Re: DC-8s in service; no 707s?

Date:         27 Jan 97 02:45:55 
From:         swestin@ford.com (Stephen Westin )
Organization: Ford Motor Company
References:   1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1997.239@ohare.Chicago.COM> dorfman@netcom.com (Merlin Dorfman) writes:

>      A couple of weeks ago in this newsgroup there was a thread about the
> number of (early) DC-10s in service as compared to few if any L-1011s.
>      A similar comment might be made about 707s and Dc-8s.  It has been
> a long time since I've seen a 707 (707-airframe TACAMOs and Joint STARS,
> yes, and a double-take at an A340 at DFW last year, but not an airline
> 707).  But I frequently see DC-8s, in cargo service with new engines.
>      Is there a reason that the DC-8 airframes are still in service
> up to 30 years later while the 707s are not?

My take on this is that the DC-8 was, due to tail/landing gear
configuration, amenable to stretching while the 707 was not. So there
never was a Boeing equivalent to DC-8-6x. Some airlines deemed it
worthwhile to re-engine the stretched '8s with CFM-56's, which
improved fuel economy and noise performance and extended their useful
life. The 707 re-engine program was dropped for lack of interest,
though KC-135's got the new engines. I believe that 707's have trouble
meeting airport noise requirements, so have been dropped from major
airline fleets.


--
-Stephen H. Westin
swestin@ford.com
The information and opinions in this message are mine, not Ford's.