B727-200LR docs

[RHLMcG]

Looking for someone who might have Boeing and/or Ansett manuals for the LR. Would be happy either to have a short loan to read for an appropriate bottle or two or, if surplus, buy for an appropriate sum. Thanks in anticipation.

[morno]

Ansett did though?

[JamieMaree]

A very weird question to ask on the AU/NZ forum... when no one operates them.
you missed a golden opportunity not to make a goose of yourself!

[Raffles S.A.]

Boeing 727-200LR? I have some 727 material. Please elaborate on the LR suffix, I have never come across that one.

[megan]

Ansett had LR's (Long Range) - extra fuel tanks in the hold. Perhaps the LR designation was an Ansett thing, the designation appears in the international press when referring to the Ansett aircraft..

https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/582570-ansett-boeing-727-200-advanced-lr.html

[SRM]

Ansett had LR's (Long Range) - extra fuel tanks in the hold. Perhaps the LR designation was an Ansett thing, the designation appears in the international press when referring to the Ansett aircraft..

https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/582570-ansett-boeing-727-200-advanced-lr.html
I have a full set of Boeing Manuals for B727-200 Advanced (Ansett LR)
Volume 1
Volume 2
FCTM
PM me.

[RENURPP]

A very weird question to ask on the AU/NZ forum... when no one operates them

yet look, some on replied with EXACTLY what was asked for!

[empty_seats]

My edition of the Boeing 727 Performance and Operating Handbook sadly caught fire... It was based on the LR as well.

[john_tullamarine]

The LR was an upgrade variant to the 200. Some extra kit, a second belly tank (about 45 mins worth, as I recall - getting to be a long time ago, now), and an extra 2 or 3 tonne to the GW. Otherwise, as I recall, they flew pretty much like the standard 200 - that is to say, no where near as nice as the 100. For those who recall the AN fleet, the LRs were ANx and the 200s RMx, if the memory still works at all ?

[RHLMcG]

SRM, Thanks very much - PM away to you.

Reason for this forum is that I am in Australia and I figured that there would be a few copies of the docs around in the possession of ex-AN people, as I presume SRM to be.

[SIUYA]

JT.....the 200LRs also had the Performance Data Computer System that allowed higher cruise speed from memory (M0.84).

[ACMS]

JT.....the 200LRs also had the Performance Data Computer System that allowed higher cruise speed from memory (M0.84).

Didn’t need the PDCS to cruise at .84 the good ol FE sorted that out..
Our LR’s also had a VLF Omega Nav sys and an Autothrottle....( some of the normal 200’s were also fitted with VLF, RML had 2 for Cocus island trips )

[john_tullamarine]

the 200LRs also had the Performance Data Computer System that allowed higher cruise speed from memory

the good ol FE sorted that out..

Indeed.

I well recall one memorable trip on the 200. We were in the usual very loose form with TAA around the lap for a couple of days and, of course getting there early was a consideration. Last leg into SYD prior to a pax leg back to MEL and we won ... by a goodly margin. So much so we figured on catching the previous scheduled burner to MEL rather than await that which had been set for us. You guessed it. All bays were full and we were slotted to the bay which held our target trip to MEL ......

Re the LRs, one tale which did the rounds was along the line that Sir Peter had been sold a pup with the PDCS which, after all, was just an inferior version of an F/E and half as fast in looking up the figures in the performance book. In practice, we generally took little to no notice of the box, far preferring to rely on the chap sitting in the back seat ... who really knew what was what. I don't recall that the autothrottle was much chop when compared to the DIY option.

[SIUYA]

Didn’t need the PDCS to cruise at .84 the good ol FE sorted that out..
Our LR’s also had a VLF Omega Nav sys and an Autothrottle....( some of the normal 200’s were also fitted with VLF, RML had 2 for Cocus island trips )


ACMS......did you actually fly on tne 200LRs?

Because if you did you might have a better understanding of what the PDCS actually did. And 'yes' the FE was there to help the old 350kt descents till 10 nm BUT he (no she's then) AND us worked the PDCS to let it do what it was supposed to do.

Maybe you operated the aircraft differently than I was trained to though.

[DHC4driver]

While on the subject of 727’s, can somebody please tell me why the VMO (IAS) actually INCREASES with altitude in both Mode A and Mode B?? I just find it interesting given the other jets I have flown have a constant VMO figure until Mach crossover around the high 20’s and then the IAS obviously decreases at the same Mach. Given how loud the 737 flight deck is at 320kts one can only imagine the noise at over 400kts in Mode A. Would have loved to have flown the three holer- great looking jet. Cheers

[SIUYA]

My bad...

