US Supersonic Transport (SST) Program 1960-1971

Oh, right.

Which airline that was planning on flying 2707s has the prettiest livery for the late 1970s and early 1980s?
 
I have small wooden models made in the Philippines of the 2707-100 variant with wings open and nose straight ( so just after flight). They are about 9" long and I have posted pics of them in this thread.

I took the decision to have them made in the airline liveries applicable in 1967 when the models were made. This reflected the Pacmin models given by Boeing to airlines at the time.

Sadly those lovely schemes would not have been applied to the real planes if they had ever entered service. I suspect that like many early airliners they would have been left in natural finish with just small lettering for the airline names.
 
uk 75 said:
....

Sadly those lovely schemes would not have been applied to the real planes if they had ever entered service. I suspect that like many early airliners they would have been left in natural finish with just small lettering for the airline names.
Click to expand...
Hi uk 75,
Possible liveries for SSTs is a interesting subject. For example Concorde was painted all white for a reason, it radiates heat. If you remember the one painted Pespi dark blue, it was limited in speed, cause the paint would peel of. So for any livery other than white for the SST, they would have had to make special heat resistant paints for many colors.
As for leaving the plane natural metal, well that's another possible problem. these were supposed to be made of titanium, and that doesn't look cool as pretty as bare aluninum. As soon as exposed to oxygen environment, Titanium surface oxidize fast and take a mat dark brownish grey color. Not very nice for airline PR purpose. Maybe a special protective varnish would have done the trick...
 
galgot said:
Oh I see :) Well I've not played with that 2707-300 model for a while. Last time was 2 years ago I did a touch and go at Edward AFB whatif vid:
Will have to redo a -300 at one point anyway, but as a 1/144 scale model, so will see of a 321 seats type is doable... Already did a 1/200 scale version, will post images in the models section if interested.
Click to expand...
That's a lovely video. I'm curious about how you rendered it, what sim, if any, you used. Your test livery looks like a perfectly period correct TWA scheme. This is the basic scheme a plane delivered in early 1978, per the schedule printed in Aviation Week, would have worn.
 
MaxLegroom said:
That's a lovely video. I'm curious about how you rendered it, what sim, if any, you used. Your test livery looks like a perfectly period correct TWA scheme. This is the basic scheme a plane delivered in early 1978, per the schedule printed in Aviation Week, would have worn.
Click to expand...
Yes it's supposed to be the TWA scheme but without "TWA", someone knowing much than me about airlines/airliners suggested that livery. works well for the time frame, like a prototype painted in one of the launch customer colours used in test before having the whole correct livery for promotion purpose.
The plane was done and animated in Blender, vid was rendered through a render farm, then post-worked in After Effects. I've uploaded some alternate versions and other shots that didn't made it in the final long vid, can see here :
Some BoeingSST shorts.
 

Attachments

  • farue6jgercd1.jpeg
    farue6jgercd1.jpeg
    1.7 MB · Views: 77
  • large_01.jpg
    large_01.jpg
    101.5 KB · Views: 70
  • 026.jpg
    026.jpg
    408.8 KB · Views: 68
  • 027.jpg
    027.jpg
    472.6 KB · Views: 62
  • 028.jpg
    028.jpg
    396.3 KB · Views: 58
  • 061.jpg
    061.jpg
    379.8 KB · Views: 55
  • img_4949_1824x1216_2.jpg
    img_4949_1824x1216_2.jpg
    298.6 KB · Views: 89
Last edited:
What is this?
 

Attachments

  • what is this.jpg
    what is this.jpg
    576.7 KB · Views: 106
Thanks a lot galgot san!
Side view of this model looks like B2707-300.
Boeing and Lockheed has designed many SSTs, but their efforts have not paid off.
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • 6ed1190b-9a36-4dc5-9ad5-0758a795891d.jpg
    6ed1190b-9a36-4dc5-9ad5-0758a795891d.jpg
    194.7 KB · Views: 59
  • 8c77b261-76ab-4ef8-8344-382cc2164833.jpg
    8c77b261-76ab-4ef8-8344-382cc2164833.jpg
    759.4 KB · Views: 55
  • 36cee522-e93b-43bd-b0ce-d60163d0810a.jpg
    36cee522-e93b-43bd-b0ce-d60163d0810a.jpg
    398.2 KB · Views: 54
  • 171d32d4-5d54-42dc-a6de-1b130a35176a.jpg
    171d32d4-5d54-42dc-a6de-1b130a35176a.jpg
    563.3 KB · Views: 54
  • 2707 CABIN.jpg
    2707 CABIN.jpg
    772 KB · Views: 60
  • b3908099-b6e4-4476-8550-a42875f10dbc.jpg
    b3908099-b6e4-4476-8550-a42875f10dbc.jpg
    1,003.7 KB · Views: 55

