• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

DC-8 Projects & Variants

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Just a question to whom may know it: does anyone happen to know which was the Douglas model number (D-something) assigned to what would later become the DC-8, and if there was only one or different during the design evolution? I've consulted all the major printed sources to no avail, and before resorting to browse through the magazines archive, I'll try a shorcut here... ;). I'm preparing a PPT presentation for a congress.
 

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
14
IIRC, the 'original' DC-8 was derived from the Mixmaster.


Skybolt said:
Just a question to whom may know it: does anyone happen to know which was the Douglas model number (D-something) assigned to what would later become the DC-8, and if there was only one or different during the design evolution? I've consulted all the major printed sources to no avail, and before resorting to browse through the magazines archive, I'll try a shorcut here... ;). I'm preparing a PPT presentation for a congress.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Ok, ::) so let's say the 4-J57-powered swept wing airplane that was tendered to the USAF as tanker and intended as a civilian transport, too... :p
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,475
Reaction score
203
4-J57-powered swept wing airplane that was tendered to the USAF as tanker and intended as a civilian transport, too

Douglas submited a contender to USAF jet tanker competition?. Exciting!. Unfortunately I can't help Skybolt. :(
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Yep, bid were asked to Boeing, Lockheed, Douglas, Martin, Fairchild and Convair. At least Boeing (367-80), Lockheed and Douglas responded. Fairchild probably could have bidded the delta airliner project they were working on in that timeframe. I bet that Convair design was a forerunner of the 880/990 (model 60 ?). Have no idea of Martin's. There was a model 306, a twin-jet version of the 3-03 Martinliner, but I doubt it would qualify.
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,588
Reaction score
890
Yes, the model 306 (twin TG-180s) does seem too small for the role. A variation on the model 350 strategic bomber would appear be more probable.

On the other hand, does anyone have any info on Martin's model 333 or 343 cargo transports?

Or, stretching further, would a land-based derivative of the model 275 (P6M SeaMaster) make any sense? I notice that Martin didn't seem to assign model number 277.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Since the two transport are successive model numbers and devoted to USAF AND Army, I'll surmise that they are tactical transports, maybe STOL. The 350 was a supersonic and too late. And 277 probably went to non-aeronautical project. Land based Seamaster, ummm, improbable. Martin did have a proposed derivative of the Seamaster in the tanker role, but always sea-based. They had even a proposed passenger derivative of the Seamaster, sea-based.
 

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
71
The search for the Douglas modelnumber of the DC-8-10 jet (first model) is very frustrating.
No results produced by the Putnam an Bizon books about Douglas.
Nothing in Terry Waddingtons ,otherwise magnificient book about the DC-8
Noting in Air Pictorial and Flying Revies for 1954 and 1955.
Only hope :'Flight' for these years , but I have note the complete collection....
Maybe someone can contact Tery Waddington ;D
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Ummm, I suspect that neither him has anything, otherwise he would have published it. Anyone has the e-mail address of Renè Francillon ?
 

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
71
I'm beaten in the end run.The winner is Sky...
Congratulations! :-* ahem.. :D
 

nugo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
337
Reaction score
11
Hi All!

pre DC-8:
Douglas Model 1278, "familiarly know as the DC-8", 4 turbojet engine, 80 passenger, speed about
M=0.9, wing sweept 35 degrees.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
Thanks Nugo, but which one ? 80 pax seems too low for the defintive DC-8. Could be the civilian version of the proposed tanker, which was sensibly smaller. Which is your source ?
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
875
Nice DC-8 article in the last Boeing Frontiers issue
http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/i_history.pdf
 

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
Okay, I read both links.

I just am wondering two things...
1.) So the reason they went with such obscenely large windows was because they wanted the plane to be like a penthouse in the sky?
2.) What does "detail engineering" mean exactly when it pertains to airplane design?


Kendra Lesnick
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
I seem to remember that the large windows were a heritage of old airliners, when not all the seats had a window. Boeing did differently on the 707, and in time their solution won.
 

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
Skybolt said:
I seem to remember that the large windows were a heritage of old airliners, when not all the seats had a window. Boeing did differently on the 707, and in time their solution won.

What's the point of doing that? Setting the plane up so that not everybody sitting in the window-seats gets a window?


Kendra Lesnick
 

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
14
I assume the bigger the window, the bigger the chance of pressurization issues or the thickness of the window material.





KJ_Lesnick said:
Skybolt said:
I seem to remember that the large windows were a heritage of old airliners, when not all the seats had a window. Boeing did differently on the 707, and in time their solution won.

What's the point of doing that? Setting the plane up so that not everybody sitting in the window-seats gets a window?


Kendra Lesnick
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
875
This is how it's explained from today's point of view

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2005/q4/051215d_nr.html
"The 787 Dreamliner will provide passengers with a noticeably better flying experience and our windows are a big part of that improvement," said Mike Bair, vice president and general manager of the 787 program.

http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/dreamliner.html?c=y&page=2
Starting in 1999, with Gillette’s backing, Emery convened some 50 focus groups in several countries with the goal of finding out what people really wanted in an airliner. “We’d hear the usual things—‘I can’t find my seat,’ ‘I don’t have enough room for my legs,’ ‘I went to the bathroom on an airplane once and I never want to do it again,’ ” he says. “We listened to all that. But we were looking for things that people really couldn’t articulate.”
To draw people out, Emery’s team would take 10 or 15 into a room and tell them that they were in charge of designing the world’s first jetliner cabin. No limitations. Or they would sit them next to the blank wall of a cabin mockup, give them a Magic Marker, and ask them to draw an ideal window. “Their deeper values began to come out,” says Emery. “Some things we couldn’t use, of course, such as elaborate overhead delivery systems for food to get carts out of the aisles. But one big lesson was the concept people have that as one walks down a jetway you’re feeling cramped because there are no windows, then you go through the door of the airplane and everything seems to get smaller and smaller.”

