Trident Water injection
The early Boeing 707-120 and Douglas DC8-10 (and USAF B52s and KC-135s) with P&W JT3C turbojets also had the feature, and were collectively known as "Water Wagons". Usage generated smoke far denser than anything from a Trident or One-Eleven.
Boeing 707-123 - American Airlines | Aviation Photo #0541868 | Airliners.net
Boeing 707-123 - American Airlines | Aviation Photo #0541868 | Airliners.net
Re the CV 880
i wondered if these strange craft evr came to LHR because for many years my memory told me I saw a JAL 880 doing what would now be be done in a sim flying circuits to LHR while I was waiting for an infrequent bus in Hounslow High Street .
However I remembered the reg as JA8001 which was a DC8 although I always though ththe aircraft from the smoke and shape was a super rare 880.
CV 880 was hardly the ideal aircraft for LHr-Tokyo so did JAL really use them to LHR or not.
On the original topic quite a few of the early non fan 707s and DC8s used water meth and they certainly were smokey-as was the CV 990 with tits weird rear fan
PB
i wondered if these strange craft evr came to LHR because for many years my memory told me I saw a JAL 880 doing what would now be be done in a sim flying circuits to LHR while I was waiting for an infrequent bus in Hounslow High Street .
However I remembered the reg as JA8001 which was a DC8 although I always though ththe aircraft from the smoke and shape was a super rare 880.
CV 880 was hardly the ideal aircraft for LHr-Tokyo so did JAL really use them to LHR or not.
On the original topic quite a few of the early non fan 707s and DC8s used water meth and they certainly were smokey-as was the CV 990 with tits weird rear fan
PB
WHBM,
It made flying the departure route dead easy - just follow the smoke!! Much better than a magenta line.
It made flying the departure route dead easy - just follow the smoke!! Much better than a magenta line.
JW411,
Methanol does act as an anti-freeze but also acts as additional fuel.
IIRC the Dart used 55/45 mix and the PT6-45 A & B on the SD3-30 used 60/40 mix.
Dixi.
Methanol does act as an anti-freeze but also acts as additional fuel.
IIRC the Dart used 55/45 mix and the PT6-45 A & B on the SD3-30 used 60/40 mix.
Dixi.
Re the CV 880
i wondered if these strange craft evr came to LHR because for many years my memory told me I saw a JAL 880 doing what would now be be done in a sim flying circuits to LHR while I was waiting for an infrequent bus in Hounslow High Street .
However I remembered the reg as JA8001 which was a DC8 although I always though ththe aircraft from the smoke and shape was a super rare 880.
CV 880 was hardly the ideal aircraft for LHr-Tokyo so did JAL really use them to LHR or not.
i wondered if these strange craft evr came to LHR because for many years my memory told me I saw a JAL 880 doing what would now be be done in a sim flying circuits to LHR while I was waiting for an infrequent bus in Hounslow High Street .
However I remembered the reg as JA8001 which was a DC8 although I always though ththe aircraft from the smoke and shape was a super rare 880.
CV 880 was hardly the ideal aircraft for LHr-Tokyo so did JAL really use them to LHR or not.
A couple of carriers, Lufthansa was one, also used the medium haul Boeing 720B at the time on routes to the Far East.
Madrid
The guys should have checked the tables for Madrid before diversion but the skipper decided it would be better for repair as it was a major station.
The Madrid controllers were as useless as they were highly paid and would stick Iberia onto or across the landing runway and sod everyone else (wasn't just the Brits as happened to me a couple of times). Go around power was set but the bird kept descending..the skipper did a fantastic job realising what was happening..lowered the nose whilst flying over lower terrain, accelerated, got the droop in and as minimum drag was around 250 knots along with ram recovery factor got away with it.
