Why Was The 727 Phased Out?

TriL1011Star · Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:46 pm

With all of the things a 727 could do, For example:

The plane had rear air stairs. (why do planes no longer have stairs built in? How many times have you landed at an airport and had them say all the gates were full so you had to sit on the plane until one became available? This could be prevented if planes still had stairs because if all the gates are taken, you could still get people off by parking next to a gate that is being used!)

It cruised at mach .90.

It could land at smaller airports very easily.

It could climb very rapidly.

It could slow down very rapidly.

It had good back up. (Electric back up AND manual cables.)

It handled smoothly,

It was built like a tank.

With all of the features and benefits it had, why was it not just as a success as the 737?

Upgrades could have been done to it to make it cheaper to operate, such as glass cockpits and maybe the elimination of the tail engine.

longhauler · Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:53 pm

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
It cruised at mach .90.

It could go M.90 but certainly didn't cruise there. At the end, we cruised them at M.77 to M.78.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
It could land at smaller airports very easily.

Not as easily as the B737! We flew ours on gravel and ice, and 4000' we certainly do-able with a profitable payload.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
It could climb very rapidly.

Again, the edge goes to the B737 with a better thrust/weight ratio. In fact, most of what you cite, the B737 did better.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
why was it not just as a success as the 737?

One less engine, one less pilot ... in top of being better at most of what you cite. The B727 did cruise faster than the earlier B737s, but with the advent of the NG with a faster wing, they are about the same now.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
The plane had rear air stairs. (why do planes no longer have stairs built in?

Some airline's B737 had rear airstairs. (some of ours did). It remains an option.

The entire stair assembly is very heavy and labour intensive. If not needed, why install/maintain it?

LH707330 · Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:09 pm

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
With all of the features and benefits it had, why was it not just as a success as the 737?

It was initially more successful than the 737, at least until the classics showed up. What really killed it was a mix of higher fuel prices, noise regs, and newer planes like the 757 and A320. Noise became a bigger factor in Europe before it did in the USA, which is why many EU carriers replaced their 727s with A320s in the early-90s while US carriers split between the 320 and 738 in the mid-late 90s.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
Upgrades could have been done to it to make it cheaper to operate, such as glass cockpits and maybe the elimination of the tail engine.

True, but they would not have been as good as a new-build.

Going through your points, most relate to cost and weight, as well as other considerations that changed as the times did.

It cruised at mach .90.
->Not really a necessary feature in short/mid-haul planes. It's cheaper to fly at .78 and easier to optimize a plane for such speeds.

It could land at smaller airports very easily.
->Most airports are bigger now.

It could climb very rapidly.
->Again, not a useful feature if it means more fuel burn.

It could slow down very rapidly.
->Useful at times, but not a game-changer

It had good back up. (Electric back up AND manual cables.)
->Most newer planes likewise have backups

It handled smoothly,
->Pilots don't buy planes, beancounters do....

It was built like a tank.
->Yes, but that made it too heavy, and hence thirsty.

kurtverbose · Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:28 pm

Unlike the 737 it couldn't be re-engined with high bypass engines, so Boeing brought out the 757 - which to all intents and purposes was a 727 replacement.

It was a very successful programme. It held the record for the most number of jet airliners built for quite a while.

As for the rear stairs, I think DB Cooper stopped that. To my knowledge many of them were sealed up after that event.

1337Delta764 · Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:05 am

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 3):
Unlike the 737 it couldn't be re-engined with high bypass engines, so Boeing brought out the 757 - which to all intents and purposes was a 727 replacement.

Of course, few airlines (other than cargo airlines) actually ordered the 757 to replace 727s; they ordered 757s either for domestic growth and/or to replace the 707 or DC-8 on domestic routes. Most often 727s were either replaced by A320s or 738s, with some also replaced by MD-80s and 734s. DL originally was going to replace their 727s with MD-90s, but later decided to replace them with the 738 instead after cancelling most of its MD-90 orders.

[Edited 2014-10-20 17:05:58]

737tdi · Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:18 am

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 3):
As for the rear stairs, I think DB Cooper stopped that. To my knowledge many of them were sealed up after that event.

I don't know of any that were sealed up but we did modify them with what was called the DB Cooper mod.. Picture a spring loaded weather vane that when there was sufficient airflow across it would rotate 90 degrees and physically block the air stair from being deployed in flight. Once the airflow was lost the little vane would rotate back and clear the air stair for lowering.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
Upgrades could have been done to it to make it cheaper to operate, such as glass cockpits and maybe the elimination of the tail engine.