Attachments

  • 3537932960_b83a2a46a1_o.jpg
    3537932960_b83a2a46a1_o.jpg
    69.9 KB · Views: 54
  • 1674020238644.jpg
    1674020238644.jpg
    123.7 KB · Views: 54
Last edited:
Apart from any ecological/economical aspects, what are the pure engineering/technological considerations/limitations with respect to the Boeing SST ever actually taking to the skies and meeting its basic performance specifications? Asking for a non Boeing employed friend here ...
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
Apart from any ecological/economical aspects, what are the pure engineering/technological considerations/limitations with respect to the Boeing SST ever actually taking to the skies and meeting its basic performance specifications? Asking for a non Boeing employed friend here ...
Click to expand...
I don't think there was any engineering issues involved. Yes, the plane would be titanium and titanium sucks to work on. Lockheed figured it out in the 1950s.

It ran on standard JP4/Jet A. It used the same jetways as 707s at the airport.

The major challenge I've seen from reading the General Description of the 2707-300 (pdf in this thread, I can upload a copy if you need one) is that the cockpit is a long way ahead of the nose gear, so the ground handling is a bit tricky to keep the nose gear on the pavement. Could be fixed by giving the pilots a camera attached to the NLG to display on the control panel, but a TV camera in the 1960s was not a small chunk of equipment.
 
martinbayer said:
Apart from any ecological/economical aspects, what are the pure engineering/technological considerations/limitations with respect to the Boeing SST ever actually taking to the skies and meeting its basic performance specifications? Asking for a non Boeing employed friend here ...
Click to expand...
Very good question. We need Boeing's answer.
I used to read by some book that there were still some problems to overcome for Boeing which need cost.
It's one of the reason why 2707-300 was cancelled.
For example, the SR-71 and XB-70 suffered from fuel leaks, but was there any prospect of resolving this problem with the B2707-300?
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
...

The major challenge I've seen from reading the General Description of the 2707-300 (pdf in this thread, I can upload a copy if you need one) is that the cockpit is a long way ahead of the nose gear, so the ground handling is a bit tricky to keep the nose gear on the pavement. Could be fixed by giving the pilots a camera attached to the NLG to display on the control panel, but a TV camera in the 1960s was not a small chunk of equipment.
Click to expand...
Seems there was provision of a "TV camera" installed inside the fuselage, with a retractable episcope, giving view to the whole front gear and fuselage/nose when taxying. Maybe other angles too.

B2707-300_FRONT.jpg
 
Last edited:
galgot said:
Seems there was provision of a "TV camera" installed inside the fuselage, with a retractable episcope, giving view to the whole front gear and fuselage/nose when taxying. Maybe other angles too.

View attachment 756574
Click to expand...
Ah-hah! And there we go, a way to see that the pilot is keeping the nose gear on the yellow brick road and out of the dirt.

I honestly think that all the issues with the 2707 were economic, not technologic. They would have burned a crapton of fuel, ~360,000lbs for 3800nmi range. And they'd carry 2/3rds the passengers of a 747.

That 747 will burn maybe 300,00lbs of fuel for the same distance, so cost per seat-mile is high. Call it 1.8x that of a 747.

Plus the 2707 is going to be significantly more expensive to buy in the first place. It's been a while, but IIRC the Boeing Surplus store sold titanium at ~$7/lb for big chunks to machine parts from and aluminum at less than ~$1/lb.

And when the not-friends in the Middle East say, "by the way, we are quadrupling oil prices" that absolutely kills the case for one. Since it's burning even more fuel than a 747-100 per flight, and flying 2-3x more often.
 
