last 727 Pax Flight
I worked on many B727s back in the 90s but my favourites were the UPS -100s, they had been re-engined with RR Tays and retrofitted with a glass cockpit and head up display.
Did anyone here fly them ?
Did anyone here fly them ?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
When the CVR was introduced to U.S. carriers in the 1960's the erase button was demanded by ALPA due to privacy concerns of the crews. Of course, ALPA received assurances that the new CVR technology would only be used to improve safety and never for disciplinary or liability purposes.
The old CVR's recorded 30 minutes and the erase button cleared the whole recording. I believe on the 727 the parking brake had to be set and the engines shut down (or was it on external power?).
Ironically, to me anyway, current U.S. regs say the erase button can delete all but the last 30 minutes of the recording at any time, not just on the blocks:
(f) In complying with this section, an approved cockpit voice recorder having an erasure feature may be used, so that at any time during the operation of the recorder, information recorded more than 30 minutes earlier may be erased or otherwise obliterated.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/121.359
A trend in recent years is for the NTSB to harvest what used to be labeled 'non-pertinent conversation' from the CVR. In the Colgan 3402 mishap a decade ago comments on commuting and sleeping in the crew lounge were included in the CVR transcript and even read into the Congressional Record.
No idea of there is any truth to it...
In the mid 1970s, Boeing was all set to launch a 727-300 program, using a re-fanned JT8D-200. United was to be the launch customer. But right before the planned launch announcement United suddenly got cold feet and pulled out and the program was quietly shelved. However the engine was eventually used for the MD-80.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tdracer said " The story that was floating around Boeing at the time was that there was a belief that you could get a little better cruise speed and fuel burn if you extended the flaps a bit (flaps 1?) - but to do it you had to pull circuit breakers to keep the leading edge slats from also going out."
A VERY well placed WELL known good friend of mine ( deceased in 2004 ) who was a Boeing Engineer -ex Multi engine Military pilot- Boeing KC 135 delivery pilot- and a training pilot - at various times in his long career - and had been involved in training a Canadian chief pilot for Wardair on 727 ( whom I happened to meet .. long story ) when Wardair bought a 727 for a route from Vancouver to Ireland as I recall with a 727 !!- told me ( years later ) about the flap- circuit breaker method on 727 . So at least that part seems to be true.
And as to the 727 LE slat and dive story - dont know- but I do know of a jammed slat issue ( which required a change in first 3 or 4 767 slat linkages ) due to a one side jamming issue on first or second flight of 767- which resulted in a very hot landing at Paine . Spent a few interesting tooling hours on that
A VERY well placed WELL known good friend of mine ( deceased in 2004 ) who was a Boeing Engineer -ex Multi engine Military pilot- Boeing KC 135 delivery pilot- and a training pilot - at various times in his long career - and had been involved in training a Canadian chief pilot for Wardair on 727 ( whom I happened to meet .. long story ) when Wardair bought a 727 for a route from Vancouver to Ireland as I recall with a 727 !!- told me ( years later ) about the flap- circuit breaker method on 727 . So at least that part seems to be true.
And as to the 727 LE slat and dive story - dont know- but I do know of a jammed slat issue ( which required a change in first 3 or 4 767 slat linkages ) due to a one side jamming issue on first or second flight of 767- which resulted in a very hot landing at Paine . Spent a few interesting tooling hours on that
Last edited by CONSO; 25th Jan 2019 at 03:58. Reason: minor corrections
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And as to the other inadvertant dive stories - maybe- a bit of confusion with the 707 Pan Am 115 flight in 1958?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_115
One later "story" of that plane said that after it was returned to service with slightly bent wings- it had one of the best fuel burns of that model until retired years later
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_115
During the rapid descent the copilot was unable to effect recovery. When the captain became aware of the unusual attitude of the aircraft he returned to the cockpit and with the aid of the other crew members was finally able to regain control of the aircraft at approximately 6,000 feet; they later made an emergency landing at Gander with damaged flaps.[3]
In the mid 1970s, Boeing was all set to launch a 727-300 program, using a re-fanned JT8D-200. United was to be the launch customer. But right before the planned launch announcement United suddenly got cold feet and pulled out and the program was quietly shelved. However the engine was eventually used for the MD-80.
There are a dozen or so still flying, whereas the Tay 727QFs are all long gone.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
Dan Air never went down any upgrade road for their 727-200's - They were starting to get 733's and 734's
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the CVR was introduced to U.S. carriers in the 1960's the erase button was demanded by ALPA due to privacy concerns of the crews. Of course, ALPA received assurances that the new CVR technology would only be used to improve safety and never for disciplinary or liability purposes.
The old CVR's recorded 30 minutes and the erase button cleared the whole recording. I believe on the 727 the parking brake had to be set and the engines shut down (or was it on external power?).
My recollection was setting the parking brake. The 727 wasn't on external power unless the APU was inop.
Ironically, to me anyway, current U.S. regs say the erase button can delete all but the last 30 minutes of the recording at any time, not just on the blocks:
A trend in recent years is for the NTSB to harvest what used to be labeled 'non-pertinent conversation' from the CVR. In the Colgan 3402 mishap a decade ago comments on commuting and sleeping in the crew lounge were included in the CVR transcript and even read into the Congressional Record.
