You younger guys with your whiz-bang cockpits wouldn't try this one...

http://www.dc-8jet.com/0-dc8-sst-flight.htm

I have seen the airspeed of a 777 show a little over 700 MPH. I assumed that it was a ground speed and we were riding a jet stream.

I believe this is erroneous. Of course the Concord is the fastest airliner ever built, but the 880 is {was?}the fastest built in the United States. We were the first operator of the CV880 and I believe we were the largest operator of the DC-8 and flew a host of variants of the -8. [And this, the DC-8, was my favorite A/C of all time.] But the Convair was smaller and much faster and had gone through the sound barrier several times, I am told. In fact, I believe it still holds the west coast to Atlanta speed record which was set by Capt "Pre-Ball" on a delivery flight.

A/C Data for the B707, CV880 and the DC-8.

Convair 880 Boeing 707-120 Douglas DC-8
Wing Span
120 ft. 130 ft. 10 in. 142 ft. 5 in.
Length
129 ft. 4 in. 144 ft. 6 in. 150 ft. 6 in.
Passengers
88 - 110 110 - 189 105 - 173
Maximum Cruise Speed
615 mph 585 mph 579 mph
Please note the differences in the stated maximum airspeed. This equates to a high Mach number and much higher than allowed today. Of course, kerosene is no longer $.11 per gallon - yes, that's eleven cents per gallon!
For the DC-8 referenced it would have had the 'wet' engine of water mass injection P&W's while the CV880 flew with the CJ805, a civilian version of the J79. These power plants had better weight to power ratio, lower fuel consumption, did not require water injection/thrust augmentation of early series P&W turbojet engines, and featured variable stators promoting rapid power adjustments.





The CV880 was a beautiful airplane - just not a practical people mover.

I'm sorry to say I do not have access to most of the records re this matter but will be back in the office Tues - any more detail/data wanted just ask - I can fill your requests!

I would have figured a 727 or L-1011 would have been fastest production aero-bus at altitude ...

I remember the 880/990. Took thirty minutes for the smoke to clear after one took off. They had a higher Mach cruise number, but the DC-8 broke Mach 1 first, if any of the others did. I remember that from DC-8 school twenty years ago, so it is correct. The 707 and the 8 made more money than the Convairs, but they were cool airplanes. Very sleek.

The 747 cruised at .84, with some supersonic flow at that number. VNE was .92. I wouldn't want to take one any faster. I did get one going .90 one night, just for the hell of it.

And that 770 knot number was a ground speed readout. I've seen that on the whale, east bound to Europe in the winter on the tracks, riding the jet. I've also seen 375, heading the other way.

I was thinking we were talking about level flight...anything with a turbine on it will exceed 1.0 in a dive ...

quote:

Originally posted by jetdrvr:
I remember the 880/990. Took thirty minutes for the smoke to clear after one took off. They had a higher Mach cruise number, but the DC-8 broke Mach 1 first, if any of the others did. I remember that from DC-8 school twenty years ago, so it is correct. The 707 and the 8 made more money than the Convairs, but they were cool airplanes. Very sleek.

The 747 cruised at .84, with some supersonic flow at that number. VNE was .92. I wouldn't want to take one any faster. I did get one going .90 one night, just for the hell of it.

And that 770 knot number was a ground speed readout. I've seen that on the whale, east bound to Europe in the winter on the tracks, riding the jet. I've also seen 375, heading the other way.

No argument about the smoke, I have a picture of one of the DL CV880s taking off, all you can see is the fuselage forward of the wing and then
smoke, smoke, smoke. And I don't know when you went to DC-8 school but the first generation DC-8 was a smoker too, wet engines all smoked. The first generation B747 with the JT-9 engines had a wet setup [ATA system 82] Ours had the setup but it was never used to my knowledge.
I will dig out the info when I return to the office and tell you the exact details of some of the CV-880 flights.
Also, as an aside, the update mods to the Dc-8, i.e.; the DC8-61 to DC8-71 with the new glass, 2 man cockpit and the CFM56 engines was a vast improvement over the older versions with the JT3D1 or the JT4 P&W engines. One of the few conversions I am acquainted with wherein the end product was superior to what everyone expected. We converted one for NASA, DC8-62 to a DC8-72 and it was one of the slickest A/C I have ever seen. They reportedly flew this A/C at speeds over 700KTs but I have never seen this documented. I do know they flew it through volcano clouds for atmospheric condition monitoring after eruptions, mostly in the Arctic regions.
I wish we still flew the DC8!

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:
I was thinking we were talking about level flight...anything with a turbine on it will exceed 1.0 in a dive ...

Uhhh... not exactly, if you try that n say... an Me262 the aircraft will pitch up and shed it's wings before going supersonic.
Some German Test pilot discovered that to his shock and dismay....

SNAP!!!.... Oh Sheiss.... Geschplat!

quote:

and the CFM56 engines

One needed to tape skateboards on the bottoms of the inboards on that thing. You landed wings level or you left pieces on the runway... Beautiful airplane, though.

quote:

Originally posted by jetdrvr:

quote:

and the CFM56 engines

One needed to tape skateboards on the bottoms of the inboards on that thing. You landed wings level or you left pieces on the runway... Beautiful airplane, though.

Actually, not that bad on the DC8. Now, on the B737 - another story. They had to clip the fans and 'bend' the bottom of the fan cases to keep them out of the grass. "World's Largest Vacumm Cleaner!"


That's close!

quote:

Actually, not that bad on the DC8.

Having spent part of my youth in a 71 series DC-8 I have to disagree. You do NOT land a CFM powered DC-8 in a slip or you will be making sparks.

Also having spent WAY to much time in 300 and 500 series 737's you can land that thing any way you want major wing down if you want and you are not going to scrape anything.

Remember the rotation on a stretch 8? 8 degree's pitch until the mains get light then gently up from there or you are going to make more sparks with the tail.

quote:

Remember the rotation on a stretch 8? 8 degree's pitch until the mains get light then gently up from there or you are going to make more sparks with the tail.

I seem to recall something about the tail skid being very expendabble on the old DC-8's, most especially on the -71 series - like replaced on virtually every letter check or more often?
"Supplemental Landing Gear, ATA Chpt. 32"
Honest airplane, did everything that was asked of it!

Yep that lady demanded respect but when treated right she was true blue. She did not suffer fools lightly.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
She did not suffer fools lightly.

is there an aircraft that does suffer fools?

I mean other than a PBY5A Catalina already in stable cruise flight...

I remember a conversation with a WW2 cat pilot and 60-odd years after the last time he set eyes on one he was still wondering why the airplane had been fitted with an autopilot.

According to him it took very determined effort to make it do anything other than fly straight and level and generally releasing the control yoke would let it return to strait and level flight like water can find the bottom of a martini glass.

Mabey he was exaggerating a bit...

AD