Wichita's final 757 to take a bow

Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

Many fine memories of the 8, my first assignment at D. The short 8 was a hot rod. The joke about the stretch was you didn't really fly it you kind of herded it. In turbulence those wings would flap up and down, while the engines went in all directions on their pylons. The tail would wag back and forth so much that from the cockpit the aft jumpseat would dissapear from view as the tail went side to side. Bend but not break.

The 8 was a floater with tiny brakes. So lots of them went off the runway end, especially early on. Reverse thrust on the new engines helps that.

No speedbrakes. Lots of idle thrust and a clean profile meant you could hardly get it down. It is certified to allow reverse thrust in flight on the inboard engines. Did it a few times with the old engines, but not with the new ones, since the thrust reversers were too effective. ie it was supposed to be like hitting a brick wall, not cool for passengers.

Everything was cable operated. DC was short for Douglas Cable Company. That was good from a engineer standpoint. Just grab a handle and move it, no electrons.

Bad thing was no ground air conditioning. So you were dependant on gate or portable air. Then you'd load up and on a hot day hope to get off the ground before cabin hit 90 or higher. Remember some long taxis at DFW in the summer that got ugly.

The starters on the old engines let out a scream when they were engaged. Everybody in ATL knew when an 8 was starting up. Since no APU you were dependent on ground power and air. More than one 8 got left at the gate with an engine running after the crew, in a hurry to make h-hour, forgot to secure the last engine after power was hooked up. That usually meant a visit to the CP office. Of course the engineer was responsible for that. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I was lucky enough to fly it as an FO. Many captains would not leave it for the L-1011. When the 8 was finally retired some retired with it. But most made the transition to L-1011. There were a lot of bets going as to which captains wouldn't make it, but I think they all did.

What a machine.
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

I got a chance to look at 717's at various stages of being built and the "DC" thing is certainly alive and kicking! Underneath the floor paneling are enough cables to make your eyes pop out!

Thanks for the "Diesel Eight" memories!
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
I got a chance to look at 717's at various stages of being built and the "DC" thing is certainly alive and kicking! Underneath the floor paneling are enough cables to make your eyes pop out!

Thanks for the "Diesel Eight" memories!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, when the new engines were put on, the 8 got a complete overhaul. Went over and saw all the cables. Then I got assigned as fo on one of the first test flights of the first overhaul. NOT GOOD. Things were not doing what they were supposed to. We were not far into the test flight when the captain told the lead mechanic that he had had enough and wanted to go home. The mechanic was relieved and said something like: "please, just get us on the ground". After that their learning curve on rigging new cables improved dramatically. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
Many fine memories of the 8, my first assignment at D.

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome stories!!! Thanks for a smile or two this morning (OK, it's morning to me... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif)
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And by stretch 8's you mean the 737-800's?


[/ QUOTE ]

Ah no young Padawan, the "Stretch 8's" are extended DC-8's... Much like this:

dc8.jpg


Beautiful... even with no windows!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, they are BIG and Beautiful! Especially when you taxi by one of the UPS ones at KPIE in a PA-28!

Those big turbofans on those outboard pylons always seemed like they would be a handful on a crosswind landing.

Wasn't the DC-8 the largest plane until the 747 came along?
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
Those big turbofans on those outboard pylons always seemed like they would be a handful on a crosswind landing.

Wasn't the DC-8 the largest plane until the 747 came along?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scraping the outboard engines in a crosswind was a problem. And many if not most of them got some paint taken off. The 8 was flown with control tabs and was not very responsive in roll, especially at approach speeds. This is much as anything was the source of "herd it instead of fly it". In gusty winds you made big corrections with the ailerons, kind of stirred the tail around with the rudders, and hoped it all averaged out to on the runway going mostly straight.

The 8 and the 707 were the big airplanes at their introduction. I don't know which one ended up with the highest gross weight certification, but I'd guess the 8.

Of course I'm talking in the past tense. I'd take a job flying an 8 in a minute. The old girl still has a lot of hauling to do.
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
I guess it's not so bad. I just don't like it too much because I haven't heard about it as much as the 727 and 747 have made a legend. That's what I meant by "real airplanes".

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably because the 72/72 have been around 20-30 years longer than the 75. The stupidest thing I heard Boeing say about discountinuing the 75 was "it's too old of a design."
HELLO! Let's see 737s....1960s, 757....1980s. In comparison to the 737NGs, If you put a plasma TV(NG) in an old house(Classic), you still have an old house. The 757 was a new house, and they scrapped it. Bad move Boeing

By the way, the MD11 didn't make the legend.....the DC10 did. The MD11 has tarnished the legend if anything.

Doug, I remember going into Stapleton (The REAL Denver) and seeing United's stretched 8s at the gates. Awesome.
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
The 757 was a new house, and they scrapped it. Bad move Boeing

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree the 757 will be a legend and will fly for many years to come. I suspect there are two reasons the sales dried up for the 757. One was fuel economy, then 737 stretch and A-320 derivatives had better fuel specifics and the second was that it really was an old design that was probably very expensive to maintain.

The manufacturers are concentrating on cost of maintenance almost as much as fuel burn. 757 is a great airplane, like the 8, from a pilot's perspective, but probably not from a bean counter's. And they do rule the world. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The 757 was a new house, and they scrapped it. Bad move Boeing

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree the 757 will be a legend and will fly for many years to come. I suspect there are two reasons the sales dried up for the 757. One was fuel economy, then 737 stretch and A-320 derivatives had better fuel specifics and the second was that it really was an old design that was probably very expensive to maintain.

The manufacturers are concentrating on cost of maintenance almost as much as fuel burn. 757 is a great airplane, like the 8, from a pilot's perspective, but probably not from a bean counter's. And they do rule the world. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/banghead.gif

[/ QUOTE ]



Well...what about the 757-300. though not a new design or re-design at all they (Boeing engineers) did tinker around with it a bit and gave it superior fuel specifics and a much lower cost per seat mile.

A book I have here says the 757-300 has the lowest fuel cost per mile of any two engined plane in it's class so that would include the NG737 as well as the A320's.

It's a shame to see a great airplane heading into the sunset so early more especially a great plane like the 757.

The 7E7 will have alot of shoe to fill in my opinion. More especially since it seems to be more of a replacement for the 767 then the seven-five.


Matthew
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
Well...what about the 757-300. though not a new design or re-design at all they (Boeing engineers) did tinker around with it a bit and gave it superior fuel specifics and a much lower cost per seat mile.

A book I have here says the 757-300 has the lowest fuel cost per mile of any two engined plane in it's class so that would include the NG737 as well as the A320's.

It's a shame to see a great airplane heading into the sunset so early more especially a great plane like the 757.

The 7E7 will have a lot of shoe to fill in my opinion. More especially since it seems to be more of a replacement for the 767 then the seven-five.


Matthew

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know if 757-300 and 737 are in same class or not. Probably.

But the bottom line is Boeing shut the line down because they couldn't sell enough of the airplanes. And they were running into a problem of the 737-800/900 being a viable and more cost effective replacement. They were competing against themselves. Obviously, the 757-300 is another matter. But they couldn't sell them. If anybody had stepped in with a big order, they'd still be making them.

I still believe that maintenance costs were a factor. Going forward the airlines want airplanes designed so that a mechanic can change out a fuel pump in 30 minutes. Modular is a big deal. Simple, no complexity. The 757 was old school in that regard.

Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
But the bottom line is Boeing shut the line down because they couldn't sell enough of the airplanes.... They were competing against themselves. Obviously, the 757-300 is another matter. But they couldn't sell them. If anybody had stepped in with a big order, they'd still be making them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, I think they are competing with themselves. They have way too many products out there. Too many aircraft in the same niche are saturating the market.
717
737-600/700/800/BBJ/900
747-400,ER/F/Ei,Ei O.
767-200/200ER,300/300ER/F,400ER
777-200/ER/LR, 300/ER
7E7
Not including all the sub categories of each type (ie...767-216, there are 39 subcategories to the 767-200 series alone!!!))

And still supporting the MD market with the -80/90/10/11to boot.

[ QUOTE ]
...airlines want airplanes designed so that a mechanic can change out a fuel pump in 30 minutes. Modular is a big deal. The 757 was old school in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]But with that the 737 20 years older tech than the 757. Their logic just doesn't flow.

I hope they can sort it out. I'd hate to see the bottom of the Boeing logo say....
"Boeing, A division of Airbus."
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
But with that the 737 20 years older tech than the 757. Their logic just doesn't flow.

I hope they can sort it out. I'd hate to see the bottom of the Boeing logo say....
"Boeing, A division of Airbus."

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. The interesting thing about the 737 was they never thought they'd sell many. When they couldn't stop selling them they finally redesigned the wing, and stretched it. Just like when they designed the 747 for the military heavy lift contract against the C-5. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than smart. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

It has always happened & will always happen, each customer is different & the customer do not always know what they want. Airbus has the same problems, so we could see Airbus become another Boeing company.

As for the different variations of the 737, they are built on the same assembly line, same can be said for Airbus with their: A318, A319, A320, A321 and the Airbus Business jet.

The 757 & the 737-900 are not really in the same class, and besides not many customers ordered the 737-900.

737-900 177 passengers or 189 passengers.
757-200 200 passengers and up to 228 passengers.
757-300 243 passengers and up to 280 passengers.
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing we don't choose aircraft....the airlines would really be out of business... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing we don't choose aircraft....the airlines would really be out of business... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah . . . I don't see the average airline passenger having an appropriate appreciation for the DC-3. 'Tis my goal to fly one at least once before I'm done.

MF
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

Oh man, the sweetest sight and sound I get on a daily basis, is a Pace 757 with RR engines that flies in and out of SFB./ubbthreads/images/graemlins/buck.gif Those RR engines put out the greastest sound on the take off roll.
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

I really miss the B727ADV. First jet I ever flew in. They were so loud, even with the hush kits. Too bad not many US carriers have them in their fleet nowadays. As a matter of fact, I think at the airplane graveyard down the street there are a few DAL727-200adv's.

I would go look if it wasn't 110 degrees out with a UV index of 11 out of 10! ...And if I had a car...
 
Re: Wichita\'s final 757 to take a bow

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Believe me if pilot preference was what drove fleet decisions, we'd all be flying 747s, DC-8s, Connies, DC-3s, 727s, 757/67s and (place your favorite here).

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing we don't choose aircraft....the airlines would really be out of business... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


True that, there is a group of folks that would still love to see the Concorde still fly......
 
Back
Top