UPS did do some of this (actually Dee Howard Co. did). EFIS cockpit, many upgrades, and re-engine with RR TAYS. They have all been retired.

Avro7 · Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:17 am

The 727 might have been a great design in it's time and a rugged airframe with lots of life left but there would be so few routes which would justify the fuel cost even if it had been certified with an updated 2-man cockpit (were there even any serious proposals?). For better or worse, there is no longer any need for a flight engineer in modern aviation. Plus noise restrictions in Europe, etc.......

Max Q · Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:45 am

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 3):
As for the rear stairs, I think DB Cooper stopped that. To my knowledge many of them were sealed up after that event.

Quoting 737tdi (Reply 5):
I don't know of any that were sealed up but we did modify them with what was called the DB Cooper mod.. Picture a spring loaded weather vane that when there was sufficient airflow across it would rotate 90 degrees and physically block the air stair from being deployed in flight. Once the airflow was lost the little vane would rotate back and clear the air stair for lowering.

Completely correct and well explained. There wouldn't be any point in sealing them up as you'd still be carting the weight around and it was basically part of the airframe.

Furthermore the ventral stairs were very useful and at my airline had to be locked down when we were loading and unloading to avoid any chance of tipping on the tail. The 727 was a tail heavy aircraft.

It was also the sweetest flying jet I've ever flown, the first one I flew and still may favourite, it went through turbulence like a knife through butter.

But it's had its day, just burned too much fuel and too noisy.

akiss20 · Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:39 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 7):
There wouldn't be any point in sealing them up as you'd still be carting the weight around and it was basically part of the airframe.

Was the rear air stair in the 727 considered a necessary emergency exit on any models? If so, it wouldn't even be legal to seal them no?

Cheers

Pihero · Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:34 pm

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 8):
Was the rear air stair in the 727 considered a necessary emergency exit on any models?

I don't think so : impossible to open /use on a belly landing.

tb727 · Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:43 pm

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 8):
Was the rear air stair in the 727 considered a necessary emergency exit on any models? If so, it wouldn't even be legal to seal them no?

In a hurry my first choice would be L2/R2. If you belly it in, end up going down a slope or have a fire in the back, the airstairs are useless. They were nice to have though! Very self sufficient at the small airports we went into that lacked facilities and stairs, it was a nice airplane to just go to a remote airport and do it's thing.

It was an awesome plane for what it did when it was built, it still has a tiny niche out there with some freight operators and some as private jets. Problem is that when it comes down to it, it just costs to much money to operate with airplanes that do the exact same thing for a lot less fuel burn and only 2 pilots and lots of maintenance support.

It was long my favorite airplane as a kid growing up and I stopped flying it last month. I feel extremely fortunate that I got a type rating and some good time in it but it was time to move on. I'm still in training for my next a/c and I know it will handle nothing like it and it's all automated! The only easy thing in class is that I have no automation to forget while learning the new plane! The saddest thing is the FE is stuck in a little box and has been computerized

kurtverbose · Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:27 pm

Quoting tb727 (Reply 10):
The saddest thing is the FE is stuck in a little box and has been computerized

Isn't he far less moody now?

desertjets · Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:29 pm

Ultimately 9/11 intervened and the 727s got retired early. IIRC AA, DL, UA and maybe NW still had fairly sizeable fleets of 727-200s in 2001 -- I am thinking around 200-250 aircraft in that time period (maybe less, don't quote me on it). Then they were pretty much gone overnight. But even in the absence of 9/11 their days were numbered. For the most part they were all on the other side of 20 years old and were well used to boot. If jet fuel had not stayed so cheap during the 1990s I feel that the majors would have been quicker to retire them.

BravoOne · Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:34 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 1):
Some airline's B737 had rear airstairs. (some of ours did). It remains an option.

Funny no one in Boeing 737 Tech Ops has ever heard of such a thing? Can you provide a photo or some sort proof as it would make for a good beer bet.

kanban · Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:46 pm

Here's a video of the retracting 737 air stairs.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByBJwPxxb0A

Google "737 Retracting Air Stairs" and there is a picture of an aft stair installation on Alaska..

tb727 · Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:55 pm

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 11):
Isn't he far less moody now?

lol, I'm not quite sure yet, the little box does have a French accent and thinks it can do no wrong. At least it doesn't leave it's seat out or steal the last water in the cooler I suppose!

longhauler · Tue Oct 21, 2014 5:12 pm

Quoting BravoOne (Reply 13):
Funny no one in Boeing 737 Tech Ops has ever heard of such a thing? Can you provide a photo or some sort proof as it would make for a good beer bet.

