. Airplanes made in other countries such as the Comet, VC-10 or Caravelle would be great, but would probably be even harder to acquire.

Quoting nikeherc (Reply 19): Airplanes made in other countries such as the Comet, VC-10 or Caravelle would be great, but would probably be even harder to acquire.

Er... the museum already has a Comet!   

Quoting UA444 (Reply 16): The DC-10 is an iconic aircraft with a storied history. It deserves to be preserved.

It is the aircraft which is beyond question the worst designed commercial airliner in history when compared to the state of the art at the time of its design. Thanks to McDonnell and its military mindset the designers took a number of shortcuts that neither Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, or Convair would have done it had three major crashes that should not have happened. McDonnell had never before designed a commercial airliner, having only designed military planes, and their approach was that once specifications had been met you were done. All other commercial airliner manufacturers had learned that if you can make it safer you do, period. And when McDonnell took over Douglas midway through the DC-10 design it was their engineers that were calling the shots, not the experienced (and excellent) Douglas engineers. So as far as I am concerned I do not care if no DC-10 (or MD-11, which was even worse) ever gets preserved.

Quoting aviatorcraig (Reply 20):

Not aware of that, as I haven't had the opportunity to visit the museum or study its collection. Just throwing it out as a possibility.

I don't think that the DC -10 was a bad design in itself, I think that cost pressures and the competition with Lockheed's L-1011 led McDD to rush things and cut two critical corners, no asymmetry lock-out on the leading edge slats and no hydraulic circuit breakers. The cargo door lock was a poor design, but not unique to the DC-10. As others have pointed out, the 747 had a similar problem, just not quite as tragically. The DC-10 did have a long and productive career and is worthy of inclusion, but not necessarily as much as some other aircraft.

Also, keep in mind that FX still operates 43 MD-10s...its still an active type, albeit only for a few more years. the DC-10 is also not as important in the history of commercial jet aviation as the 707, DC-8, 727, 737, 747, and A320. Heck, the DC-9 was probably more impactful. There were fewer than 500 DC-10s built, and although it did go on to have a moderately successful career, it was plagued by some high-visibility problems as previous posters have pointed out. When telling the story of commercial aviation, the DC-10 is not a main player. That doesn't mean it didn't develop into a fine plane, however, I find it spectacular there are 45+ year old MD-10s still flying.

Quoting UA444 (Reply 16): The DC-10 is an iconic aircraft with a storied history. It deserves to be preserved.

Not sure why that has to be at this particular museum. There is finite space. I don't think its a Boeing conspiracy that they manipulating the museum in an attempt to diminish Douglas products. It is a Boeing historical company after all.

tortugamon

.
United Airlines´ Boeing 247D - CN 1729, reg. NC13347, powered by two air-cooled, supercharged . R-1340-S1H1-G Wasp, 9-cylinder, single-row radial engines, with the CR of 6:1, displacement 1.343,8 cu in / 22.021 cc (bore: 5,75 in / 146,05 mm ; stroke: 5,75 in / 146,05 mm), rated at 600 hp / 447 kW at 2.250 rpm at 6.200 ft / 1.890 m. The engines´ max. diameter was 51,75 in / 1.314,5 mm, and dry weight 930 lb / 422 kg. The engine had two overhead valves per cylinder, single-speed centrifugal type supercharger (1:10 step-up). The fuel system comprised two-barrel Stromberg carburetors by which 91-octane gasoline was blended with the pressurized air and injected into the intake manifolds of the cylinders. The engines drove three-bladed Hamilton Standard controllable-pitch propellers through the 3:2 gear reduction.

* Boeing 247D - CN 1729, reg. NC13347, landing for the last time at Boeing Field (BFI) in Seattle …

.

Eighty-three years after the successful delivery in 1933, the world’s oldest Boeing 247D returned back to the Boeing Field. The aircraft made the 15-minute flight from the Paine Field in Everett (PAE) to the Museum of Flight at Boeing Field (BFI) in Seattle, under the command of Mike Carriker and copilot Chad Lundy. Lundy and Carriker are both former Boeing test pilots. Carriker being known as the former chief test pilot on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

.