Hi
https://flic.kr/p/kgPeM8
View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bngphotos/12649742645

https://flic.kr/p/27TiiY3
View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/42587351790/in/album-72157622126099246/


www.lajeteepress.com

PanAm Boeing 2707-300 at WorldPort — La Jetée Press

A Pan American Boeing 2707-300 “docked” at the Pan Am WorldPort, JKF International Airport, New York, as it could have been the mid 70s. Concept art by artist and aeronautics enthusiast Gaël Elegoët. This image is available as a 16x20 Giclee Fine Art Print on archival Hahnemuhle fine art papers. Pri
www.lajeteepress.com www.lajeteepress.com
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/12455336467228966/
View: https://jp.pinterest.com/pin/12455336467228966/
 

Attachments

  • 2c0bf34bf3a641fc9374e629fa61ac4c.jpg
    2c0bf34bf3a641fc9374e629fa61ac4c.jpg
    87.1 KB · Views: 61
  • 9b447ef595e5f7954a662b4349d6e6a2.jpg
    9b447ef595e5f7954a662b4349d6e6a2.jpg
    59.6 KB · Views: 61
  • boeing_2707-300_proto_inboard.jpg
    boeing_2707-300_proto_inboard.jpg
    152.9 KB · Views: 61
  • image_original.jpg
    image_original.jpg
    589.3 KB · Views: 64
Last edited:
Hi!
Source : Pinterest
 

Attachments

  • SST EARLY DESIGN.jpg
    SST EARLY DESIGN.jpg
    632.9 KB · Views: 51
  • d88d222d2ec37639bcf1f426171ca088.jpg
    d88d222d2ec37639bcf1f426171ca088.jpg
    90.7 KB · Views: 58

Attachments

  • ae7i8865.jpg
    ae7i8865.jpg
    206.8 KB · Views: 48
  • ae7i8873.jpg
    ae7i8873.jpg
    195.4 KB · Views: 50
  • ae7i8960.jpg
    ae7i8960.jpg
    164.2 KB · Views: 43
  • ae7i8880-pano-768x1039.jpg
    ae7i8880-pano-768x1039.jpg
    242.8 KB · Views: 42
  • ae7i8871.jpg
    ae7i8871.jpg
    179.5 KB · Views: 40
  • modele-Boeing-2707-supersonique-04.jpg
    modele-Boeing-2707-supersonique-04.jpg
    416.2 KB · Views: 68

The Ongoing Mystique of the Boeing SST - World Airline Historical Society

Written by Shea Oakley Last year I shelled out the most money I have ever paid for an airliner model in a lifetime of collecting. It is a five-foot-long 1/50th scale needle-nosed monster with working variable sweep wings, flaps and spoilers in Eastern Air Lines colors. On its tail is a...
wahsonline.com wahsonline.com
 

Attachments

  • EasternSSTModel.jpg
    EasternSSTModel.jpg
    86.3 KB · Views: 61
  • UnitedSSTModel.jpg
    UnitedSSTModel.jpg
    73.1 KB · Views: 64
RareBird said:
Yes all are 1/200, though I do have 1/100 factory model as well as several of the early 1/250? Scale 733 chrome models.
I know the 2707-300 without speed bumb bulges was pacmin, im trying to find out more about the 2707-300 with, as it seems to hold more significant history as pictures of it exist in the possession of many on the program.

How would you like to see? Two, three at a time? I can plenty more pix.
Click to expand...
Oh wow, browsing this mega-thread I realize I've missed this ! Hope you're still around :) Beautiful collection...
The 2707-300 with fairings on the wings would be a 1968-69 configuration, like the well known Boeing cutaway published in AWST in 12/1968:
1968120918_1.jpg
Can see the fairings there.
then the one without these fairing would be the "PPD" 1970 configuration, like the one published in AWST in 01/1970 (unfortunately at very bad quality...) :
AWST011970-2707-300-PPD.jpg
That one is very much like the last full scale mockup. Note the underwing streaks are still present, but much reduced in length, that is why maybe not reproduced on your model.

Also of note about the MG fairings on these 1968/69 models, seems Boeing tinkered with different solutions for these, on lots of others ref they are shown as a single bigger fairing instead of two long ones. Like on these images :
zBoeing 2707-300 - Vought Subcontractor Section Jan-29-69.jpg

sst04.JPG
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom