Pilots helping pilots
View over 100 airline profilesAdd to Google



Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Technical
Register FAQ Advertising Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Technical The airliners we fly

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-04-2009, 07:23 PM   #11 (permalink)
No one's home
 
III Corps's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Flyer View Post
You're also right on with your comment about the "three-holer". Probably the most advanced jet aircraft ever built in that if one didn't perform the landing maneuver properly, you paid for it....big time ! The LTC (landing technique computer) on board made sure of that.
Don't know if it is true or not but reportedly Boeing said they would NEVER again build a wing so complex.. triple slotted fowler flaps with leading edge slats and kreuger flaps. We used to refer to full flaps as 75% wing disassembly.



FWIW, I never got used to the yoke being offset to the outside in the -100. Loved the -200.
__________________
Simple solutions are seldom either.
III Corps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 05:27 AM   #12 (permalink)
Snakes & Nape
 
Phantom Flyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: B-767 Captain
Posts: 387
Thumbs up Completely Agree !!

Quote:
Originally Posted by III Corps View Post
Don't know if it is true or not but reportedly Boeing said they would NEVER again build a wing so complex.. triple slotted fowler flaps with leading edge slats and kreuger flaps. We used to refer to full flaps as 75% wing disassembly.


You're bringing tears to my eyes with a picture of the best turbojet ever built.

When I was a Check Airman, I always said that the most difficult maneuver to perform correctly in the B-727 was the noise abatement take-off. I still stand by that statement. When one considers, as you pointed out, there are so many things moving on the wing during the flap retraction segment and then ATC throws a turn into the equation and the flying pilot is busy just trying to hold the airspeed where it should be and follow the profile.

A Cat II landing in a crosswind...a piece of cake with the center line thrust but when one had to learn to "release" the back pressure on the yoke during the last landing phase, or as we used to say, "roll it over", well, that was another story.

For those who never had the honor of flying the "three-holer", it would go fast, go slow, go high or go low and the O'Hare controllers absolutely loved the aircraft. The Chicago approach guys could put a 727 in the low 20's and enjoyed the flexibility of having an aircraft at 220 knts or up to 330 to fit into the flow. Thanks Boeing !!

I'm starting to tear up but thanks for the memories III Corps.

G'Day from an I Corps guy
Phantom Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 11:52 AM   #13 (permalink)
No one's home
 
III Corps's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Flyer View Post
You're bringing tears to my eyes with a picture of the best turbojet ever built.
You're welcome.

Quote:

For those who never had the honor of flying the "three-holer", it would go fast, go slow, go high or go low and the O'Hare controllers absolutely loved the aircraft. The Chicago approach guys could put a 727 in the low 20's and enjoyed the flexibility of having an aircraft at 220 knts or up to 330 to fit into the flow. Thanks Boeing !!
We often flew in the "A mode" and I saw INDICATED of over 400 a number of times. "B mode" made us like other mere mortals in the civilian pattern.. 350kts.

And now for a special treat



Note the tailwheel is still in the air. The big square tail was always the give-away for me.
__________________
Simple solutions are seldom either.
III Corps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 07:43 PM   #14 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by III Corps View Post
We often flew in the "A mode" and I saw INDICATED of over 400 a number of times. "B mode" made us like other mere mortals in the civilian pattern.. 350kts.

400kts

the best I can do is 335.

I wish I could have had an opportunity to fly the 727. EVERYONE that talks about it says all kinds of great things about it.
IrishTiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 06:36 AM   #15 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Skyone's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: B777 Left
Posts: 414
Default

How about taking the 727 through the break at Yuma at 800ft FCLP pattern and doing bounces with the ball. 60 degrees angle of bank, full speed brake, gear down at 300kts....somewhere around the Yucatan Penisula when slowed enough for pattern work. Uh, just heard that may have happened in the late 80s. And funny thing "Phantom Flyer" just so happens it was a former Navy Phantom flyer in the left seat. The Marines in the twr loved the "show".
__________________
S1
Skyone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 06:58 AM   #16 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Twin Wasp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Hanging around the fence, again.
Posts: 449
Default

I've had the clacker going off turning base to final in Auckland, NZ. "High speed approved," what a concept!
Twin Wasp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 09:34 AM   #17 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Twin Bonanza (C50ER) Captain
Posts: 245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by III Corps View Post
Don't know if it is true or not but reportedly Boeing said they would NEVER again build a wing so complex.. triple slotted fowler flaps with leading edge slats and kreuger flaps. We used to refer to full flaps as 75% wing disassembly.



FWIW, I never got used to the yoke being offset to the outside in the -100. Loved the -200.
Those were the days. Many happy memories about the 727-200/Advanced...the -100 always looked a little too short to me, but everyone's got their thing.

What a fantastic airplane it is.
__________________
"Clear left, I'll have the chicken."
The Stately Beechcraft Racer - The Twin-Bonanza
SomedayRJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 11:03 AM   #18 (permalink)
No one's home
 
III Corps's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishTiger View Post
400kts

the best I can do is 335.

I wish I could have had an opportunity to fly the 727. EVERYONE that talks about it says all kinds of great things about it.

The Mighty Tri-motor was NOT light on the controls. It was, however, SOLID. Set the power, configure, trim and it would stay there. It is an airplane that you could go down and slow down. The speedbrakes were excellent. But it, like the 707 and 737 was a NOISY cockpit over 250kts. 300kts and you were speaking loudly. 400kts and it may as well have been hand signals. Also, the brakes were VERY good. IF you had (and only a few did use them) the nose brakes, it would stop right NOW!

And yes, I LOVED flying it.
__________________
Simple solutions are seldom either.
III Corps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 11:08 AM   #19 (permalink)
No one's home
 
III Corps's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomedayRJ View Post
Those were the days. Many happy memories about the 727-200/Advanced...the -100 always looked a little too short to me, but everyone's got their thing.

What a fantastic airplane it is.
Almost the 727-300.. but not completely. The -RE took the engines off the MD-80 (JT8D-217/219) and replaced the #1 and #3. No one could figure out how to get #2 to breathe properly with the bigger engine.



Note the #2 reverser gone and the winglets.

United nixed the 727-300 proposal and it remained a paper airplane. The next proposal became the 757.
__________________
Simple solutions are seldom either.
III Corps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 12:37 PM   #20 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 129
Default

Why does the inboard slats look so weird.
IrishTiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
B777f AirbusA320 Cargo 3 08-30-2009 07:10 AM
777 tanker? Sniper Military 27 06-22-2009 06:58 PM
Fedex and Boeing 777 P-F HankHill Cargo 12 04-14-2009 08:30 AM
777th 777 vagabond Foreign 1 04-12-2009 06:29 PM
Experts fret over 777 problem vagabond Technical 4 12-31-2008 05:13 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:03 PM.


Copyright ©2000 - 2009 Internet Brands, Inc.

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7