Rear airstairs were standard on the Combi version of the B737C, and optional on all B737s ... some even had both installed, front and back. They weren't ventral like the B727, the B737's aft pressure dome wouldn't permit it, they were installed on door L2.

Here they are extended:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Carlos A. Morillo Doria

Externally the door was different, as it was wider, no window, and although you can't see it in the picture here, there was a huge lever on the side of the fuselage (reached from the ground) to open the door in an emergency, it "disconnected" the hydraulics and let the door/stairs free fall. It was similar in function to the emergency lever installed inside (beside the lav) to use the exit in an emergency.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jay Selman - AirlinersGallery

DocLightning · Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:25 pm

To sum up what others have said, the 727 was withdrawn for the same reason the 707 and DC-8 were. It was obsolete. It was less capable than newer aircraft that had fewer engines and fewer pilots, and it burned a lot of fuel.

By the time the last 727s in the US were withdrawn from service (late 1990s), the 757 was firmly established as a replacement and the 737-NG family and A320 family were also available for 727 missions.

The 727 was designed to offer medium-range coverage and hot/high performance. US offered 727 service on CLT-SFO nonstop (which was pushing the range of the later models). But most 727s were used on shorter flights that didn't require their full performance. Examples were DTW-DEN, DTW-ORD, and SFO-LAX.

For the same reason, the 757 went out of production. Newer aircraft could offer similar performance with less overall weight and power. With the introduction of the A321-NEO and 737-9 MAX, about 95% of 757 routes will be covered with these newer, lighter, more efficient frames.

CALTECH · Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:29 pm

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 3):
As for the rear stairs, I think DB Cooper stopped that. To my knowledge many of them were sealed up after that event.

Quoting 737tdi (Reply 5):

I don't know of any that were sealed up but we did modify them with what was called the DB Cooper mod.. Picture a spring loaded weather vane that when there was sufficient airflow across it would rotate 90 degrees and physically block the air stair from being deployed in flight. Once the airflow was lost the little vane would rotate back and clear the air stair for lowering.

MD80 · Wed Oct 22, 2014 2:43 am

Thanks for posting a photo of this device!

Viscount724 · Wed Oct 22, 2014 2:52 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 16):
Quoting BravoOne (Reply 13):
Funny no one in Boeing 737 Tech Ops has ever heard of such a thing? Can you provide a photo or some sort proof as it would make for a good beer bet.

Rear airstairs were standard on the Combi version of the B737C, and optional on all B737s ... some even had both installed, front and back. They weren't ventral like the B727, the B737's aft pressure dome wouldn't permit it, they were installed on door L2.

The first 737s built, LH's 737-100s, had both front and rear airstairs.

That photo is from this recent (3 months ago) thread on a similar subject.
Lufthansa B737-100 (by willyknut Jul 7 2014 in Civil Aviation)

In later years I don't think many 737s other than the 732C combis had the rear airstairs.

737tdi · Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:32 am

Quoting MD80 (Reply 19):
Thanks for posting a photo of this device!

What, My great engineering mind did not explain it well enough.

I am just kidding, I still do a lot of my mechanic job by pictures and diagrams.

Great pic.. Wow, how many of those did I install, I can't count the number. It is amazing the number of mods. that come along that stick in your mind for decades. The cockpit door mod./replacement is probably my biggest job ever. Pat and myself were the first mechanics in the US to test fit the new door in a Boeing. It was a 737-200 and it was a pain in the rump. Next we tested the -300, much easier. Next of course was the NG, pretty much the same as the classic but other then shimming it bolted right in with a few extra holes.

Sorry for the misdirection.

Max Q · Wed Oct 22, 2014 4:47 am

We had some -100 and -200 series 737's inherited from PEX and FAL.

Don't remember if they had the front stairs installed but I remember riding on one, looking at the rear air stairs and thinking they looked very heavy !

MD80 · Wed Oct 22, 2014 5:42 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
The first 737s built, LH's 737-100s, had both front and rear airstairs.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 22):
they looked very heavy !

