727 magic?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On one of my first B727-100 flights as an F/O my training captain showed me how to enter a circuit at high speed (this was of course before there was speed control, 250 below 10,000 and FOQA). Request a high speed approach at Darwin and entered a long downwind at 390 indicated. All worked well. I do recall tho that my brain and heart landed long after the aeroplane!
Years on the wonderful 777 aside, getting a command on the 727 was simply the best thing ever. Yes....thanks Boeing!
Years on the wonderful 777 aside, getting a command on the 727 was simply the best thing ever. Yes....thanks Boeing!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737forever -
I'm not a fan of saying the 727 is the best ever. At it's time it was a great airplane.
757 IMO outperforms it in reliability, climb performance, short field performance, high altitude capability, hot and high performance, is much quieter, better thrust to weight, and more efficient. Every thing related to safety, except a third, older engine, is better on the 757.
The 727 is faster(.885/411 KIAS
). The 727 can be a handful in the pattern and is unforgiving of poor landing technique.
I enjoyed the 727 but don't miss it. To me it's like people talking about the 1964 Opel they owned, "best car ever", when today's technology is clearly superior.
Best handling airliner? Eight different ones so far and for me the A300 had the best combination of light, and balanced, controls. That said, I'd take a 767 over the A300.
I'm not a fan of saying the 727 is the best ever. At it's time it was a great airplane.
757 IMO outperforms it in reliability, climb performance, short field performance, high altitude capability, hot and high performance, is much quieter, better thrust to weight, and more efficient. Every thing related to safety, except a third, older engine, is better on the 757.
The 727 is faster(.885/411 KIAS
). The 727 can be a handful in the pattern and is unforgiving of poor landing technique.I enjoyed the 727 but don't miss it. To me it's like people talking about the 1964 Opel they owned, "best car ever", when today's technology is clearly superior.
Best handling airliner? Eight different ones so far and for me the A300 had the best combination of light, and balanced, controls. That said, I'd take a 767 over the A300.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: window seat
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B727
This machine used to be really versatile
you could arrive "FAST AND LOW" OR
"HIGH AND SLOW"
By fast and low I mean at VMO 12 miles 2000 feet.
by high and slow I mean at Vref Flaps 40 10 miles 10,000 feet and
you could do a straight in approach.
Obviously this was before all the limitations of today . . .
like 250 KTS below 10,000 feet, ALAR, CRM, Safe Sex, etc.
you could arrive "FAST AND LOW" OR
"HIGH AND SLOW"
By fast and low I mean at VMO 12 miles 2000 feet.
by high and slow I mean at Vref Flaps 40 10 miles 10,000 feet and
you could do a straight in approach.
Obviously this was before all the limitations of today . . .
like 250 KTS below 10,000 feet, ALAR, CRM, Safe Sex, etc.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: hong kong
Age: 59
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
727 handled beautifully as anyone knows who was lucky enough to fly it. Tough as nails and versatile enough for just about anything. Entered the hold over Luanda one night at 20,000', cleared for the NDB 24 and were able to lose 16,000' once around the hold, yes 1 min legs, and land from 4000' FAF. Boeing really did a good job with it.
Moderator
Oh common, it's like a 172,
Until I realised that was the case I had a pretty chequered career trying to land the -200. The -100 is a real pussycat and, once the above was incorporated into my belief set, so was the -200.
One needed to keep one's wits about oneself but it certainly was a fun machine to operate .... check essential.
Until I realised that was the case I had a pretty chequered career trying to land the -200. The -100 is a real pussycat and, once the above was incorporated into my belief set, so was the -200.
One needed to keep one's wits about oneself but it certainly was a fun machine to operate .... check essential.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought, why did not Boeing continue with the 727 design, implementing more modern engine technology/hardware/software and incorporating two pilot operations on the f/d?
Daz
Daz
Dog Tired
Oh... lots of people out there still living or dreaming in the land of the dinosaurs. 75/76/77? hellooo! Any of you flown the 320 or, better yet, the 330?
Back to the Q. My favourite moments in the magnificent 727 (200 - sorry JT) was a heavy take off using the slow trim, manually flown. Excellent.
