727 (s)  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Full Scale planes, cars, helis, boats >> Airplanes - Full Scale >> 727 (s)
Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
727 (s) - 2/22/2004 5:15:13 AM   
rc12


 

Posts: 252
Joined: 11/21/2003
From: Olathe, KS, USA
Status: offline 		I have noticed recently that 727s have droped from around $6,000,000 to around $500,000 in some places. Is this because of their age or due to Delta Airlines selling all their 727's. This is just a question I thought I would bring up.
       Post #: 1

RE: 727 (s) - 2/22/2004 7:36:57 AM   
GRANT ED



Posts: 2610
Joined: 4/13/2003
From: Adelaide, AUSTRALIA
Status: online 		The age of the aircraft combined with the fact that many do not comply with the ever stricter noise regs and that there are many newer aircraft sitting in the deserts around the world all add up to the 727 not having much value.
One would make an interesting house though.

(in reply to rc12)
       Post #: 2

RE: 727 (s) - 2/22/2004 8:55:45 AM   
Jim C.



Posts: 730
Joined: 1/4/2003
From: armagh, PA, USA
Status: offline 		i heard the MD-80's are to be phased out by next year also due to the noise issue.. dunno who true that is tho?

_____________________________

http://jimsrc.com
Mulligan Hill RC Club

(in reply to GRANT ED)
       Post #: 3

RE: 727 (s) - 2/22/2004 10:15:59 PM   
rc12


 

Posts: 252
Joined: 11/21/2003
From: Olathe, KS, USA
Status: offline 		That is the thing, they do comply with current nosie regs. All the ones I have seen have stage three hush kits on them. From what I see is they only need stage two to be legal. Their for I would think they would be snached up by the lower class cargo carriers. Not being laied of from them. Also they would make GREAT private jets for their size and current puzzling low cost.

(in reply to Jim C.)
       Post #: 4

RE: 727 (s) - 2/22/2004 10:21:52 PM   
MajorTomski



Posts: 1401
Joined: 5/1/2003
From: Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Status: offline 		Please remember that a Part 25 airplane like the 727 is under a very big, expensive OEM maintenance plan. The FAA used to operate two ex Lufthansa airplanes. A Boeing service rep pointed out that they make more money selling new airplanes not fixing old ones. So you just raise the required inspections to the point that it's cheaper to buy new. And in today's market the old three holer isn't very fuel efficient.

(in reply to rc12)
       Post #: 5

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 1:14:58 AM   
rc12


 

Posts: 252
Joined: 11/21/2003
From: Olathe, KS, USA
Status: offline 		Most of the ones I see, well allmost half I see just went through their C less than 200 hours ago. That is one Expencive thing to do to an aircraft that you are about to sell! C is when they basicly tear the plane apart and put it back together!

(in reply to MajorTomski)
       Post #: 6

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 11:19:04 AM   
GRANT ED



Posts: 2610
Joined: 4/13/2003
From: Adelaide, AUSTRALIA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: GraupnerFan

i heard the MD-80's are to be phased out by next year also due to the noise issue.. dunno who true that is tho?


I doubt that. Northwest still has DC-9's, the oldest being made I believe in the late 60's / early 70's and they have not made any firm plan's to replace them yet.
Also its not only older planes like 727's being parked. Newer designs such as 747-400's, 767-300 and the like are also in storage. The main problem being after 911 and the SARS problem a lot of airlines simply had to much capacity. It cost less to put a plane in temp storage than to have it flying around 80% empty.

(in reply to Jim C.)
       Post #: 7

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 12:21:25 PM   
LearjetMech


 

Posts: 515
Joined: 9/22/2003
From: Corinth, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Another reason 727's being phased out is it takes 3 to fly them. Back in college I did a report on UPS and their 727QF's (Quiet Frieghter). Dee Howard converted old 727's to an all glass cockpit and made it a 2 person airplane. Also put Rolls Royce engines in them. You can tell these aircraft by the oblong #2 intake. They initially figured about a 1-2% fuel cost savings, and at 11 million coversion cost, the airplane would pay for itself in so many years. It turned out the fuel savings were 11%. The airplane ended up paying for itself in like 3 years. I have also seen some private 27's at our airport with winglets. Not sure what mod it is but it is pretty sharp. My Father-in-Law flew United in the 27. He loved it and sweared by it! It is a shame to see that airplane depart our skies!