Re TWA 841: I vaguely recall a theory floated at the time, wholly unverified, that there was a practice at higher FLs of pulling the Leading Edge Isolation Valve c/b and extending the fist notch of flaps to improve stability (increased wing area ?). The first notch moved the flaps mostly aft vs down. The max altitude with flaps extended is FL200 as higher altitudes were not flight tested for mach effects.
With the c/b pulled, movement of the flap lever wouldn't allow hyd pressure to reach the LEDs.
As the story went, the F/E returned to the cockpit, saw the c/b popped and reset it allowing the LEDs to receive hyd press and extend to match the flap lever position resulting in the event.
I have a problem with that theory: The event occurred at night (2148 local time). So, we're to believe that the F/E entered a dark cockpit at night and saw one c/b popped on the P-6 panel among a forest of c/bs...in the dark and reset it without comment to the crew ?
I just don't think that passes the plausibility test.
Not long after that event, we got a bulletin about slat droop at the gate with no System A hyd press on them (not Krueger flaps...they always drooped with out pressure). There is an allowed amount of droop before MTC action is required. The explanation of excessive droop had something to do with cracks being found in the slat actuator retract lock ring...or some other component with the potential to let a slat not remain retracted.
Admittedly, my recall is fuzzy but that's what I remember.
aterpster ?
With the c/b pulled, movement of the flap lever wouldn't allow hyd pressure to reach the LEDs.
As the story went, the F/E returned to the cockpit, saw the c/b popped and reset it allowing the LEDs to receive hyd press and extend to match the flap lever position resulting in the event.
I have a problem with that theory: The event occurred at night (2148 local time). So, we're to believe that the F/E entered a dark cockpit at night and saw one c/b popped on the P-6 panel among a forest of c/bs...in the dark and reset it without comment to the crew ?
I just don't think that passes the plausibility test.
Not long after that event, we got a bulletin about slat droop at the gate with no System A hyd press on them (not Krueger flaps...they always drooped with out pressure). There is an allowed amount of droop before MTC action is required. The explanation of excessive droop had something to do with cracks being found in the slat actuator retract lock ring...or some other component with the potential to let a slat not remain retracted.
Admittedly, my recall is fuzzy but that's what I remember.
aterpster ?
Last edited by bafanguy; 25th Jan 2019 at 20:45.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: DFFD Ouagadougou
Age: 62
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re TWA 841: I vaguely recall a theory floated at the time, wholly unverified, that there was a practice at higher FLs of pulling the Leading Edge Isolation Valve c/b and extending the fist notch of flaps to improve stability (increased wing area ?). The first notch moved the flaps mostly aft vs down. The max altitude with flaps extended is FL200 as higher altitudes were not flight tested for mach effects.
With the c/b pulled, movement of the flap lever wouldn't allow hyd pressure to reach the LEDs.
As the story went, the F/E returned to the cockpit, saw the c/b popped and reset it allowing the LEDs to receive hyd press and extend to match the flap lever position resulting in the event.
I have a problem with that theory: The event occurred at night (2148 local time). So, we're to believe that the F/E entered a dark cockpit at night and saw one c/b popped on the P-6 panel among a forest of c/bs...in the dark and reset it without comment to the crew ?
I just don't think that passes the plausibility test.
Not long after that event, we got a bulletin about slat droop at the gate with no System A hyd press on them (not Krueger flaps...they always drooped with out pressure). There is an allowed amount of droop before MTC action is required. The explanation of excessive droop had something to do with cracks being found in the slat actuator retract lock ring...or some other component with the potential to let a slat not remain retracted.
Admittedly, my recall is fuzzy but that's what I remember. aterpster ?
With the c/b pulled, movement of the flap lever wouldn't allow hyd pressure to reach the LEDs.
As the story went, the F/E returned to the cockpit, saw the c/b popped and reset it allowing the LEDs to receive hyd press and extend to match the flap lever position resulting in the event.
I have a problem with that theory: The event occurred at night (2148 local time). So, we're to believe that the F/E entered a dark cockpit at night and saw one c/b popped on the P-6 panel among a forest of c/bs...in the dark and reset it without comment to the crew ?
I just don't think that passes the plausibility test.
Not long after that event, we got a bulletin about slat droop at the gate with no System A hyd press on them (not Krueger flaps...they always drooped with out pressure). There is an allowed amount of droop before MTC action is required. The explanation of excessive droop had something to do with cracks being found in the slat actuator retract lock ring...or some other component with the potential to let a slat not remain retracted.
Admittedly, my recall is fuzzy but that's what I remember. aterpster ?
A trend in recent years is for the NTSB to harvest what used to be labeled 'non-pertinent conversation' from the CVR. In the Colgan 3402 mishap a decade ago comments on commuting and sleeping in the crew lounge were included in the CVR transcript and even read into the Congressional Record.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: DFFD Ouagadougou
Age: 62
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Super 27 performance, granted we were on the light side.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: DFFD Ouagadougou
Age: 62
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Laredo, TX
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My memory is hazy but I believe there were two circuit breakers associated with the leading edge devices, a "leading edge valves" and a "LEFUS". I never saw it done but pulling one would allow you to extend the flaps without the LEDs. One rumor was that they were trying out the idea and didn't understand the system that well and pulled the wrong CB.
I see "ALT SELECT" armed so must be a Block 5 autopilot ? It was an improvement over the standard Bloc 4 which required you to pay attention and select ALT HLD or bust the altitude.
I got to prefer the Sperry F/D with a separate bar for roll and pitch vs the Collins FD 108/109 with the "bat wings".