Talk:Boeing 707

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boeing 707 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Boeing 707 was copied or moved into List of accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 707 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 20, 2015.

Aviation: Aircraft

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Comet design limitations

" Freed from the design constraints imposed by the limitations of late-1940s jet engines, which led to the Comet disasters, developing a robust, safe, and high capacity jet aircraft was within Boeing's grasp." Perhaps we could include some explanation of how late-40s jet engine tech imposed design limitations that led to DeHavilland using square-framed windows on the Comet, which were the direct cause of the aforementioned disasters. Because it is not at all clear to me what engines have to do with window design. The Comet had issues with engines, but they had nothing to do with the lost aircraft.

64.223.108.253 (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A better explanation would be nice but such info is mostly irrelevant to the Boeing 707. I just trimmed the erroneous engine-Comet diaster text. Thanks, -Fnlayson (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Production count disparities

This article has conflicting numbers regarding 707 production, as follows:

865 707s produced, total (article lied & data panel) 856 707s produced, total (from the "707 Model summary" section of Orders & deliveries)

175 707-320B produced (article text, description of variants) 174 707-320B produced (707 Model summary)

335 707-320C produced (article text, description of variants) 337 707-320C produced (707 Model summary)

Boeing's website says 1,010 707 & 720 aircraft were produced in total, which matches the 856 figure. Sacxpert (talk) 06:39, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the differences are probably due to test airplanes being retained by Boeing and not delivered to customer(s), i.e. the built numbers do not match the delivered numbers. -Fnlayson (talk)

Uhm... I think someone can change that miscalculation? ChangeMyNamePlease (talk) 11:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why it took over two years to do it, but the article's self-conflicting numbers have been corrected, per the reference. 1peterk (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I now see that some parties keep correcting the figures, then other parties revert them. It's 865 707s, excluding (not including) the 720s. 1peterk (talk) 04:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes exactly. The model 720 was initially designated 707-020, hence some confusion. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]