Talk:Boeing 707/Archive 2

707-700
The article currently says "Boeing abandoned the program, since it felt it would be a threat to the Boeing 757 program." This is not true, the problem was that airlines did not want to plunk down the 10.4 million to convert them. I've got a bunch of other info on the development, marketing, and pitch with this plane, does anybody think it warrants its own footnote distinct from the paper airplanes like the 620 and 820? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgw89 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * As it flew it probably deserves to be pulled out of the what ifs and promoted to a section like the other variants, I have a reference I can add for the threat to the 757 program! MilborneOne (talk) 18:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Range of the -138 and 138B
I want to know what the range of the 707-138 is. I've looked everywhere but I don't see the actual number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.59.88 (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Boeing 707. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081116193226/http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRNews1/FRNews02/FR020512.htm to http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRNews1/FRNews02/FR020512.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Tail antenna
One of the 707's most distinctive features is the antenna that protrudes forward from the top of the aircraft's tail. I was surprised to see that there's no mention of this in the article. Some explanation would be helpful. Thanks. 64.185.129.173 (talk) 20:38, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Its just an HF aerial and not particularly notable. MilborneOne (talk) 21:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * A few early 707s and a lot of 720s did not have the aerial as they were used for domestic flights and didnt use HF. MilborneOne (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Boeing 707. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120911085224/http://www.boeing.com:80/commercial/airports/707.htm to http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/707.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430103225/http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/product.html to http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/product.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:10, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boeing 707. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107044727/http://flug-revue.rotor.com/frnews1/FRNews02/FR020512.htm to http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRNews1/FRNews02/FR020512.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:57, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boeing 707. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120526140846/http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/707sec3.pdf to http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/707sec3.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

707-436?
So what is a Boeing 707-436 then? It isn't listed in the variants, all you have is a "707-420" which is supposed to be the variant sold to BOAC, but the photograph right next to it is of a BOAC "707-436 in 1970". I came here to find out what a -436 was, since I've seen models of it and videos on Youtube, but it doesn't tell me.

Idumea47b (talk) 10:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * As linked to in the first paragraph under "Variants", see List of Boeing customer codes. - BilCat (talk) 11:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Planes in active service: Lead inaccurate needs updating
This article's lead says "As of July 2017, there were no active 707s in commercial airline service." This article 2019 Saha Airlines Boeing 707 crash shows that could not have been the case, because the plane involed in the crash was in service for a commercial airline between May 2016 and January 2019. Since the source with information for the lead is inaccurate, we don't know if there weren't/aren't others in service. Any way to find this out? If not, we should at least remove the text in question. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It is not inaccurate since the text states "As of 2017", but it is older. The newer 2018 Airliner directory from Flight is linked here. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

main picture
Although the current picture is nice and crisp, I'm not sure it's representative as it shows a very rare -138 shrink (1.5% of all 707s), and it could be mistaken for the slightly shorter Boeing 720. The much more widespread -320 (two thirds of all 707s) should be more representative. The Pan Am has a similar depiction and the Western is an interesting air-to-air picture, showing the fuselage unobstructed. Both are grainy pictures, but it's a part of the era. The RAAF is a recent, crisp picture but the unusual operator may be distracting, as is the Saha one, but it is notable as the last passenger carrier.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 17:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It would probably be best to use a -320. The Pan Am one makes sense as they were the first 707 operator and top of the primary users list. Are you sure the Western pic is actually real? It looks like a painting to me! The RAAF one is angled well and fuselage showing fairly clearly but the writing on the side makes it a bit too non-generic. The Qantas -138 pic could be moved down to sit in the Further developments section where the Western pic is currently. Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I would agree that the Pan Am 320B image would be more relevant to the 707 history. MilborneOne (talk) 18:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)