Re: 707 and KC-135 relationship and something about the 747 (was: Subsidies)

From:         pravelin@us.oracle.com (Paul Raveling)
Organization: Oracle Corporation. Redwood Shores, CA
Date:         27 Apr 96 01:14:33 
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.503@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Chris Jardine <cjardine@wctc.net> writes:
|>
|> In Article<airliners.1996.491@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
|> <shafer@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov> write:
|>
|> > Thus, the 707 is, in fact, a KC-135 derivative, rather than the
|> > reverse, although the reverse is very commonly believed.
|>
|> If you go even further back you will notice that both the KC-135 and 707 were
|> based on the DASH 80 in which Boeing risked 1/4 of the company net worth on
|> the bet that either commercial airlines or the military would like to buy a
|> jet of the type they had. ...

	Chris's response more nearly conveys the sense of 707/KC-135
	development, though it IS true that the first commercial 707's
	(-120's) took advantage of the military R&D investment in
	the KC-135.

	When the -80 was under development I was a youngster in Seattle,
	already an aviation fan, and the median dad in the area worked
	for Boeing.  Word was getting out no later than 1952 that the
	Dash-80 was a big deal because it would be the prototype for the
	first U.S. jet airliner.  This came from Boeing employees and
	from the Seattle news media -- mostly KING, KOMO, & 2 newspapers.

	My best friend's dad put in a lot of overtime working on the
	-80, until it flew in 1954; my own dad started working on the
	early KC-135's and all early 707's, starting with Pan Am #1.
	What I heard in those years was that Seattle as a whole and
	apparently Boeing as well, had a priority to make the 707
	a successful new airliner.  There wase a sense, at least in
	public, that the KC-135 was a byproduct.

	Pupating the 707 as a KC-135 was one of those things demanded
	by economic need in order to develop the new airframe.  Of course
	the KC-135 itself filled an important role and was a worthy
	product.


 ______________________
 Paul Raveling
 pravelin@us.oracle.com

	The statements and opinions expressed here are my own and
	do not necessarily represent those of Oracle Corporation.
	--  Oracle policy