Date: 26 Dec 97 03:28:48 From: email@example.com (James Matthew Weber) Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
On 21 Dec 97 17:01:28 , hackettNO*SPAM@southwind.net (Kim Hackett) wrote: >In article <airliners.1997.2995@ohare.Chicago.COM>, David Richter <firstname.lastname@example.org> says: >>My father used to talk about "water wagons" -- early 707s which used >>water injection for additional takeoff thrust. Despite keeping my ears >>open for any tibits about these beasts, I've heard nothing about them. >> >>Were they real? Can anyone provide details about them? > >The early 707s, the KC-135A with J57 engines, and the B-52G use water >injection for additional takeoff thrust. The B-52G has a water tank in >the fuselage forward of the wing. The water injection lasts about 45 >seconds. Not all takeoffs use water injection. On takeoffs with water >injection, all of the water must be used, otherwise it would freeze at >altitude. I think the water capacity on the B-52G is about 3000 lb, if >I remember correctly. I didn't die all that quickly. Early 747's, with JT9D-3A and 7A engines I know were 'wet'. the 7F may have been 'wet'. I know the flight engineers never cared for wet takeoffs. A number of 'wet' KC135's are still around, and wet takeoffs are fairly common among the ANG tankers based at Phoenix during the summer. In addition the Gas Turbine engines in Metroliners use water/methanol injection in some circumstances to hold down turbine temperatures. I belive it is used on some variants of the TPE731 and TPE331 engines. my recollections anyway.