One of these things is not like the other...

"user314" (user314) 07/08/2020 at 14:45 • Filed to: Planelopnik, planelopnik history, Boeing, boeing 707, boeing b-52, b-52, history, Old pictures, old planes are old

0

13

Three 707s and a B-52 at Boeing Field, 1958

This came across my tumblr feed this morning, and it’s too important not to share. Did a GIS, and found a description on Wiki:

“POISED ON THE FLIGHT LINE in Seattle, Wash., Are the first three 707-121 aircraft with Pratt & Whitney JT3C6 engines awaiting delivery to Pan American World Airways in 1958. Aircraft !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! (foreground) was the jetliner which inaugurated the first regular US jet transport service on Oct. 26, 1958 with a flight between New York and Paris. “ Left side view from slightly above of Boeing Model 707-121 (r / n !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ) on the Boeing factory flight line in Seattle, Washington. In background are seen r / n N710PA (center) and beyond, r / n !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ; a U.S. Air Force Boeing B-52 Stratofortress is seen at far left background.

711 and 710 both had long careers; both were scrapped in 1984. 709, however, was !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! after being struck by lightning while in a holding pattern for Philadelphia Int’l.

I’m assuming that’s an R/B-52B at the back, but the tail number isn’t clear enough to read.

Just Jeepin' > user314 07/08/2020 at 14:48

0

Man, that lightning strike is depressing. Any safety enhancements come out of that beyond “try not to get struck by lightning”?

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > user314 07/08/2020 at 14:49

3

Forgot that Pan AM flew BUFFs... were those to Saigon back in the day?

For Sweden > Just Jeepin' 07/08/2020 at 14:52

2

This was the crash that lead to “make sure the aircraft can handle lightning strikes” regulations.

Of course, the regulators could have made that change before a crash, but that would require foresight .

user314 > Just Jeepin' 07/08/2020 at 14:55

3

There were several recommendations made by the investigation board:

AFAIK, the elimination of Jet B is the one most linked to the accident, though I expect the others were also acted on as well.

ttyymmnn > For Sweden 07/08/2020 at 15:02

4

Tombstone technology FTW. 

ttyymmnn > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 07/08/2020 at 15:03

1

Carried more cargo than pax, so not that profitable. 

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > ttyymmnn 07/08/2020 at 15:05

4

But not a single refused or “returned” shipment.  Imagine.

user314 > user314 07/08/2020 at 15:23

1

Also, the JT3C6 (J57) was used on an almost comical array of aircraft:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The JT3D (TF33), which descended from the J57   was also widely used, and is still flying on various military aircraft (mostly C-135 variants) :

ttyymmnn > user314 07/08/2020 at 15:54

1

That’s a great shot. 

ttyymmnn > For Sweden 07/08/2020 at 15:55

0

Yet another case of the conflict that arises when the agency that is mandated to regulate aviation is also tasked with promoting it. 

My X-type is too a real Jaguar > For Sweden 07/08/2020 at 16:43

0

Just like the ValuJet flight that started that whole maybe wee need smoke detectors and not transport hazmat on commercial flights. 

Chek6 > Just Jeepin' 07/09/2020 at 15:11

1

One of my uncle’s NASA projects was to fly backseat in a F-106 while it flew into thunderstorms to gauge the effects of li ghtning strikes on avionics. since his usual “ride” was a Cessna 195, it was quite an upgrade for him

Just Jeepin' > Chek6 07/09/2020 at 15:21

0

That sounds exhilarating. Of course I get air sick in a small plane so I can only imagine how miserable I’d be.