DC8 VS 707 fuselage widths

[Arnold Morscher]

Looking at photos of DC8's and 707's, it appears to me that the DC8's have
much narrower fuselages than the 707 do. This seems true, even when
looking at the pre-stretch DC8 photes.

This strikes me as being odd, as I remember that the 707 and DC8's both
had six seats acrossin the economy section of the cabin. Can anyone quote
me a figure on fuselage width for the 2 aircraft?

Thanks alot,
Arnie

[Barry Oliver]

Arnold Morscher <ax...@po.CWRU.Edu> wrote in article
<5as50t$e...@kragar.kei.com>...

I just looked at a couple of books and could not find the width.

From memory the 707-320 and the DC8 fuselage width was nearly the same -
possibly within 6 inches of each other. Also I believe the 707, 727, and
737 had the same width fuselage.

The DC8 always looked longer to me partly because the cockpit is set back
farther than the 707 so the distance from the windshield to the tip of the
radome is longer on the DC8.

[Don Stokes]

In article <5attvr$6...@kragar.kei.com>,
Barry Oliver <bar...@wolfenet.com> wrote:
>Arnold Morscher <ax...@po.CWRU.Edu> wrote

>> Looking at photos of DC8's and 707's, it appears to me that the DC8's
>> have much narrower fuselages than the 707 do. This seems true, even
>> when looking at the pre-stretch DC8 photes.

>> This strikes me as being odd, as I remember that the 707 and DC8's both
>> had six seats acrossin the economy section of the cabin. Can anyone
>> quote me a figure on fuselage width for the 2 aircraft?

>I just looked at a couple of books and could not find the width.

>From memory the 707-320 and the DC8 fuselage width was nearly the same -
>possibly within 6 inches of each other. Also I believe the 707, 727, and
>737 had the same width fuselage.

DC-8: 147". 707: 148", and that only happened because although the 707
was longer than the original DC-8, it wasn't going to be as wide (and
would only seat five across with any kind of comfort), and the airlines
started rejecting it, preferring to wait another two years for the DC-8.
Boeing widened the cabin to be bigger (by an inch) than Douglas's, and
the orders came flooding back. (There were also performance problems,
which Boeing managed to lick just ahead of the customers bailing for the
DC-8 -- early 707s couldn't cross the USA in adverse conditions, whereas
the DC-8 could.)

The DC-8 looks narrow because of the windows -- they're much bigger (and
less of 'em) than on the 707 and subsequent jet aircraft. It did mean
that the DC-8 could leave seats with little access to windows because of
the spacing.

--
Don Stokes, Network Manager, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
d...@vuw.ac.nz(work) d...@zl2tnm.gen.nz(home) +64 4 495-5052 Fax+64 4 471-5386

[C. Marin Faure]

In article <5as50t$e...@kragar.kei.com>, ax...@po.CWRU.Edu (Arnold
Morscher) wrote:

> Looking at photos of DC8's and 707's, it appears to me that the DC8's have
> much narrower fuselages than the 707 do. This seems true, even when
> looking at the pre-stretch DC8 photes.

> This strikes me as being odd, as I remember that the 707 and DC8's both
> had six seats acrossin the economy section of the cabin. Can anyone quote
> me a figure on fuselage width for the 2 aircraft?

Having recently written a script for an in-house film about the Boeing
Dash-80, I can tell you that the interior fuselage width of the 707 was
two inches wider than the interior width of the DC-8. The 707 originally
was going to have five-abreast seating. The airlines wanted six-abreast
seating. Boeing said, no, this is the way we're going to build the
plane. The airlines said, fine, you do that; we'll buy DC-8s. Boeing
said, "Wait a minute," and redesigned the fuselage to be two inches wider
than the DC-8 with six-abreast seating. The 707 went on to be a winner
and Boeing learned a valuable lesson about listening to the customer.

The 707, 727, and 737 have identical fuselage diameters. The 757 actually
is a tad bit wider, but for all practical purposes, it is the same as the
707/727/737.

C. Marin Faure
author, Flying A Floatplane

[Thundercraft]

In article <5as50t$e...@kragar.kei.com>, ax...@po.CWRU.Edu says...

>Looking at photos of DC8's and 707's, it appears to me that the DC8's have
>much narrower fuselages than the 707 do. This seems true, even when
>looking at the pre-stretch DC8 photes.

>This strikes me as being odd, as I remember that the 707 and DC8's both
>had six seats acrossin the economy section of the cabin. Can anyone quote
>me a figure on fuselage width for the 2 aircraft?

Can't help you there, but I just wanted to add that the 707 (originally
-80) was originally being developed as 5 abreast. They had to change
because Douglas decided that they were going to build a 6 abreast.

The 707, 720, 727, and 737 all had similar fuselages. It was joked that
boeing was just building one long tube and that they cut off the desired
lenght for what ever a/c they were building. Not true, but a nice storey.

Going back to the DC8 (and DC9), Notice the nice 'crease' that runs along
the fuselage? I always thought that was a nice feature.

I had (HD crashed, still have to check floppies) a picture of a DC8-10
series a/c on decent that had speed brakes that came out of the fuselage
just behind the wings. Has anyone else seen or heard of these? The
picture was very grainy, but I had one of the directors of the Abbotsford
Intl. Airshow look at the picture and he had to agree with me even though
he had never heard of such a thing. Mabe that was a prototype experiment?

[Ray Clawson]

There is a picture of the 8 with the fuselage speed brakes extended in
the new book, "Great Airliners, volume Two, Douglas DC-8" by Terry
Waddington.

I believe they were installed on ship #1. There was not a prototype
built of the 8, the first ac went to work. According to the above
book, the speed brakes were removed as they proved ineffective.

Ray Clawson

WARNING: The return email address field has been altered to
foil bulk email spammers. If you reply to this message please
remove the * from the return address or it'll bounce.

[C. Marin Faure]

In article <5bejgs$6...@kragar.kei.com>, fau...@halcyon.com (C. Marin
Faure) wrote:

> In article <5as50t$e...@kragar.kei.com>, ax...@po.CWRU.Edu (Arnold

> Morscher) wrote:
>
> > Looking at photos of DC8's and 707's, it appears to me that the DC8's have
> > much narrower fuselages than the 707 do. This seems true, even when
> > looking at the pre-stretch DC8 photes.
>
> > This strikes me as being odd, as I remember that the 707 and DC8's both
> > had six seats acrossin the economy section of the cabin. Can anyone quote
> > me a figure on fuselage width for the 2 aircraft?
>

> Having recently written a script for an in-house film about the Boeing
> Dash-80, I can tell you that the interior fuselage width of the 707 was
> two inches wider than the interior width of the DC-8.

I just reviewed my script and according to it and the research material I
was given, the 707 fuselage was redesigned to be only ONE inch wider than
the DC-8, not two. Sorry... What I don't know is if this one inch
difference reflects the differences in interior floor widths, interior
cabin widths or exterior fuslelage widths.