What is the
(1) plane built longest ago
(2) that can legally fly
(3) multiple paying passengers in scheduled service.

It has to meet all legal standards including noise standards. But to the extent the rules have grandfather clauses, they can be used.

The DC3 will get you pretty up there in terms of age. You won't see it flying out of LHR JFK or PVG but still there in niche flying. And I would include the Basler conversion in that since the airframe is still vintage.

Other than that, I'd say some Venezuelan DC9 or a 732 in the Canadian Arctic would be the best you could do.

TWA772LR wrote:

The DC3 will get you pretty up there in terms of age. You won't see it flying out of LHR JFK or PVG but still there in niche flying. And I would include the Basler conversion in that since the airframe is still vintage.

Other than that, I'd say some Venezuelan DC9 or a 732 in the Canadian Arctic would be the best you could do.

Can a DC-3 legally fly regularly scheduled paying passengers anywhere except the Canadian North? There is no way they meet modern safety standards???

A 737-200 is a stage II noise aircraft unless modified, as is a DC-8 and a 727. So that counts. Anyone flying 727s or DC-8s with passengers.

kitplane01 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The DC3 will get you pretty up there in terms of age. You won't see it flying out of LHR JFK or PVG but still there in niche flying. And I would include the Basler conversion in that since the airframe is still vintage.

Other than that, I'd say some Venezuelan DC9 or a 732 in the Canadian Arctic would be the best you could do.

Can a DC-3 legally fly regularly scheduled paying passengers anywhere except the Canadian North? There is no way they meet modern safety standards???

A 737-200 is a stage II noise aircraft unless modified, as is a DC-8 and a 727. So that counts. Anyone flying 727s or DC-8s with passengers.

What qualifies as modern safety standards? Keep in mind the 737 (and 747 for that matter) are still considered safe by the latest safety rules because they met the safety rules back in the 60s. If they were new designs today, forget about it.

It wasn't that long ago when the JU52 stopped seeing some kinds of regular air service for Ju-Air in Europe.

Not trying to be argumentive, just pointing out some facts. I do like the topic of the thread though so I'll be keeping an eye on it.

kitplane01 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The DC3 will get you pretty up there in terms of age. You won't see it flying out of LHR JFK or PVG but still there in niche flying. And I would include the Basler conversion in that since the airframe is still vintage.

Other than that, I'd say some Venezuelan DC9 or a 732 in the Canadian Arctic would be the best you could do.

Can a DC-3 legally fly regularly scheduled paying passengers anywhere except the Canadian North? There is no way they meet modern safety standards???

A 737-200 is a stage II noise aircraft unless modified, as is a DC-8 and a 727. So that counts. Anyone flying 727s or DC-8s with passengers.

Just had a thought, Kenmore Air in Seattle. They operate DHC-2s as well as the turboprop conversion. They are an actual airline, in fact, I can nonrev on them because I'm an airline employee myself and have seen them on our list of agreements. Harbour Air in Vancouver, BC also operates them.

Both of them operate the DHC-2 and -3, which have been flying since 1947 and 1953, respectively. So I'd wager 1947 is the earliest for an airplane that can legally fly and carry multiple passengers in scheduled service. Bonus, those airlines are in countries that have pretty tight aviation safety and noise laws.

TWA772LR wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The DC3 will get you pretty up there in terms of age. You won't see it flying out of LHR JFK or PVG but still there in niche flying. And I would include the Basler conversion in that since the airframe is still vintage.

Other than that, I'd say some Venezuelan DC9 or a 732 in the Canadian Arctic would be the best you could do.

Can a DC-3 legally fly regularly scheduled paying passengers anywhere except the Canadian North? There is no way they meet modern safety standards???

A 737-200 is a stage II noise aircraft unless modified, as is a DC-8 and a 727. So that counts. Anyone flying 727s or DC-8s with passengers.

What qualifies as modern safety standards? Keep in mind the 737 (and 747 for that matter) are still considered safe by the latest safety rules because they met the safety rules back in the 60s. If they were new designs today, forget about it.