The Madrid controllers were as useless as they were highly paid and would stick Iberia onto or across the landing runway and sod everyone else (wasn't just the Brits as happened to me a couple of times). Go around power was set but the bird kept descending..the skipper did a fantastic job realising what was happening..lowered the nose whilst flying over lower terrain, accelerated, got the droop in and as minimum drag was around 250 knots along with ram recovery factor got away with it.
Last edited by blind pew; 31st Mar 2018 at 06:05.
Water-Meth was/is used for turboprop aircraft for more power.
Totally different is water injection as being discussed here. Jet aircraft do not tolerate water meth, bits melt.
Please differentiate between the two.
Totally different is water injection as being discussed here. Jet aircraft do not tolerate water meth, bits melt.
Please differentiate between the two.
Wodrick.
Sorry to cause you some confusion but I don't think they are totally different.
Water causes the air to be cooled and increase in density.
Then we want to increase the power by adding fuel. This can be done either by opening the jet fuel tap to add more or using Methanol mixed with the water to do the job.
Yes, as far as I know, Jets use Demin water and add more fuel and Turbo-Props use Water/Meth, but I'll bet there are examples of use the other way around.
Yes, if you put Water/Meth or Fuel in the water tank the engine will overheat and bits will melt, as with the PanInternational BAC 1-11 that I had worked on only a few days before the accident.
Sorry to cause you some confusion but I don't think they are totally different.
Water causes the air to be cooled and increase in density.
Then we want to increase the power by adding fuel. This can be done either by opening the jet fuel tap to add more or using Methanol mixed with the water to do the job.
Yes, as far as I know, Jets use Demin water and add more fuel and Turbo-Props use Water/Meth, but I'll bet there are examples of use the other way around.
Yes, if you put Water/Meth or Fuel in the water tank the engine will overheat and bits will melt, as with the PanInternational BAC 1-11 that I had worked on only a few days before the accident.
WHBM
Thnaks for your kind answer I certainly remember somewhat telling me it was JAL route proving and clearly was DC8 then CV880 and back to the Dc8s, not much difference in smoke from what i assume were DC8 -30 series
And back then of course London-Tokyo was not long hail just a series of short /medium haul sectors stitched together. used to love the timetables from those days like a bus timetable with all the city names it stopped or missed according to days of the week, very exotic to a ten year old .
thanks again
Thnaks for your kind answer I certainly remember somewhat telling me it was JAL route proving and clearly was DC8 then CV880 and back to the Dc8s, not much difference in smoke from what i assume were DC8 -30 series
And back then of course London-Tokyo was not long hail just a series of short /medium haul sectors stitched together. used to love the timetables from those days like a bus timetable with all the city names it stopped or missed according to days of the week, very exotic to a ten year old .
thanks again
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PanInternational BAC 1-11 that I had worked on only a few days before the accident.
I was told that the reason the 1-11 crashed was that the fuel instead of water made the mixture too rich and put the flame out.
The Pan International crash was caused by fuel in the water tank. I believe that several (5 I think) containers were used to to to fill the water tank, 2 of which contained fuel that had been drained from another aircraft, but not marked as such. The fuel would have floated on the top of the water so that initially, during take off, all would be normal as the water was taken from the bottom of the tank, until the level got down to the fuel when there was a sudden over-temp of both engines. The water flow rate was higher than the fuel flow so the effect would be catastrophic on the hot end.
IIRC the luck and bad luck was the Autobahn they landed on had a bridge that they went under. It had no centre pillar so when a wing hit on one side the aircraft slewed sideways and broke apart. Had there been a centre pillar then both wings would have hit and the fuselage may have carried on in a straight line and remained intact.
IIRC the luck and bad luck was the Autobahn they landed on had a bridge that they went under. It had no centre pillar so when a wing hit on one side the aircraft slewed sideways and broke apart. Had there been a centre pillar then both wings would have hit and the fuselage may have carried on in a straight line and remained intact.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: West Berkshire
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dependent on where the H2O is introduced into the engine and there are two options. 1) coolant spray into the compressor inlet - typical for a turboprop, as it evaporates the water cools the incoming air (latent heat of vaporisation etc etc) and increases its density.