To date, only four of these aircraft are still in existence: CN 1699, reg. CF-JRQ - National Museum of Science and Technology, Rockcliffe, Canada; CN 1722, reg. N18E - Science Museum store, Wroughton, UK; CN 1729, reg. N13347 - Museum of Flight at Boeing Field in Seattle, WA, USA and CN 1953, reg. NC13369 (marked as NR257Y) - National Air and Space Museum, Washington, D.C., USA.

Built in 1933, Boeing 247D was the first recognized modern airliner at the time offering travelers speed and comfort in an all metal design.

All I can say is: ´What a beautiful and unique piece of the aviation history!´


Nice regards

Mario

I thought the Model 40 was the oldest flying Boeing airliner, shown in the link flying with the 787.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...12425e0a040b4959cb31eo0&ajaxhist=0

Interestingly, Mike Carriker was at the controls of the 787 shown in this photo.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 26): Interestingly, Mike Carriker was at the controls of the 787 shown in this photo.

Yep. Christine Walsh was in the right seat that day and is now the 737 Deputy Chief Pilot.

Interesting that Boeing pilots flew the 247 PAE-BFI, but not the 727 a few weeks ago.

Anybody know when the last 247 flew in service - commercial or private? I've seen a few web sites state that some flew into the late 1960s.

Thanks Mario, nice summary!

So, now, what would be the oldest all-metal aircraft still flying?

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21): Quoting UA444 (Reply 16): The DC-10 is an iconic aircraft with a storied history. It deserves to be preserved. It is the aircraft which is beyond question the worst designed commercial airliner in history when compared to the state of the art at the time of its design. Thanks to McDonnell and its military mindset the designers took a number of shortcuts that neither Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, or Convair would have done it had three major crashes that should not have happened.

Many major airlines carried millions of passengers on DC-10s and MD-11s safely for many years.

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 28): So, now, what would be the oldest all-metal aircraft still flying?

At least eight Ford Tri-Motors are still airworthy, including two that operate sightseeing rides for the EAA. Ford Tri-Motors were produced from 1925 to 1933, the first year of Boeing 247 production.

Quoting mfranjic (Reply 25): Lundy and Carriker are both former Boeing test pilots. Carriker being known as the former chief test pilot on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

I don't think the word "former" is accurate here. They are both still Boeing test pilots. Which ever article you got "former", from wasn't correct.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 27): Interesting that Boeing pilots flew the 247 PAE-BFI, but not the 727 a few weeks ago.

Not really, Mike Carriker also flew the Boeing 307 Stratoliner and Chad Lundy's background makes him a good candidate for the job. On the other hand there are plenty of current/qualified 727 pilots around and none of them work for Boeing.


http://www.airlinereporter.com/chadlundy/

Interesting read on the Boeing 247 wikipedia article, United Air Lines pilot has a big say in the design of the plane, and refused the initial proposal that was bigger with more powerful engines ! They thought it was too heavy for the airfields of the time, and were scared by the power of the engines.

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 28): Thanks Mario, nice summary!

Thank You, Aircellist. I am very glad You like it.

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 28): So, now, what would be the oldest all-metal aircraft still flying?

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 30): At least eight Ford Tri-Motors are still airworthy, including two that operate sightseeing rides for the EAA. Ford Tri-Motors were produced from 1925 to 1933, the first year of Boeing 247 production.

I have found the same one, as and maxpower1954, last night, but it was already midnight here in my hometown...

Eastern Air Transport´s Ford 4-AT-E Tri-Motor, CN 4-AT-69, reg. NC8407, was powered by three Wright J-6 Whirlwind 9 (R-975), 9-cylinder, single-row radial engines, with the CR of 5,1:1, displacement 972 cu in / 15.927 cc (bore: 5 in / 127,0 mm; stroke: 5,5 in / 139,7 mm), rated at 300 hp / 223 kW at 2.000 rpm.
The engines´ max. diameter was 45 in / 1.143 mm, length 41-7/16 in / 1.053 mm and dry weight 520 lb / 236 kg. The fuel system comprised single-barrel Stromberg carburetors and each cylinder had 2 spark plugs.