It wasn't that long ago when the JU52 stopped seeing some kinds of regular air service for Ju-Air in Europe.

Not trying to be argumentive, just pointing out some facts. I do like the topic of the thread though so I'll be keeping an eye on it.

I’m surprised at times that the safety standards are grandfathered enough that dc-3s can legally serve airlines. That’s all I meant. (Of course I know dc-3s are cool).

Ok. Next question. What’s the oldest JET in regularly scheduled airline service.

If an air carrier is willing to invest the required money to have an old airframe certified and is able to turn a profit by doing so, then that would be your answer.

In regards to jets, Canadian North and Nolinor still fly regularly scheduled 737-200s.

kitplane01 wrote:

Ok. Next question. What’s the oldest JET in regularly scheduled airline service.

Probably a 737-200. Still quite a bit out there. By some half-assed research of mine, there's a good amount in the Canadian Arctic, at least 1 in the Congo, and still going pretty strong in Venezuela. I'm positive there's more.

TWA772LR wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

Ok. Next question. What’s the oldest JET in regularly scheduled airline service.

Probably a 737-200. Still quite a bit out there. By some half-assed research of mine, there's a good amount in the Canadian Arctic, at least 1 in the Congo, and still going pretty strong in Venezuela. I'm positive there's more.

I wonder how you get pilot training for a 737-200? Are there simulators out there. Because doing stalls and engine-cut-on-takeoff on an empty plane sounds expensive.

kitplane01 wrote:

Can a DC-3 legally fly regularly scheduled paying passengers anywhere except the Canadian North? There is no way they meet modern safety standards???

The DC-3 no longer flies scheduled passenger service in Canada’s Arctic. Buffalo Airways’ DC-3 passenger services ended when their Performance and Weight&Balance practises fell under scrutiny following a crash at Yellowknife.

I don’t know if it’s legal any more any way. Transport Canada mandated performance limitations on the aircraft that apparently made it uneconomic for operations. Basically, it had to be able to fly on one engine. (How dare they) And, gosh gee whiz, weight&balance had to be completed before departure!

The Basler BT-67 does fly passenger charters though. Also, if one desired, the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum offers sightseeing flights in a DC-3/C-47 out of Hamilton Ontario.

kitplane01 wrote:

I wonder how you get pilot training for a 737-200? Are there simulators out there. Because doing stalls and engine-cut-on-takeoff on an empty plane sounds expensive.

Nolinair has a 737-200 simulator in their training centre at Mirabel. When Canadian Airlines retired the type in 2004 the two simulators (YYZ and YVR) were quickly snatched up.

And you are correct, expense was a factor, but the biggest issue was safety. It is astounding how many large commercial airliners and their crew were lost in the early ‘60s during training accidents.

kitplane01 wrote:

Ok. Next question. What’s the oldest JET in regularly scheduled airline service.

I wonder if the FlySAX DC-9 still flies, couldn't find it anywhere. It used to be the oldest, over half a century old and still going strong.

Other than that, what about Air Koryo? They operate some heavily outdated Soviet-era aircraft such as Tu-134s, Tu-154s and Il-62s. Even the Il-18 is still listed as part of their fleet although I seriously doubt if it's still active. I suppose they can make it active if they need to, and it's not like they need to meet any safety standards.

Trans Northern in Alaska still might operate DC-3s that can be over 80 years old?

Noshow wrote:

Trans Northern in Alaska still might operate DC-3s that can be over 80 years old?

There are no scheduled DC3 passenger services left. A few frames still operate charter/sightseeing/enthusiast flights.

kitplane01 wrote:

I wonder how you get pilot training for a 737-200? Are there simulators out there. Because doing stalls and engine-cut-on-takeoff on an empty plane sounds expensive.

Pan Am in Miami still has a 737-200 sim which I used last in 2018.

Noshow wrote:

Trans Northern in Alaska still might operate DC-3s that can be over 80 years old?

TransNorthern does have passenger DC-3s (actually Super DC-3s) but they are not in scheduled service.