BUT he (no she's then) AND us worked the PDCS to let it do what it was supposed to do.

But of course DL WAS there. Apologies Deb (99).

[Global Aviator]

Alas yes it’s a bucket lister to fly!

I was lucky enough to jump seat, that was indeed fun!

The days of real flying eh!!!

[megan]

an extra 2 or 3 tonne to the GWJT, the LR doesn't appear on the TCDS so how was the GW increased with respect to performance numbers, STC by Boeing?

[john_tullamarine]

the LR doesn't appear on the TCDS

A fine question, good sir. Will need to do some homework as I have not had any need to check the 727 against the TCDS. However, as I recall, the LR is referred to as the B727-200 ADV (ie advanced). Subject to a looksee at the TCDS, I would expect that the LR entries will be via notes with S/N applicability if there is no separate entry. As to what changes may have been made for the weight delta, that might not be readily available unless Boeing elected to put some words in descriptive text in the manuals. Comparison of the relevant mx manuals (to which I don't have any access) would reveal anything of note via a comparison if there be nothing explicitly stated.

Will have a look and come back later with whatever I can locate. The weight delta isn't overly significant - around 86T (-200) to around 89T (-200 ADV) as I recall - long time, now, since I have flown any of the models. I still reckon that the -100 was the pick for flying, though. A bit like a Super Cub on steroids.

[BuzzBox]

JT, the LR doesn't appear on the TCDS so how was the GW increased with respect to performance numbers, STC by Boeing?

The TCDS doesn't have a separate entry for the 'LR', but it does show the serials for Ansett's four 'LR' aircraft (22641-22644) in Section II - Model 727-200 (Page 5). The TCDS states that maximum weights for all models are found in the 'appropriate FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual'.

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/5d48fc77a31b7f6985256722006b0c1c/$FILE/A3we.pdf

[megan]

Thanks Buzz, a senior moment for not looking at the ""Maximum weights", dur. :ugh: Question answered JT.

[cooperplace]

the LR doesn't appear on the TCDS

A fine question, good sir. Will need to do some homework as I have not had any need to check the 727 against the TCDS. However, as I recall, the LR is referred to as the B727-200 ADV (ie advanced). Subject to a looksee at the TCDS, I would expect that the LR entries will be via notes with S/N applicability if there is no separate entry. As to what changes may have been made for the weight delta, that might not be readily available unless Boeing elected to put some words in descriptive text in the manuals. Comparison of the relevant mx manuals (to which I don't have any access) would reveal anything of note via a comparison if there be nothing explicitly stated.

Will have a look and come back later with whatever I can locate. The weight delta isn't overly significant - around 86T (-200) to around 89T (-200 ADV) as I recall - long time, now, since I have flown any of the models. I still reckon that the -100 was the pick for flying, though. A bit like a Super Cub on steroids.
lots of old-timers fondly reminisce over 727s. What was so great about them? As pax I liked the rear stairs, great for quick disembarking in ADL: no jetbridges in those days.

[By George]

Ansett 727-200LR Maximum TOW was 89,358kg compared to the straight 200 being 86,409kg. Both versions had the same landing weight of 72,575kg (flap30) and the same ZFW of 63,503kg. The extra fuel on the LR was 5,400lbs in the forward Aux tank. Beautiful aeroplane to fly and built like a tank. In 'B' mode, max IAS at Sea Level was 350kts and at 25,000ft a max IAS of 370kts. So, easy to descend at 350kts if running late. Wouldn't do much to help these days with everybody in front waffling about at 280kts and 250 below 10.

[601]

VLF Omega Nav sys

Boy, I betcha that gave Dr Google a workout

[john_tullamarine]

Boy, I betcha that gave Dr Google a workout

On the other hand, the omega kit worked just fine. Maybe not quite as accurate as GPS but, certainly, good enough for Government business

[seventy-seven]

Looking for someone who might have Boeing and/or Ansett manuals for the LR. Would be happy either to have a short loan to read for an appropriate bottle or two or, if surplus, buy for an appropriate sum. Thanks in anticipation.
I believe the Ansett aircraft were VH-ANA, ANB, ANE, ANF. The pdcs was combined with the Omega navigation system that worked reasonably well.
The flight control hydraulic package was different to the standard package from Boeing and was considered stiffer and less nice to manually fly.
Never the less one of Boeings best creations in my view and a thorough joy to fly, especially in the flare.