By the way, hello (marhaba) Flt D.
fantom
Back to the Q. My favourite moments in the magnificent 727 (200 - sorry JT) was a heavy take off using the slow trim, manually flown. Excellent.
By the way, hello (marhaba) Flt D.
fantom
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought, why did not Boeing continue with the 727 design, implementing more modern engine technology/hardware/software and incorporating two pilot operations on the f/d?
Con-Pilot,
It was Dee Howard in San Antonio. My understanding is when they talked to FAA about their "mod" the Feds said you can do what you want but a 727 has 3 flight crewmembers and 3 engines per the Type Certificate Data Sheet. Their new airplane (Howard 1000 would be a good name) would be a totally new aircraft and require new certification from square one.
It was Dee Howard in San Antonio. My understanding is when they talked to FAA about their "mod" the Feds said you can do what you want but a 727 has 3 flight crewmembers and 3 engines per the Type Certificate Data Sheet. Their new airplane (Howard 1000 would be a good name) would be a totally new aircraft and require new certification from square one.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Quebec
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donald Trump's 727 is for sale, for those interested!
Donald Trump 727 For Sale - Is Donald Trump Broke? | NYCAviation.com | Planespotting and Aviation Photography, Breaking Airline News, Aviation Discussion
Donald Trump 727 For Sale - Is Donald Trump Broke? | NYCAviation.com | Planespotting and Aviation Photography, Breaking Airline News, Aviation Discussion
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best for high altitude!
Around 8000 hrs in comand on that fantastic A/C, operating from high altitudes airports like La Paz (13400' ), CBB (8360'), TJA (6300'), SRE (9100') and many crazy placed airports in mountainous Bolivia and South America, with NDB, VOR approaches, and I couldn have asked for a more reliable aircraft than the 727-200 with 17R engines, just the best!!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown the 757 to La Paz. I also flew as a passenger on a 727 out of La Paz. The 727 takeoff roll took 33% more time than the 757's.
A 727 has a thrust to weight ratio of approx. ..24-25:1. The 757 has a thrust to weight ratio of approx. .34:1. That's an increase of 36-41% in the thrust to weight ratio.
Have you actually commanded a 757? At high altitude airports? 36-41% more thrust to weight is significant and a huge improvement in performance, especially at high altitudes.
A 727 has a thrust to weight ratio of approx. ..24-25:1. The 757 has a thrust to weight ratio of approx. .34:1. That's an increase of 36-41% in the thrust to weight ratio.
Have you actually commanded a 757? At high altitude airports? 36-41% more thrust to weight is significant and a huge improvement in performance, especially at high altitudes.
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you actually commanded a 757?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: world
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have wanted so much to fly one of those beautiful noisy birds.
Unfortunately I arrived much too late for them.
Anyway it was with these aircrafts in mind and not Airbuses that I decided to pursue a career in aviation.
I like flying and not pressing buttons on FMS CDUs, therefore I will always regard them as my dream-planes forever.
They did a magnificient job for decades and still now, even if in very limited numbers.
For this and many other reasons they deserve the whole respect, even from today "computer" pilots.
Unfortunately I arrived much too late for them.
Anyway it was with these aircrafts in mind and not Airbuses that I decided to pursue a career in aviation.
I like flying and not pressing buttons on FMS CDUs, therefore I will always regard them as my dream-planes forever.
They did a magnificient job for decades and still now, even if in very limited numbers.
For this and many other reasons they deserve the whole respect, even from today "computer" pilots.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: HKG
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Close the thrust at TOD and plan to be overhead the field at 250 kts/1500ft for a visual. Start a turn with about 2.5 mile radius that will take you all the way through downwind base and final rolling wings level at 250ft and spooling up.
Through base it looks like there is no way you can make it in. All the time you drop flap all the way to flap40 as she decelerates ( This is the key ) and she just sinks!! Then stop shorter than a Baron. And reverse into your bay.
Not many jets can do that. Loved it.
In Africa it was way more reliable than 737 's
Through base it looks like there is no way you can make it in. All the time you drop flap all the way to flap40 as she decelerates ( This is the key ) and she just sinks!! Then stop shorter than a Baron. And reverse into your bay.
Not many jets can do that. Loved it.
In Africa it was way more reliable than 737 's
