[sci.military] Support for 707 variants

jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov (06/14/91)

From: jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov


>I recall hearing that there was concern about using old airframes {for
>such purposes as JSTARS and AWACS} if Boeing did indeed shut down the 
>707 production line {which they have indeed done}.

Hmm.  I thought a whole cottage industry had grown up around used 707s 
(ditto DC-8s).  Do their capabilities extend only to hush kits, or 
do some of them have the engineering horsepower to cope with something 
that differs more dramatically from a factory 707?

--Joe

major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) (06/18/91)

From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt)


jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov writes:
> Hmm.  I thought a whole cottage industry had grown up around used 707s 
> (ditto DC-8s).  Do their capabilities extend only to hush kits, or 
> do some of them have the engineering horsepower to cope with something 
> that differs more dramatically from a factory 707?
 
These modified 707s are approved 'militarized' versions.  Fully compliant 
with all the appropriate MILSTD (Military Standards).  Obviously, using any
other airframe (757, 767, 747) the cost of 'militarizing' would almost be
prohibitive.  

mike

norton@manta.nosc.mil (LT Scott A. Norton, USN) (06/20/91)

From: norton@manta.nosc.mil (LT Scott A. Norton, USN)

In article <1991Jun18.074226.14550@amd.com> bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) writes:
>jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov writes:
>> Hmm.  I thought a whole cottage industry had grown up around used 707s 
>> (ditto DC-8s).  Do their capabilities extend only to hush kits,  [...]
>These modified 707s are approved 'militarized' versions.  [...]

I noticed that, in their two prototype Joint STARS aircraft,
Grumman took used 707s, and _removed_ the hush kits, in order
to militarize them.

Some people thought this level of detail was not needed in
a prototype.  But thhen the aircraft were sent to the Gulf.

Scott Norton  <norton@NOSC.MIL>