DC-10s as Water Bombers?

Really? Are you sure? I'm not saying it couldn't be as you say, but it
was my understanding that the B747 arose directly from a conversation
between Juan Trippe (CEO of Pan AM) and Boeing President William Allen
in the fall of 1965 about Pan Am's need for a 300+ passenger
long-range airliner. It was my understanding that after Pan Am signed
the initial letter of intent and order, that Malcolm Stamper (An
electrical engineer and production specialist, brought over from GM)
put together a team and essentially designed the 747 from scratch,
without using an existing design as the 'basis' for it (obviously it
has a similar planform to planes like the 707, but very little else in
common with it). I'm kind of an aviation history buff, and I had
always read that the 747 was essentially a 'clean-room' design
specifically to meet Trippe's (and obviously other airlines)
specifications.

I'd like to know more about it's background as a military cargo
transport. Is there a source that you know of that has more extensive
information about this history?

Thanks,

Cap

"Michael Nouak" wrote in message ...
"Captain Wubba" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Captain Wubba" wrote in message
om...
snip
You might as well say that the 747 was originally designed as a bomber.

Uh, no, one couldn't. It was designed 'from scratch' as a passenger
carrying airliner. ...

While I generally agree with the rest of your post, you're incorrect here.
The B747 was originally conceived to be a cargo plane for the military, in
competition to the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy, which eventually won the contract.
Only after losing did Boeing decide to convert its design to pax use.

Mike

Please ignore my pervious post. After reading your post I went out and
did some more research, and you are indeed correct. I had thought the
747 was a 'clean room' design, but apparently I was wrong. I'd love to
see the original version Boeing tossed up against the Lockheed entry.
I know Boeing had a ton of teething problems with the B747 (notably
the P&W engines) and had initially envisioned a plane with full-double
decks, but abandoned it. Related to the original post, I can't imagine
the entry for the HLS competition was anything resembing the final
production version of the 747-100, but I can't seem to find any
pictures or engineering drawings, so it might be a 'spitting image'
. If you know of any, I'd love to see them. You learn something new
every day


Thanks,

Cap



"Michael Nouak" wrote in message ...
"Captain Wubba" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Captain Wubba" wrote in message
om...
snip
You might as well say that the 747 was originally designed as a bomber.

Uh, no, one couldn't. It was designed 'from scratch' as a passenger
carrying airliner. ...

While I generally agree with the rest of your post, you're incorrect here.
The B747 was originally conceived to be a cargo plane for the military, in
competition to the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy, which eventually won the contract.
Only after losing did Boeing decide to convert its design to pax use.

Mike

"Big John" wrote in message
...
Pete

What about the:

737
757
767
7E7

I don't know of any of these that have a military counterpart.

Big John

If they quit fighting in Congress they may buy a modified civilian 767
as a tanker?

If they do it's a bad decission as the 767 doesn't have the range or
load to project air power around the world. For example it will take
two 767's to refuel the same gallons as a single KC-135.



And I heard on NPR this morning that they are going to lease instead of by
them so they will have to be Certified in the tanker configuration.

(Captain Wubba) wrote in message . com...

"Michael Nouak" wrote in message ...
"Captain Wubba" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Captain Wubba" wrote in message
om...
snip
You might as well say that the 747 was originally designed as a bomber.

Uh, no, one couldn't. It was designed 'from scratch' as a passenger
carrying airliner. ...

While I generally agree with the rest of your post, you're incorrect here.
The B747 was originally conceived to be a cargo plane for the military, in
competition to the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy, which eventually won the contract.
Only after losing did Boeing decide to convert its design to pax use.

Mike

Really? Are you sure? I'm not saying it couldn't be as you say, but it
was my understanding that the B747 arose directly from a conversation
between Juan Trippe (CEO of Pan AM) and Boeing President William Allen
in the fall of 1965 about Pan Am's need for a 300+ passenger
long-range airliner.


There seems to be some truth to both sides. According to Boeing's
website,
http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/747.html
"...Boeing had already developed the design concepts and technology
of such an airplane because the company had bid on, but lost, the
contract for a gigantic military transport, the C-5A."

The Pan AM/Trippe story is related at
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRHe...04/FR9904e.htm

Note also that the 747 was available from the start in both freighter
and passenger versions, so freighter use was planned from the beginning.
It's a bit of a stretch to say it was ever a pure passenger airliner.

I seem to recall that freigher use was a primary reason for
putting the flight deck up on the "second story", to allow for a hinged
nose to open up for unobstructed cargo access. In fact, I know I've
read somewhere that many of the forward-thinking planners of the late
'60s felt that all the early passenger 747s would soon be converted to
freighters, because passenger flights would all be switched to
supersonic transports. So it was important to build even the passenger
models with eventual freighter conversion in mind, so that the airlines
wouldn't get stuck with an obsolete slow passenger hauler in the
supersonic age. Oh well, I guess the visionaries can't always be right...

--Rich

Michael

Yep.

Big John

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:25:41 +0100, "Michael Nouak"
wrote:


"Captain Wubba" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Captain Wubba" wrote in message
om...
snip
You might as well say that the 747 was originally designed as a bomber.

Uh, no, one couldn't. It was designed 'from scratch' as a passenger
carrying airliner. ...

While I generally agree with the rest of your post, you're incorrect here.
The B747 was originally conceived to be a cargo plane for the military, in
competition to the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy, which eventually won the contract.
Only after losing did Boeing decide to convert its design to pax use.

Mike

Bob

Just read in AFT today that "rent 20 and buy 80" (767's) just went
through and Congress signed off.

May get some real life data now?

Big John

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:40:21 GMT, Bob Noel
wrote:

In article , Big John
wrote:

There's lots of politics in this procurement so you will hear many PR
figures that may not be supportable in operation since they will be
put out to sell project.

put out to sell the project or to kill it. yeah, it certainly
has politics all over it.


If anyone can find apples and apples would be interested in seeing the
figures.

I'm looking...

Ron

Among a few others, the 89 Airlift Wing at Andrews AFB, Washington, DC
operate some of the following to haul VIP's around.

C-32 ---757
C-37 --- Gulf Stream
C-40 --- 737

All have 'poosh' interiors, special communications, serve #1 booze and
food. (Probably also Green Tea if you want G)

You wouldn't expect the Washington types (Congress and others) to fly
around 2nd class would you ????


Bottom line is that I stand corrected. Had forgotten the Special Air
Ops that had up graded to current civilian transports.


Big John


On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:54:22 -0500, "Ron Natalie"
wrote:


"Big John" wrote in message ...
What about the:

All of them have military variants (well at least except for the 7E7 which doesn't really exist yet).

737

T-43

757

C-32

767

KC-767

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:47:15 -0800
"Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX" wrote:

A widebody jet converted to fire bomber would involve
different tradeoffs and tactics. It would be a whole
new ball game.

Last time I flew over Victorville there were many airframes
waiting for something to do.

--
Chuck Forsberg www.omen.com 503-614-0430
Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications
Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software"
10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231 FAX 629-0665



Chuck Forsberg of ZMODEM fame, this is a blast from the past. I remember
buying a license for ZMODEM back in the day. I guess ZMODEM has done you
well. Congrats.


R. Hubbell