IIRC it was the complexity of the design and the weight that resulted to the fact that this feature was short-lived.

Here is a training video for flight attendants and the aft stair is well explained from minute 15 onwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLxwNv6Y3C0

UA444 · Wed Oct 22, 2014 7:36 am

Quoting desertjets (Reply 12):
Ultimately 9/11 intervened and the 727s got retired early. IIRC AA, DL, UA and maybe NW still had fairly sizeable fleets of 727-200s in 2001 -- I am thinking around 200-250 aircraft in that time period (maybe less, don't quote me on it). Then they were pretty much gone overnight. But even in the absence of 9/11 their days were numbered. For the most part they were all on the other side of 20 years old and were well used to boot. If jet fuel had not stayed so cheap during the 1990s I feel that the majors would have been quicker to retire them.

UA had plans to fly them until 2003, they announced in early 2001 they'd accelerate the retirement of the remaining 75 from 2005 to 2003. Then 9/11 happened and they were all gone by November 1 of that year. AA retired theirs a few months later and DL and NW were done by summer 2003.

BravoOne · Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:29 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 16):
Rear airstairs were standard on the Combi version of the B737C, and optional on all B737s ... some even had both installed, front and back. They weren't ventral like the B727, the B737's aft pressure dome wouldn't permit it, they were installed on door L2.

Okay I thought you meant aft ventral stairs. I use to operate a B767-200ER with stairs at the L2 door. Watching them extend and retract was a nail bighter as they looked ike a poorly designed Erector set.

Thanks for the pics. I think that most if not all the early 737-100/200's had the 1L stair as standard equip although many airlines removed them as Jetway became more common?

CALTECH · Wed Oct 22, 2014 4:08 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 22):
Don't remember if they had the front stairs installed but I remember riding on one, looking at the rear air stairs and thinking they looked very heavy !

They did. Continental removed them after a while in service. All the -100s had them IIRC. Can see the airstair panel under door 1L.....

Think some of the Frontier -200s had them too. Lots of memories fading,

Quoting MD80 (Reply 23):

IIRC it was the complexity of the design and the weight that resulted to the fact that this feature was short-lived.

And jetways appearing at more and more airports.

Quoting BravoOne (Reply 25):
Okay I thought you meant aft ventral stairs. I use to operate a B767-200ER with stairs at the L2 door. Watching them extend and retract was

Thought he said ventral airstairs too. Could put a set of stairs at any door just about. Like the special entrance on Air Force One,

KELPkid · Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:20 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 7):

It was also the sweetest flying jet I've ever flown, the first one I flew and still may favourite, it went through turbulence like a knife through butter.

My next door neighbor growing up was a 727 captain, and said it was next to impossible to get a gentle landing in it, though...

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):

By the time the last 727s in the US were withdrawn from service (late 1990s), the 757 was firmly established as a replacement and the 737-NG family and A320 family were also available for 727 missions.

DL was still flying a few in the early 2000's.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt

They were amongst the last ones built, though....IIRC, DL got their last 727's delivered in 1988! Not sure if those were ordered by Delta directly or ancilliary orders from Western Airlines (whom Delta merged with).

TriL1011Star · Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:27 pm

Quoting BravoOne (Reply 25):

I am curious now, why did 9/11 accelerate their depletion? Safety?

BoeingGuy · Wed Oct 22, 2014 10:13 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
My next door neighbor growing up was a 727 captain, and said it was next to impossible to get a gentle landing in it, though...

I heard that too. I heard a 707 was great at flattering the pilot, but the 727 was most certainly not.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
They were amongst the last ones built, though....IIRC, DL got their last 727's delivered in 1988! Not sure if those were ordered by Delta directly or ancilliary orders from Western Airlines (whom Delta merged with).

Considering the last 727 delivered in 1984, DL clearly got the 1988 ones second hand.

Quoting TriL1011Star (Reply 28):
Quoting BravoOne (Reply 25):

I am curious now, why did 9/11 accelerate their depletion? Safety?

Had nothing to do with safety. It would be due to an overall drop in traffic after 9/11. The 727s were the first to go when the airlines reduced their fleets.

seabosdca · Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:35 pm

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
Upgrades could have been done to it to make it cheaper to operate, such as glass cockpits and maybe the elimination of the tail engine.

The tail engine was eliminated, along with a whole lot of other changes, in the late 1990s. The new version was designated "737-800."

