DIfferent versions - aviation section

DIfferent versions - aviation section

Author
Discussion

Austin Prefect

Original Poster:

477 posts

3 months

Sunday 26th January
quotequote all







Tony1963

5,564 posts

173 months

Sunday 26th January
quotequote all
?

Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Sunday 26th January
quotequote all
He left out this version -



And I would even argue that this is, if not a version, a development of the original B-29 -


Austin Prefect

Original Poster:

477 posts

3 months

Sunday 26th January
quotequote all
Good points about the B50 and the Bear.

GliderRider

2,592 posts

92 months

Sunday 26th January
quotequote all
Perhaps the B-50 should be there too?

Here in KB-50 form.



Edit: EricMc got there first smile

Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
This thread died so I thought I'd revive it - on a similar theme -












eharding

14,307 posts

295 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
F-4A



F-4B



RF-4B



F-4C



RF-4C



F-4D



F-4E



F-4EJ




RF-4E



F-4F



F-4G



F-4J



F-4J F.3



F-4K FG.1




F-4M FGR.2



F-4N



F-4S



Super Phantom (Concept)





Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
I think we should add the mockup as well to show how the Phantom was originally supposed to look -


Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
How about some Boeing 737s -

Boeing 737-100



Boeing 737-200



Boeing 737-200 Adv



Boeing 737-300



Boeing 737-400



Boeing 737-500



Boeing 737-600



Boeing 737-700



Boeing 737-800



Boeing 737 - 8 Max



Boeing 737 - 9 Max




eharding

14,307 posts

295 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
I think we should add the mockup as well to show how the Phantom was originally supposed to look -

I *knew* it was a vain task trying to out-anorak Eric. He is the Arthur Roy Brown to my Manfred von Richthofen.

Simpo Two

88,204 posts

276 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
eharding said:
I *knew* it was a vain task trying to out-anorak Eric. He is the Arthur Roy Brown to my Manfred von Richthofen.
hehe

Never fly low over the enemy trenches...

5 In a Row

1,811 posts

238 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
Phantom heaven

Tango13

9,252 posts

187 months

Wednesday 12th March
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
I think we should add the mockup as well to show how the Phantom was originally supposed to look -

That picture was taken before an F-8 pilot sabotaged the blueprints deleting the gun armament and the hanger doors were slammed on it as it was wheeled outside... wink

Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
The F4 mockup shows more clearly the lineal descent from the F3H Demon.


Austin Prefect

Original Poster:

477 posts

3 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all








Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
The Boeing 707 line -

Boeing 367-80



Boeing C-135 variants











There are lots more C-135 versions.

Boeing 707-120



Boeing 707-138



Boeing 707-220



Boeing 707-320



Boeing 707-420



Boeing 720



Boeing 720B



Boeing 707-320B



The differences between the multiple versions may not be that blindingly obvious but lots of changes were made as the 707 and C-135 family developed -

taller tail fin
dorsal fin added
larger dorsal fin added
dorsal fin removed
pure turbojets (Pratt and Whitney JT3C and JT4)
early bypass turbofans (Rolls Royce Conways and Pratt and Whitney JT3D)
later large fan turbofans (CFM56)
smaller wheels (720)
beefed up wind (720)
wing plan changed (the 707-320B/C versions)
variable fuselage lengths

Some 720s also did not have the characteristic tail mounted HF aerial fitted.




Austin Prefect

Original Poster:

477 posts

3 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
There is also the C-137 military version of the 707. Plus basically the same fuselage used on the 727 and 737.

Boeing were very very good at adapting one basic design beyond recognition. But do seem to have gone too far with the 737 Max.

phil squares

75 posts

112 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
Sorry if this sounds as if I am being pedantic, but the KC-135 is not a 707. Had the 135 been developed as a pax aircraft, the seating would have been 2-3. The 707 family fuselage is larger than the 135 fuselage. There are a host of other differences, but the major one is the diameter of the fuselage.

Eric Mc

123,387 posts

276 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
The 707 was very much a learning curve for Boeing. There were lots of problems with the early variants - including a tendency to Dutch Role. This was partially cured by making the tail fin taller and by adding a dorsal fin. The UK authorities insisted that the dorsal fin be enlarged on the 420s version which was the version ordered by BOAC. The problem was eventually fixed by fitting an automatic yaw damper system which is why the dorsal fin disappeared completely on the later versions.

Austin Prefect

Original Poster:

477 posts

3 months

Thursday 13th March
quotequote all
phil squares said:
Sorry if this sounds as if I am being pedantic, but the KC-135 is not a 707. Had the 135 been developed as a pax aircraft, the seating would have been 2-3. The 707 family fuselage is larger than the 135 fuselage. There are a host of other differences, but the major one is the diameter of the fuselage.
I think the point is that both the KC-135 and the 707 are versions of the 367-80.