Interesting airliner facts about the 707 and 747

[Snow]

hey guys, I came across some interesting facts about the 707 and 747 and I thought I'd share them with you.

Did you know that the both the 707 and 747 were orignally designed for the military and were later converted to comerical airliners? The 707 was orignally desiged as the kc-135 stratotanker and military transport, which probably explanes why the militay still has so many of them, although I hear plans of a KC-767 are currently under development.

The 747 was orginally designed for the air force's bid for a heavy transport but it lost out to the C-5 Galaxy, so it was then modified for comerical use and became the Jumbo we all know today. Interesting to note how both the C-5 and 747 both have a cockpit on the top deck to allow for a frontal cargo door and room for limited passinger / troop space on the top deck. Which makes me wonder why Airbus chose to put the cockpit of the new A340 on the bottom floor, I guess they never intended to make a cargo variant?

 

[Sprint100]

I couldn't believe Airbus didn't make a cargo variant either. Hopefully, they will because cargo isn't as picky as customers are when it comes to global conditions. Think about it, we'll send packages as easy as pie, but when there is an air threat we (most of us anyway) dare not travel by plane. Shoot one day cargo may be the big money-maker, and the only justifiable cause, for aircraft like the A340's.

 

[A300Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
Shoot one day cargo may be the big money-maker, and the only justifiable cause, for aircraft like the A340's.


[/ QUOTE ]


Shhhhh...don't tell UPS or FedEx there's no money in freight. We'll just continue flying those little ole 747/MD11/B767 and A300's while not making any money.

 

[Sprint100]

[ QUOTE ]

Shhhhh...don't tell UPS or FedEx there's no money in freight. We'll just continue flying those little ole 747/MD11/B767 and A300's while not making any money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to add a little clarity.......What I failed to mention was that I was comparing cargo flights to passenger flights while in an 'airplane flight timid' society (ie. after Sept. 11).

 

[ready2fly]

[ QUOTE ]
although I hear plans of a KC-767 are currently under development.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup - that's the word on the street.

MacDill AFB here in Tampa (outside of being home to Cent. Com.) is also home to the KC-135 Stratotankers. Pretty awesome to see as they are on approach and fly directly over my FBO.

On the news last week (or the week before) there was a big announcement that MacDill would be home to the new 767 tankers. Can't wait to see that!!

 

[Joe]

Anyone know what model 767 they have in mind? -200? -300? -400?

 

[cointyro]

I'm gonna call BS on the 747 story. Boeing built the Jumbo as (a) a contract from Pan Am, and (b) in market speculation. NOT in competition against the Galaxy.

If I'm wrong, I'm open for a researched rebuttal.

 

[JHines]

The 767 tankers will be based on the -200 fuselage with a glass cockpit from the -400.

 

[JHines]

You're right about the 747 in its final form, but I believe it's generally accepted that the design was a modification of the losing submission in the C-5 competition, rather than a clean sheet of paper.

Don't have a primary source for that assertion. It might be documented in Wide-Body: The Triumph of the 747, by Clive Irving, or in later versions of Vision: The Story of Boeing, by Harold Mansfield.