Or 2) into the combustion chamber - more usual for axial flow turbo-jet engines!.... Thus mass flow through the turbine is increased in relation to the compressor and the turbine inlet temperature (TiT) is reduced allowing the fuel system to schedule an increased fuel flow. Vis more thrust because of a variety of effects, not least of which jet pipe pressure.
If methanol is in the mixture; that has a calorific value, as the alcohol CH3OH burns it plays the same role in the combustion chamber as the kerosene i.e. fuel!. But this does increase the TiT. Hope you keeping abreast of these explanations.
Or 2) into the combustion chamber - more usual for axial flow turbo-jet engines!.... Thus mass flow through the turbine is increased in relation to the compressor and the turbine inlet temperature (TiT) is reduced allowing the fuel system to schedule an increased fuel flow. Vis more thrust because of a variety of effects, not least of which jet pipe pressure.
If methanol is in the mixture; that has a calorific value, as the alcohol CH3OH burns it plays the same role in the combustion chamber as the kerosene i.e. fuel!. But this does increase the TiT. Hope you keeping abreast of these explanations.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHBM
Thnaks for your kind answer I certainly remember somewhat telling me it was JAL route proving and clearly was DC8 then CV880 and back to the Dc8s, not much difference in smoke from what i assume were DC8 -30 series
And back then of course London-Tokyo was not long hail just a series of short /medium haul sectors stitched together. used to love the timetables from those days like a bus timetable with all the city names it stopped or missed according to days of the week, very exotic to a ten year old .
thanks again
Thnaks for your kind answer I certainly remember somewhat telling me it was JAL route proving and clearly was DC8 then CV880 and back to the Dc8s, not much difference in smoke from what i assume were DC8 -30 series
And back then of course London-Tokyo was not long hail just a series of short /medium haul sectors stitched together. used to love the timetables from those days like a bus timetable with all the city names it stopped or missed according to days of the week, very exotic to a ten year old .
thanks again
File:JA8025 Convair CV.880 Japan A-l LHR 02SEP63 (6794810645).jpg
I've been trying to locate a relevant old timetable for the 880 service to Europe, but no luck with the usual (and some less usual) sources. One thing I discovered was that JAL's first route to Europe was not round through Asia points (what they called "The Silk Road Route") but "The Polar Route" through Anchorage with a DC8. Twice a week through Heathrow at the end of 1961, through Paris passengers were served lunch on the ground while stopped - I wonder where. There is a mention on this page of the forthcoming 880 service in 1962.
http://www.timetableimages.com/ttima...61/jl61-05.jpg
Now, back to Tridents. Trying as ever for a link, did any Tridents ever operate routes to Japan ?
http://www.timetableimages.com/ttima...61/jl61-05.jpg
Now, back to Tridents. Trying as ever for a link, did any Tridents ever operate routes to Japan ?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the Trident and Japan.
Unless they were the CAAC versions and used on some charter flights from China to Japan.
Have you done a search online to see if there are any photos showing a Trident in Japan?
Unless they were the CAAC versions and used on some charter flights from China to Japan.
Have you done a search online to see if there are any photos showing a Trident in Japan?
short flights long nights
JAL by late 1961, when they started serving Europe, had just a handful of DC8s, reg JA8001 upwards, but these were used across the Pacific to the USA. The European flights were a string of medium hops, and there was likely little demand, so the smaller Cv880 was reasonable. They were reg JA8021 upwards, so you were nearly right. They only lasted a year or so before more DC8s replaced them and they moved to japanese regional, and domestic, routes.
A couple of carriers, Lufthansa was one, also used the medium haul Boeing 720B at the time on routes to the Far East.
A couple of carriers, Lufthansa was one, also used the medium haul Boeing 720B at the time on routes to the Far East.