I kid, but the 737-800 is a better and cheaper airplane than the 727 could have ever hoped to be, no matter how extensive the modifications.

Max Q · Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:46 am

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 26):
They did. Continental removed them after a while in service. All the -100s had them IIRC. Can see the airstair panel under door 1L.....

Thanks for that CalTech.

The front door installation looked a lot neater and lighter compared to the rear I thought.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
My next door neighbor growing up was a 727 captain, and said it was next to impossible to get a gentle landing in it, though...

It wasn't impossible but it wasn't easy without a decent amount of experience on it. It was not a forgiving aircraft in that respect.

tb727 · Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:26 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 31):
It wasn't impossible but it wasn't easy without a decent amount of experience on it. It was not a forgiving aircraft in that respect.

I got lucky my last landing in it, greased it on. The next leg my FO, a guy with 15 years as a Captain on it, absolutely clanged it on, probably the hardest one I felt in my 5 years on it! I was glad to go home with mine. Of course I took the long runway leg and he got the one with the short runway with a hump but what can I say, dealers choice

Max Q · Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:35 am

Quoting tb727 (Reply 32):
I got lucky my last landing in it, greased it on. The next leg my FO, a guy with 15 years as a Captain on it, absolutely clanged it on, probably the hardest one I felt in my 5 years on it! I was glad to go home with mine. Of course I took the long runway leg and he got the one with the short runway with a hump but what can I say, dealers choice

Good for you TB, it's always good to make your last landing before changing type a good one, that feeling stays with you.

I was lucky enough to make a good last landing on the 727 as well before being consigned to the MD80

I'm glad you got to fly it, I always enjoy reading your posts relating how much you liked it, I think we're both very fortunate to have flown such a legendary aircraft, not the most advanced now but IMHO the best handling narrowbody jet ever made.

Best wishes and I hope you enjoy your new type, whatever that is !

DocLightning · Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:01 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
DL was still flying a few in the early 2000's.

Man, those Ron Allen colors really looked great on the 727, didn't they? Yeah, some flew as long as 2003.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
They were amongst the last ones built, though....IIRC, DL got their last 727's delivered in 1988! Not sure if those were ordered by Delta directly or ancilliary orders from Western Airlines (whom Delta merged with).

IIRC, production was ended in 1984.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 33):

Best wishes and I hope you enjoy your new type, whatever that is !

Yeah, TB. What's your next type? Looking forward to reading your impressions about it.

FlyMKG · Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:38 pm

Regarding good landings, the kind of flying that tb727 did and I still do has such a wide range of landing weights that it is difficult to get a good rhythm going. This week I had back to back legs with landing weights of 120k and 164k pounds. It flies much better when it's heavy. Always seem to be chasing speeds when she's light.

FlyMKG

7BOEING7 · Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:36 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 31):
It wasn't impossible but it wasn't easy without a decent amount of experience on it. It was not a forgiving aircraft in that respect.

The -100 wasn't near as bad as the -200. With the longer fuselage if you tried to land it like a normal airplane you ended up rotating the gear into the ground. There were a million variations on how to make a smooth landing in the -200 -- carry extra speed, use flaps 30 (some airlines blocked out flaps 40), de-rotating just before touchdown, etc.

In the early 80's just prior to DL getting 737-200's I took their chief pilot on a demonstration flight. On his first landing at MWH he went through weird gyrations trying to make a smooth landing which confused me at first until I realized he was trying to use his very best 727 technique. I told him the 37 wasn't anything like a 27 and pretend it was a C-172 -- the next landing was much better.

Max Q · Fri Oct 24, 2014 6:43 am

Quoting FlyMKG (Reply 35):
It flies much better when it's heavy.

That is so true.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 36):
The -100 wasn't near as bad as the -200.

Agree, it was easier.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 36):
if you tried to land it like a normal airplane you ended up rotating the gear into the ground.

I have to disagree with that, if you had your speed nailed, (a little extra helped) and barring a last minute high sink rate which must be met with a lot of power you could land it just like any other aircraft, timing the flare was very important but, once again that's like any other aircraft.

You could do the 'pushover' at the last minute and I saw a lot of Pilots try other, strange techniques but that mostly got them in trouble, especially if you got the 'pushover' wrong !

All of the myth's surrounding these 'techniques' and promoting them as being better than a properly flown approach and landing caused Pilots a lot more problems than they were worth.

longhauler · Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:27 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 37):
All of the myth's surrounding these 'techniques' and promoting them as being better than a properly flown approach and landing caused Pilots a lot more problems than they were worth.

