B727-200 Autopilot

[wanabee777]

I'm almost certain that Eastern Airlines had Block V autoland on a few of their 72's.

[MarkerInbound]

Find that rather hard to believe, can anyone support that ?

It is a scary thought.

I've got an Eastern Airlines Flight Manual that lists the requires for CAT IIIa approaches. The first hint is having "A" "B" or "AB" options on the autopilot pitch channel selector.

-19(?) engines. Rocket ship. Huge improvement over the -15's(?).

Dash 15s had 15,500 pounds of thrust. There were -17 and -17R engines with 900 pounds more thrust than the -15. The -17Rs kicked it up another 1000 pounds during an engine failure with the APR armed.

Then there are the Valsan conversions with -217 or -219 engines. The -219s are running 21,700 pounds of thrust down the runway. Ridden in one of those a couple times, true rocket ship performance.

[captjns]

Used to fly a converted -231 into a freighter. Had -219s on the sides and a -17 in the center. Ferrying with 2,000lbs ballast for CG purposes with 20,000lbs of gas the only direction on is going is skyward with IVSI pegged. Controllers used to ask "You guys really a 727?"

Now for the old autopilot with dual channel. I used to engage the aileron portion and hand fly the pitch rather than using the speed/Mach mode on the pitch as too much porpoising resulted. Probably because of CG shifts do to Pax and galley cart movements. On the old -7 powered lead sleds at heavier weights and warm OATs, one may have to descend to regain climb speed.

[grounded27]

Autoland on a 727 ?


Find that rather hard to believe, can anyone support that ?

I already did, yes I know it is hard to believe. It was for me the first time I saw one as I had never maintained a DC10 beyond CAT II before I joined this operator. They were probably modified but to repeat myself the fleet was 100 plus strong and just about all CAT IIIa. I maintained them as so up until a few years ago when they were retired.

[misd-agin]

It must have been the -17's.

The bigger engine conversions were later.

[Spooky 2]

I suspect that the Alaska 727-200ADV were part of the group of airplanes that Alaska got from Singapore 727-212ADV with the -17 engines. They were exceptionally well equipped with AT, ABS and believe auto speed brakes as well. High gross weight somewhere around 198K. Do not recall ever seeing an auto land option in the 727 but it might have been an option. Looking at My Boeing Fleet and it does not show up when doing a word search

[SlowAndSilly]

Courtesy of smartcockpit.com, B727 Automatic Flight .

Looks like the 727 was capable with block V equipment.

[con-pilot]

OK456

Now that I think back, I seem to remember that on N2777 (or N27 ?), the -100 we got from the FAA, had an auto-land system installed for testing purposes. It was removed before we got the aircraft.

At least that was what we were told by someone from the FAA after we got the 727. Any truth to that rumor that you are aware of?

[misd-agin]

Spooky - I think our -200's w/-15 engines grossed out at around 196,000(??). I thought the AK's were much higher, like 208,000??


Research shows some topped out at 209,500. So 208,000 might have been close.


We didn't fly them anywhere near that weight, just DFW-SEA, so it was a reasonable weight and the improved performance of the -17's was noticeable.

[con-pilot]

At one point it did have a functional A/T system, but when I got in it the A/T was permanently placarded inop.....Gov Mx doing less with less.

That is most likely what I was thinking about. I know when we took it to Dalforth for the new cockpit that they pulled out hundreds of pounds of old wiring that had been install for test equipment back when the FAA had it.

What was interesting was the wiring was telephone wire.

Thanks for helping my memory, again.

On the autopilots, one Monday I took off and the autopilot paddles (switches) would not remain on. So I used a rubber band to keep the paddles connected for the week. For some reason maintenance could not fix it until the weekend. I don't have the foggiest why not. And to be honest I can't remember more than four or five times in ten years that we had autopilot problems with the 727s. So that's pretty good.

[Spooky 2]

I don't recall seeing anything over 198K unless it was a Boeing built freighter like the Fed Ex model -200F. As recall there was a different structure that increased the empty weight significantly on those aircraft. Do not recall the MTOGW but 208, sounds a little heavy?


The Singapore -212ADV was a 198,000 airplane and that I'm pretty sure of as we bought one from AK and did a corporate conversion on it.

[stilton]

Max gross weight on the -17R powered 200 series went up to 209,500 pounds.

[Spooky 2]

By chance do you recall who the operator(s) were that used those weights? I cannot find anything in My Boeing Fleet that talks to those weights but that does not mean that they don't exist.

[con-pilot]

Originally Posted by Spooky 2

By chance do you recall who the operator(s) were that used those weights? I cannot find anything in My Boeing Fleet that talks to those weights but that does not mean that they don't exist.

For some reason American Airlines keeps popping up in my mind for the answer. I think they were the last passenger airlines to get the brand new 727-200 advanced versions.

Very possibly wrong on that.

[galaxy flyer]

At 209,000, it must have been every bit the slug w grossed out D-9 powered early -200 was. I can't remember the gross on those were, but it wasn't pretty on a warm day at gross.

GF

[Spooky 2]

I know it wasn't AA. Suspect it had to be freighter as I pretty darn sure that weight was not available for a pax airplane unless in was a one-off corporate/government delivery. AS I mentioned earlier I can't find any reference to that weight in My Boeing Fleet and goes all the way back to the DC7C if you look hard enough

[galaxy flyer]

Not the Boeing DC-7C, successor to the Boeing DC-6 and DC-4?

GF

[misd-agin]

AA wasn't 209.500. I think the heaviest were 196,000(?).


I think the Alaska 727's we flew during the 'Alaska Airlines Interchange(?)' max'd out around 208,000. We didn't fly them that heavy so we just had the increased thrust to weight ratio of the -17(?) engines vs. the -15/15A engines. It was noticeable.


Trying to remember from 28-30 years ago...

[con-pilot]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

At 209,000, it must have been every bit the slug w grossed out D-9 powered early -200 was. I can't remember the gross on those were, but it wasn't pretty on a warm day at gross.

GF

Still better than the ex-Air France 727-200s with the -7 engines. Thank God I never had to fly one, but we almost leased one of them, until we found out that they had the -7 engines.

I can't imagine what a takeoff out of Denver on a summer day would have been like.

[Spooky 2]

Back in the 80's AK was buying both used and factory new 727's. My only experience was the purchase of one of the former 727-212Avd airplanes they had bought from Singapore. Very low time and exceptionally well equipped. These were -17 powered and had a MGTOW or TAXI, can't recall which of 198,000. I believe SIA only had six of these in service.