Boeing "Announces" The "Return" Of The 727 ????

[Exhaustgases]

I'd like to know 2 things, how strong is a T tail arrangement? And would they go into flutter more than a standard tail plane?
Only the 727 tail looked the strongest of all the T tails out there.

 

[97prizm]

I'd like to know 2 things, how strong is a T tail arrangement? And would they go into flutter more than a standard tail plane?
Only the 727 tail looked the strongest of all the T tails out there.

I think Boeing had to fix the jack screw mechanism as I think a couple of accidents happen stemming from them jamming.

 

[Astro14]

I think Boeing had to fix the jack screw mechanism as I think a couple of accidents happen stemming from them jamming.

Never heard of that on the 727.

Heard of it on the DC-9/MD-80/90 series, including the failure of one, on Alaska Airlines 261, caused by improper maintenance.

You sure you’re not confusing the two airplane types?

Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Thebigm]

This guy puts forth a lot of blather, rambling, and word salad, but puts forth little factual information. It's almost as if the whole thing is a form of clickbait. The video claims Boeing is going to "reintroduce" the 727, but doesn't actually say how or when. Or in what form.

Are they going to only update older airframes that are near the end of their service life? Or start building new airframes? He doesn't say, or explain what is actually meant by "reintroducing" an almost 60 year old aircraft.

Are there even enough convertible airframes out there to warrant such an expensive undertaking? Again nothing. And none of this is backed by any statements directly from Boeing in their own words. Just silent video of their people.

Through those planes hundreds of times in the '60s never a problem. Pilots used to say they are overpowered

 

[97prizm]

Never heard of that on the 727.

Heard of it on the DC-9/MD-80/90 series, including the failure of one, on Alaska Airlines 261, caused by improper maintenance.

You sure you’re not confusing the two airplane types?

Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Yeah you're right I was thinking of the MD-80 type aircraft. However the 727 did have 4 crashes early on due to high sink rates. From my reading something to do with tail design.

 

[Astro14]

Yeah you're right I was thinking of the MD-80 type aircraft. However the 727 did have 4 crashes early on due to high sink rates. From my reading something to do with tail design.

Less to do with the tail design, I think, and more to do with the transition to high performance, swept wing jets on medium routes. In the early days of the 727, most of the pilots have been flying prop airplanes prior. The 727 has a higher approach speed, higher landing, speed, and pretty high cruise speed. I totally different animal. My recollection of those early accidents is that they were all pilot error.

 

[kschachn]

Yeah you're right I was thinking of the MD-80 type aircraft. However the 727 did have 4 crashes early on due to high sink rates. From my reading something to do with tail design.

And that incident with Alaska Airlines was because of poor maintenance. They never saw fresh grease coming out of the nut as was required. Yes the existing end play checks were not adequate to properly measure wear but inadequate lubrication was the cause of the accident.

 

[MolaKule]

I'd like to know 2 things, how strong is a T tail arrangement? And would they go into flutter more than a standard tail plane?
Only the 727 tail looked the strongest of all the T tails out there.

You can make the empennage as strong as needed and is usually built to 1.5 times or more the highest loading forces encountered for any of the three-dimensional forces.

Of course, the tradeoff is the stronger the build, the greater the weight penalty with a subsequent reduction in range.

 

[Exhaustgases]

And that incident with Alaska Airlines was because of poor maintenance. They never saw fresh grease coming out of the nut as was required. Yes the existing end play checks were not adequate to properly measure wear but inadequate lubrication was the cause of the accident.

Personal opinion. Bad design, wrong screw and nut combo, and no redundancy what so ever. If the correct system was used no grease required, and serious !, grease on a part that has no heat at the sub zero temperatures at high altitude, wow what engineering.

 

[kschachn]

Personal opinion. Bad design, wrong screw and nut combo, and no redundancy what so ever. If the correct system was used no grease required, and serious !, grease on a part that has no heat at the sub zero temperatures at high altitude, wow what engineering.

You have no idea what you’re talking about here.

 

[MParr]

The DC-9 will have to be brought back, in order to compete.

 

[Albin]

I saw the last 727 being delivered to FedEx back in 1984; north end of Boeing Field in Seattle. FedEx got rid of their cargo 727s years ago and there are only 35 still flying; none of them are passenger planes.

Any video purporting that "Boeing is bringing back the 727" is full pants-on retarded.

 

[Exhaustgases]

You have no idea what you’re talking about here.

Oh yes I do.
Just because someone doesn't want to hear something, then the messenger is attacked.
I'm not sure but these maybe what is used on some aircraft now. If not it should be.
These screws never need manual lubing with grease and always have a system to lube them.
They offer less resistance and use light oil lubes over what grease is, and they last for many years under hard back and forth acceleration in very heavily loaded machine tool applications. They will out last simple dissimilar nut and screw setups measured in years not hours.
Even with this there still needs a redundancy of the system.