Like the J-5, the J-6 Whirlwind was based on the J-4 from 1924, this time with cylinders of increased bore (from 4,5 in / 114,3 mm to 5,0 in / 127,0 mm).
The first J-6 Whirlwind 7 (R-760) flew in 1925. In 1929 the J-6 Whirlwind 9 (R-975) was introduced and in 1930 the J-6 Whirlwind 5 (R-540). All three shared the same cylinder geometry (bore: 5 in / 127,0 mm; stroke: 5.5 in / 139,7 mm), and they differed in the number of the cylinders. The R-975 cylinders were made of a steel barrel over which an aluminium alloy head was screwed and shrunk. Intake ports were at the rear with the exhaust ports on the forward side of cylinder.

However, the R-975 faced heavy competition from Pratt & Whitney 's R-985 Wasp Junior and from their larger R-1340 Wasp (mentioned in my previous post). Pratt & Whitney sold many more Wasp Juniors for aircraft use than Wright sold R-975s.

After the war, Continental introduced its own R-975 version of the engine aimed for the aircraft, the R9-A. Though it was basically similar to the other R-975 engines, and its compression ratio and supercharger gear ratio were unchanged from the R-975E-3, other improvements in the R9-A allowed it to achieve 525 hp / 391 kW for takeoff, surpassing any Wright version of the engine. A military version, the R-975-46, could reach 550 hp / 410 kW, and was used in Piasecki 's HUP Retriever and H-25 Army Mule helicopters. Continental's production of R-975 engines continued until 1945.

The engine was also built in Spain as the Hispano-Suiza 9Q or Hispano-Wright 9Q without modification apart from the use of Hispano's patented nitriding finishing process and, on one version only, the 9Qdr, an epicyclic output speed reducer. The R-975 was also produced under licence by Fábrica Nacional de Motores in Brazil…

.

From 1926 through 1933, Ford Motor Company built 199 Tri-Motors aircrafts. EAA’s model 4-AT-E was the 146th off Ford’s innovative assembly line and first flew on 21. Aug 1929. It was sold to Pitcairn Aviation’s passenger division, Eastern Air Transport, whose paint scheme is replicated on EAA’s Tri-Motor.

In 1930, the Tri-Motor, NC8407, was leased to Cubana Airlines, where it inaugurated air service between Havana and Santiago de Cuba. The airplane was later flown by the government of the Dominican Republic.

An interesting historical footnote about NC8407 is that this is the aircraft that Neil Armstrong flew in with his father on 20. Jul 1936, on his first flight at five years of age. It was exactly 33 years later that he took his historic walk on the Moon.

EAA’s Ford Tri-Motor returned to the U.S. in 1949 for barnstorming use. In 1950, it was moved from Miami to Phoenix and was refitted with more powerful Pratt & Whitney 's R-985 Wasp Junior SB/SC, 985 cu in / 16.170 cc (bore: 5-3/16 in / 131,8 mm; stroke: 5-3/16 in / 131,8 mm) engines for use as a crop duster. With two 450 hp engines and one 550 hp engine, it became the most powerful Model 4-AT ever flown. In 1955, it was moved to Idaho and fitted with two 275 gal. / 1.040 l tanks and bomb doors for use as a borate bomber in aerial firefighting. Then in 1958, it was further modified for use by smoke jumpers.

After working for a variety of crop spraying businesses, EAA’s Tri-Motor moved to Lawrence, Kansas, in 1964, where its new owner flew barnstorming tours. During this period it had a variety of roles, including serving as the primary setting for the Jerry Lewis comedy, ´The Family Jewels´.

In 1973, the aircraft was still being used for air show rides, including an EAA chapter’s fly-in at Burlington, WI. While at the 1973 fly-in, a severe thunderstorm ripped the plane from its tie-downs, lifted it 50 feet into the air and smashed it to the ground on its back. EAA subsequently purchased the wreckage.

After an arduous, 12-year restoration process by EAA staff, volunteers and Ford Tri-Motor operators nationwide, the old Tri-Motor took to the air once again, where it had its official re-debut at the 1985 EAA Fly-In Convention in Oshkosh.

It was displayed in the EAA AirVenture Museum until 1991 when it returned to its former role of delighting passengers. Ford Tri-motor, NC8407, is the flagship of the EAA´s Pioneer Airport, a part of the AirVenture Museum experience...

... and who knows how many more wondrous stories this aircraft could tell us? The myriad? No. Much more than that ...


Nice regards

Mario