This is funny!

I have to figure you have seen and heard the same "let me try it this way" techniques as me. Some of them resulted in pretty spectacular landings! Now that I am a Training Captain on the B767, often I have to dispell these bar learned theories before they try them on the aircraft.

I just tell them. "You want to land a B767 well, just slowly ease the nose up, as you slowly ease the thrust off, keep the damned thing straight ... and you'll be fine!"

But back to the B727 ...

When I was a new junior B737 F/O many years ago, I remember a lot of the Captains I flew with came off the B727. They all said the same thing .... compared to the B737, the B727 is a truck. Slow to roll and LOVES the ground, both on take-off and landing. I honestly wish I had flown one, but by the time we merged ... they were gone. (Same thing with the L188, but that's a whole other story!)

CALTECH · Fri Oct 24, 2014 6:01 pm

Quoting TriL1011Star (Thread starter):
Upgrades could have been done to it to make it cheaper to operate, such as glass cockpits and maybe the elimination of the tail engine.

They did that, first with the 757 and then the 737.

The 727 was so good, they were going to make the 777 look a lot like it.

Flighty · Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:13 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
DL was still flying a few in the early 2000's.

NW had a couple as well. I remember riding one in 2000, mostly because the shade said '727' and I went "hmm." Good story, I know.

tb727 · Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:29 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 33):
Best wishes and I hope you enjoy your new type, whatever that is !

Thanks Max Q! Yeah, it's French and not as "automated" as the 727 even though everyone thinks it is all fancy and does everything for you. I feel that I have to do everything in the new plane. At least the 72' was all voice activated

Max Q · Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:10 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 38):
This is funny!

I have to figure you have seen and heard the same "let me try it this way" techniques as me. Some of them resulted in pretty spectacular landings! Now that I am a Training Captain on the B767, often I have to dispell these bar learned theories before they try them on the aircraft.

Couldn't agree more !

Quoting longhauler (Reply 38):
I just tell them. "You want to land a B767 well, just slowly ease the nose up, as you slowly ease the thrust off, keep the damned thing straight ... and you'll be fine!"

Exactly, well said, very important to have it straight on the 767 with that unforgiving landing gear, and most important of all 'look at the end of the runway'

Quoting longhauler (Reply 38):
compared to the B737, the B727 is a truck. Slow to roll and LOVES the ground, both on take-off and landing.

Well, I never flew the B737 but I found the B727 to be very responsive in roll. If you want to see a sluggish aircraft in roll response it's the MD80 !

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 39):
They did that, first with the 757 and then the 737.

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 39):
The 727 was so good, they were going to make the 777 look a lot like it.

Great looking aircraft, the 757 looks nice with a T-tail, it would have been waay up there.

I really like the look of this one, very nice looking aircraft.

Quoting tb727 (Reply 41):
Thanks Max Q! Yeah, it's French and not as "automated" as the 727 even though everyone thinks it is all fancy and does everything for you. I feel that I have to do everything in the new plane. At least the 72' was all voice activated

That's funny, i'm sure you will make the most of it and enjoy the new type.

Max Q · Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:00 am

Quoting tb727 (Reply 41):
Thanks Max Q! Yeah, it's French and not as "automated" as the 727 even though everyone thinks it is all fancy and does everything for you. I feel that I have to do everything in the new plane. At least the 72' was all voice activated

I'm sure you'll make the most of it, enjoy !

DocLightning · Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:43 pm

Quoting tb727 (Reply 41):
Thanks Max Q! Yeah, it's French and not as "automated" as the 727 even though everyone thinks it is all fancy and does everything for you. I

Is it an A300?

UA444 · Sun Oct 26, 2014 3:52 am

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 27):
DL was still flying a few in the early 2000's.

Almost all the majors were flying them in the early 2000s. UA stopped in November 2001 due to 9/11, AA is April 2002, DL in May 2003 and NW in June 2003. I may be off a month or two on DL and NW.

A346Dude · Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:31 pm

The 727 was phased out? Someone should tell YHM, it seems they're not aware.

longhauler · Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:46 pm

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 46):
The 727 was phased out? Someone should tell YHM, it seems they're not aware.

Hear, hear.

DC-10s too! And we wont even talk about the Lancaster!

(I live about 10 kms from YHM)

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net