DC-8s were not as famous as the 707s, but they were far more versatile. DC-8s were more easily stretched and they could be reengined and/or fitted with "hush kits" to meet noise regulations. Forty years after they went out of production, you can often still find one in the air, earning its keep.
We Also Learned About Assumptions Today!
20 minutes ago
7 comments:
I got a kick from the "left-handed salute" just prior to run-up for taxiout.
I worked hundreds of DC-8s in my years. First, Easterns, Deltas, and Nationals (none of whom flew the 7-oh, to my recollection—in fact, it was very rare to see a 7-oh of anyone's in ZJX), and some lesser marques, as well.
When I got to ORD and ZAU, United, of course, with ORD being their home base, had zillions of them, but Flying Tigers flew them, too.
Re-engined indeed. United refit lots of them with CFM-56 high bypass engines. They developed so much thrust just at idle, that the age old choice controllers had to make—get down or slow down (lots of speed control within 150 miles of destination, and we did a lot of it) was magnified with the high bypass 8s.
Pilots don't like to use the speed boards (spoilers) as they cause a "rumble" throughout the airframe that they're concerned passengers find unsettling, so sometimes a little extra vector was needed to give them enough real estate to get down.
Oh, the memories.
LRod
ZJX, ORD, ZAU retired
Ah, that noise. Sounds like a 707 or 720 anyway.
At first I thought it may have been a famous JAL DC-8-62, ship JAL 8032.
Ah, the "Shiga Maru".
I forgot to mention, we also referred to them as "Diesel 8s", a play on the "DC" (Douglas Corporation, if you didn't know) part of the contraction. Oddly enough, even though I probably worked just as many DC-9s, and a surprising number of DC-6s, we never referred to them as "Diesel Xes".
And if you're wondering why the gap between the DC-6 and the DC-8? I asked a DC-6 flight once why so many 6s flying and virtually no 7s. The answer? Fuel. The DC-6 used R-2800 engines which once burned 100/130 avgas, but can be made to burn today's 100LL. The 7s, on the other hand, had R-3350 engines, which burned 115/145—no longer available—and apparently aren't easily retrofitted to burn 100LL.
LRod
ZJX, ORD, ZAU retired
P.S. EBM, did you get the Corry Climax image I sent (I used the email addy from our AT&T conversation)?
LRod, I did get the image.
As for the DC-7s, one old pilot said that "DC-6s were four-engined airplanes with three-bladed props and DC-7s were three-engined airplanes with four-bladed props."
Post a Comment