The windows, thanks to the carbon fiber fuselage, are almost 19 inches tall and 11 inches wide—as opposed to 15 by 10-plus inches in the 777. The larger windows not only brighten the interior but give passengers in middle seats a better view outside. In an added trick, the windows are dimmed electronically. Move a controller, and the window darkens as if by magic.

Making the 787 mostly out of carbon fiber (the aircraft fuselage is essentially “baked” in giant forms) created opportunities to indulge in other design niceties not possible with traditional aluminum. Aluminum airplanes can certainly have larger windows. But bigger window cutouts put more strain on the airframe. Carbon fiber handles the strains better than aluminum, so engineers could show a little flair and splurge on bigger windows without shortening the life of the airframe.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
875
And finally here KJ can find all the answers for her questions
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/196818/
 

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
flateric said:
And finally here KJ can find all the answers for her questions
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/196818/

Thank you for the link.
 

nugo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
337
Reaction score
11
Hi Skybolt!

pre DC-8:
Douglas Model 1278, "familiarly know as the DC-8", 4 turbojet engine, 80 passenger, speed about
M=0.9, wing sweept 35 degrees.

source: Aviation Week, 1956.
Later I shall tell exact Vol.?, N ? and page
 

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
I guess Model 1278 was cooked up before they decided to go with a 30-degree 1/4-chord sweep-angle...

Kendra
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,914
Reaction score
1,156
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Some closeups:
 

Attachments

  • Pdr_0142a.jpg
    Pdr_0142a.jpg
    72.3 KB · Views: 355
  • Pdr_0143a.jpg
    Pdr_0143a.jpg
    72.5 KB · Views: 343
  • Pdr_0144a.jpg
    Pdr_0144a.jpg
    64.1 KB · Views: 323
  • Pdr_0146a.jpg
    Pdr_0146a.jpg
    57.2 KB · Views: 321
  • Pdr_0147a.jpg
    Pdr_0147a.jpg
    75 KB · Views: 127

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,914
Reaction score
1,156
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Boy, that DC-8 sure looks like a spacious, comfortable plane, doesn't it!

Well, pay attention to the third bullet point...
 

Attachments

  • Pdr_0145a.jpg
    Pdr_0145a.jpg
    82.3 KB · Views: 188

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
:D
Yep, it was a normal trick, used even in promotional artist views.
The original 1953 DC-8 had a 35 degrees swept. See attached.
 

Attachments

  • dc-8.jpg
    dc-8.jpg
    226.3 KB · Views: 688

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
Skybolt said:
:D
Yep, it was a normal trick, used even in promotional artist views.
The original 1953 DC-8 had a 35 degrees swept. See attached.

Why would they show a diagram with a 35-degree sweep as a "trick" instead of a 30-degree sweep? From what I remember the 30-degree set up worked just fine...


Kendra Lesnick
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
128
KJ, the trick I was referring is reducing by 25 per cent the dimensions of passenger in the model to make the cabin look roomier....
 

KJ_Lesnick

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,033
Reaction score
26
Skybolt said:
KJ, the trick I was referring is reducing by 25 per cent the dimensions of passenger in the model to make the cabin look roomier....

Okay, I understand now
 

nugo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
337
Reaction score
11
Hi All!
 

Attachments

  • Picture 074.jpg
    Picture 074.jpg
    448.2 KB · Views: 472
  • Picture 075.jpg
    Picture 075.jpg
    279.6 KB · Views: 424

nugo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
337
Reaction score
11
and

source: NGM,1953,Vol.CIV,N6( December)
 

Attachments

  • Picture 073a.jpg
    Picture 073a.jpg
    608.8 KB · Views: 427

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
26,716
Reaction score
3,492
Hi,


the DC-8 original model and some developments.
 

Attachments

  • DC-8.JPG
    DC-8.JPG
    61.3 KB · Views: 331
  • DC-8-71.JPG
    DC-8-71.JPG
    30 KB · Views: 132
  • DC-8-83.JPG
    DC-8-83.JPG
    19.9 KB · Views: 139

MaxLegroom

Why not?
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
150
Reaction score
19
Skybolt said:
:D
Yep, it was a normal trick, used even in promotional artist views.
The original 1953 DC-8 had a 35 degrees swept. See attached.

Seeing this drawing reminds me that I saw a Douglas promotional video of this design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34wgncbqBI4
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
26,716
Reaction score
3,492
In Air Pictorial 2/1956,


a strange option or considerable choice for Douglas DC-8 to be powered by six engines
instead off four engine,also a three different fuselage shapes,is that a weird Info ?.
 

Attachments

  • DC-8.png
    DC-8.png
    171.4 KB · Views: 33
Top