(in reply to GRANT ED)
       Post #: 8

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 12:45:12 PM   
Eagle28SX


 

Posts: 4
Joined: 2/22/2004
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline 		I used to fly the UPS Rolls Royce powered 727's, and now fly their MD-11's. The cockpits were converted to EFIS, but they were not converted from 3 to 2-person cockpits. The FE was still onboard. Even with the RR powered aircraft being stage 3 compliant, we still parked many (15, I think) of them in the desert. They just are not as efficient as our 757's for the shorter trips that these aircraft fly. The RR 727 has a max tow of 169,500#. The 757 has a max takeoff weight of 250,000# with about the same (or slightly less) fuel burn, and one less crewmember. We are still operating many of these RR 727's, and will for the next 2 years. After that, they will be retired to the desert. BTW - these 727's also have Head-Up display systems, allowing them to be hand-flown to CAT III minimums - very nice airplane.

(in reply to LearjetMech)
       Post #: 9

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 3:41:33 PM   
FLYBOY



Posts: 8692
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: Missoula, MT, USA
Status: offline 		The company I used to fly jets for owns a company in Seattle that puts winglets on boeing airplanes. They also do the winglets on the G2. It is an interesting mod. Does a lot for the BBJ series from what I am told. I don't know much about how they do it, but now they are in a partnership with boeing doing it. Pretty cool stuff.

_____________________________

Fly it till the wings come off.

(in reply to Eagle28SX)
       Post #: 10

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 4:39:02 PM   
scottrc



Posts: 2309
Joined: 3/7/2003
From: A TREE, KS, USA
Status: offline 		The 727 by far is my favorite. It feels quick, agile, and has nice smooth lines. Every flight I had on one I talked to the pilots and they all said it is the Corvette or sports car of commercial airliners. No other plane performs as "hot" as this one. Of coarse, according to a number of NTSB reports and documentaries, the sporty design was the main reason for crashes. The pilot got too confident with flying the plane hands on, missed a procedure, and then missed an approached or came in too hot. An A&P buddy of mine who worked for Northwest in the 70's contested that until the FAA and Boing cracked down on pilot qualifications for the 727, they went through four times the number of brakes and struts than any other airliner in the fleet.

_____________________________

If you love that plane, set it free, if it doesn't return, you should've checked your battery.

(in reply to FLYBOY)
       Post #: 11

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 7:49:23 PM   
Jimmbbo



Posts: 1179
Joined: 10/1/2003
From: Fresno, CA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GraupnerFan

i heard the MD-80's are to be phased out by next year also due to the noise issue.. dunno who true that is tho?


Nope - the MD80 is "native Stage III compliant", meaning it was certified from inception to comply with the noise regs (FAR 36)... There have been some moves to have retrofitted Stage III aircraft banned, but that is far from a done deal.

Cheers!

Jim

_____________________________

Have you flogged your crew today?

(in reply to Jim C.)
       Post #: 12

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 9:01:28 PM   
SunShyne



Posts: 3763
Joined: 12/25/2002
From: Centreville, VA, USA
Status: offline 		interesting discussion..on the 727. growing up and plane spotting I used to love watching them leave DCA heading north. man that thing is LOUD!!!! Impressive takeoffs were only part of it as the visual of the 3 engines was neat.

Recently I watched a special on Discovery Wings and a 777 pilot said the 727 was ineffecient and underpowered.


hmm..

_____________________________

http://www.SendTextMessage.net
Revver Bro #86

(in reply to Jimmbbo)
       Post #: 13

RE: 727 (s) - 2/23/2004 10:26:26 PM   
LearjetMech


 

Posts: 515
Joined: 9/22/2003
From: Corinth, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Eagle---I stand corrected! I guess college professors AREN'T always right like they think they are! (LOL)

(in reply to SunShyne)
       Post #: 14

RE: 727 (s) - 2/24/2004 2:49:24 PM   
Jim C.



Posts: 730
Joined: 1/4/2003
From: armagh, PA, USA
Status: offline 		hmm must just be the air force that is phasing them out then... but they are doing it becasue of the noise i do know that. like i said that was just what i heard about all of them..

< Message edited by GraupnerFan -- 2/24/2004 9:52:06 AM >

_____________________________

http://jimsrc.com
Mulligan Hill RC Club

(in reply to LearjetMech)
       Post #: 15

RE: 727 (s) - 2/26/2004 5:17:23 PM   
rc12


 

Posts: 252
Joined: 11/21/2003
From: Olathe, KS, USA
Status: offline 		I like the idea of them being LOUD that is what a jet is supposed to be (in my world). :P

(in reply to Jim C.)
       Post #: 16

RE: 727 (s) - 2/27/2004 5:23:38 PM   
CANDOO



Posts: 11
Joined: 12/2/2001
From: Wasilla , AK, USA
Status: offline 		and it's still the only airliner that will CRUISE at .9

(in reply to rc12)
       Post #: 17