Talk:Boeing 727/Archive 1

727 comments
I was under the impression that BA never really operated in the 727. I think it is misleading to include this given that they only leased it from ATA and their franchisee in S. Africa Comair operated it. 163.1.141.16 00:14, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

THis page bears an uncanny resemblance to the external page at this url: http://www.gizmohighway.com/transport/boeing_727.htm
 * The page currently has a note at the bottom about using material from www.wikipedia.org (here). -Fnlayson (talk) 13:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

727 wings
I saw the B727's wings could only expand 26% of the wings surface and this article says the wings can double their surface area! What gives? 24.44.77.99 18:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * They made a mistake. The flaps increase the wing-area by 25% or 26%.  They double the overall lift AVKent882 (talk) 00:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Largest 727 operators
Who were the largest operators of the 727? Andros 1337 16:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The "Need" for the 727
"Even as the larger 747s came about in 1970, international airlines still needed the 727." is the most redundant, pointless sentence I have ever heard. That's like saying "Even though RVs became prevalent in the 1980s, people still needed cars." No kidding! I am removing it. 136.176.103.117 23:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

MTOW
Recently added MTOW specification corrected according to Boeing specifications found here: Carguychris 23:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Some more trivia
I only once flew in a 727 in an American Airlines flight from Kennedy to Dallas-Fort Worth in 1982. Being a smoker I was seated very much in the back of the cabin (Yeah in those days you could smoke in an aircraft - though you were banned to the back of the cabin) and found it EXTREMELY noisy!!

A few yers later I heard that in one incident (Forgot causes and détails) a 727 repeatedly broke the speed of sound and pulled upto 6 g's. The aircraft (And all on board) landed safely, but, due to extensive dammage to the wings and hull, the machine had to be scrapped. Can anyone confirm this - find more détails? 81.246.186.208 21:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * That's because you were in the back of the plane, next to the engines. Ypsidan 14:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I flew in a 727-200 from Melbourne to Perth (Australia) in late '87 for the America's Cup. I was fortunate at the time to fly first class as a relative of mine worked for TAA (Trans Australian Airlines) now defunct. I still remember the ticket cost $110 AUS - return to fly around 8000kms. The flight was approx. 4 hours into headwind going from east to west coast. What a plane very smooth and quiet (up front). I beleive that with a stage three upgrade to engines along with wing improvements the 727 would be even better, though we'd have to ask Mr. Trump about that one. The best feature is the built in rear ramp, great design.

History vs. About
I mistakenly thought that the About heading was vandalism. I have since checked the history of the article, and realize I was wrong to claim vandalism in this case. About was added as a heading during an extensive rewrite about two-three weeks ago. However, I do not believe it is a good heading title for this type of article. History is more appropriate, and is the norm in most aircraft articles, such as the related 737, and most of the military aircraft articles. I will not contest changing History back to About if there is a concensus here to do so. I realize the body still needs some work, and I will be trying to help as I can. --BillCJ 18:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Paragraphs about major airlines retiring the 727
After doing some brief cleanup, it occured to me that placing the planes' retirement at the beginning of the "History" section seems disjointed. It makes more sense for the entire section to read in chronological order. I suggest placing Paragraph #3 ("At the turn of the 21st century...") and #4 ("Faced with higher fuel costs...") near the end between Paragraphs #13 ("Major airlines that have flown the jet...") and #14 ("In August 2006 a total of 620..."). In my humble opinion, the list of major airlines is a great prelude to the paragraphs about why they retired the plane. What does everyone else think? Carguychris 20:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

noise error
I took out a sentence about the 727 being one of the loudest commercial aircraft. It is not. It's stage II, not I. From personal experience, it isn't as loud as the 707. The Concorde was very noisy.

I replace the sentence with the fact that it is stage II, since this is an objective measure, not just my opinion. Archtrain 16:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Anyone can CLAIM anything. You need to cite verifiable sources in all the changes you've been making to the airliner pages, or otherwise it is considered Original research, even if you are trying to base it on fact. You have to cite your facts. - BillCJ 17:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the above statement by BillCJ is referring to the statement about the loudest, not my statement about stage II. Archtrain 20:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Either way content needs to be referenced per WP:CITE and other Wikipedia policies. -Fnlayson 20:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Picture swap
I am switching the DHL 727 picture with the Air Canada picture. Both are being retained in the article. The difference is the AC picture hides the center engine, which is a feature that makes the aircraft recognizable. The AC picture was originally at the top of the infobox, a high visability position.

If you disagree, merely make a comment here and feel free to change it. Archtrain 20:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you mean the image of the DHL 727 on the ground in the article, no. Flight images are preferable for aircraft in the Infobox.  Look at the PanAm and Sun Country images on the 727 Commons page. -Fnlayson 20:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

British origins
There is no mention in the development section about how the 727 almost exactly matches the HS.121 Trident's original specifications, of which a "US delegation including people from Boeing was given full access to the plans", David Maltby.

This is quite significant and I'm surprised it isn't mention in either the Trident or 727 articles on wikipedia. Maybe someone would like to read up and write up on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.237.47.51 (talk) 03:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Response at Talk:Hawker Siddeley Trident. Let's try to keep the discussions in one place. - BillCJ (talk) 05:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)