I’m working on a longish post, which involves the main competitor to this Boeing 707. But in my research, I stumbled upon a treasure trove of vintage pictures from LAX through the years, and I just had to share this one because of the cars in front of it. This was taken at the West Imperial Terminal, very familiar to me from the 70s, when we used to fly World Airways DC-10s regularly to the East Coast and Europe from there. This was taken on June 4, 1968. Not a lot of cars, but it’s a particularly eclectic bunch; no less then three out of seven are imports, and the domestics are not exactly the typical family sedans, Olds Cutlass coupe excepted. . But then this is LA.
That’s a pretty 707 to be sure, but for me THE classic 707 would be a Pan Am 320B Intercontinental. This picture shows clearly the ‘issue’ with the 707 and where the DC-8 had the advantage. No matter, they were both great passenger aircraft. Nice Olds too!
What’s the “issue”?
The “issue” might be that the 707 had lower wings than the DC8, so could not fit some of the larger diameter engines that came down the line later in the lives of the 707 and DC8. Not particularly relevant for a car site, and I am not sure about throwing the mystery issue out there and then not explaining it.
As Caledonian is British (Scottish, to be specific), I am going with Austin A55 Cambridge Mark II Saloon or A60 Cambridge Saloon for that fin on the left side of the photo.
The first aircraft to fly with the now ubiquitous (all 737s since the -300 series and at least half of the A320 series) GE/SNECMA CFM56 was a 707 converted by Boeing in 1979. There were no commercial takers as the 707s seating capacity was by then considered economically unviable for four engines. The vast majority of DC-8 conversions (-71/72/73 series) were of the stretched -61 and -63 series. Only a handful (fewer than 10) of the short fuselage (but very long range) -62s were converted. The revenue from all those extra seats pushed the operating expenses into the black.
The CFM would go on to power most (now all) of the USAF’s fleet of KC-135 tankers (which despite the resemblance aren’t really 707s) the E-3 AWACS aircraft operated by Britain, France and Saudi Arabia (which are based on the commercial 707-320) as well as the US Navy’s E-6 command post. (also 707-based)
Sorry for not explaining. The issue was the landing gear was too short and the rear of the fuselage was too low to allow for lengthening. When the DC-8 debuted, I was told some Boeing engineers made fun of the 8’s tail-high profile, referring to the aircraft as a ‘stink bug’. What Boeing didn’t realize was that Donald Douglas learned an important lesson with the DC-4/6/7: advancing engine technology would eventually allow for heavier T.O. weights, so design the airframe with an eye towards future expansion. The DC-8 not only had tall landing gear, but also a massive wing main spar, and was easily ‘stretched’ into the Super 61 and 63 models, largest and heaviest jet transports before the 747. I guess in retrospect the 707’s shortcomings prompted Boeing to develop the 747, so it really wasn’t a failure in the long run.
Yes, although Boeing did seriously consider stretched 707s as well, presumably with a revised landing gear.
Anyway, Boeing had the last laugh, as the the 707 outsold the DC-8 2:1, even without the stretch versions.
BTW, this is a 707-399C, of the 320C family, the final and ultimate version of the 707.
The Rolls-Royce engined BOAC 707’s (420’s?) were also very impressive.
Thanx ! great photos .
-Nate
I think the car at the bottom with only its fin showing might be Mercedes Benz, perhaps a W111?
What is the other Mercedes? A W108 sedan?
I’m now quite convinced it’s a Rekord P1.
For the fin, I want to say a fintail Mercedes. Or should it have some chrome trim on it?
Paul,
I liked this post – very historic, and LAX was the first major airport that I flew into as a toddler in the mid-’80s.
You realize that the date on which the photo was taken – June 4, 1968 – is a significant date in history. That evening, Bobby Kennedy won the California primary and was tragically assassinated a few hours later.
I’m going for the Rekord. They have a wrap around back glass with a wide chrome surround molding. The one to the left of the Cutlass has me stumped, though. It looks familiar, but I can’t put my finger on it.
Great photo, looking forward to the post.
Karmann Ghia. No?
That’s my guess too.
This series keeps reminding me of the disparity in technology between aviation and automotive, especially since the ’40 s. The cars may as well be horse pulled buggies, versus the 707. Great pic though!
Good point. Cars and planes are much closer now, at least in appearance, due to aerodynamics.
Not sure about a technology gap here, the Cadillac has jet power written all over its tail…:-
I assumed Opel Rekord even before seeing any comments, so I think we have a quorum on that one. I’m less confident about the Ghia, but I think any of the French or Italian alternatives are very unlikely.
Looks 100% Ghia to me.
Pre-1961 Ghia, based on the small taillights and lack of bumper overriders.
Now I’m getting 2nd thoughts … could the Opel in fact be a Taunus? Unlikely. I still say Opel.
Given that the photo was taken in the US, the American cars make perfect sense, and a Taunus is very unlikely.
I like the Caledonian livery on the plane, quite fetching. We used to fly World from LAX to Frankfurt in the early 80’s, at the time we thought the service was fairly miserable, however compared to what passes for service on the US carriers today, it would probably compare very favorably…
That tailfin on the Cadillac rivals the one on the 707 though! Was that the tallest fin ever on a car?
Do you remember how narrow the seats were on World’s DC-10s? They squeezed in 10 seats across, when everyone else had nine across. That would never work today, given how much wider most folks are.
Yes.
Northwest Orient configured at least some DC-10’s that way. I imagine JAL might have, at least on the short-haul routes.
I dont remember the seats being too narrow on the World DC-10 we flew HNL to LAX, but I was pretty narrow myself back then. That 707 also had narrow seats, 17″, in economy, just like the latest 737 models. One other advantage of the DC-8, a wider cabin allowing 18″ seats in economy.
Hmm… The 707 was actually one inch wider than the DC-8, as per the demand of American Airlines President C.R. Smith who insisted on that in order to commit to the 707.
We can both do some fact checking, but I remember the story went somewhat differently. Douglas widened the DC-8 by four inches more than the 707 for United Airlines after Boeing was committed and could do nothing to counter. C.R. had some other beef with Douglas at the time and didnt want to do business with them anyway.
Widened the fueslage or the wing span?
Changing the fuselage just for that would be one VERY big undertaking
I always thought the forward-pointing “needle” on the top of the 707’s vertical stabilizer looked rather rakish. What was its actual purpose?
The 707 itself does have to be considered *the* classic jetliner, for longevity over a range of uses if nothing else. While they all left passenger service long ago and are probably gone from civilian cargo service too, so many military variants use the 707 airframe (notably the KC-135 and E-8 AWACS) to this day.
It’s the HF radio antenna.
The KC-135 isn’t a true 707. Technically it was the original Boeing Model 717. (not to be confused with the renamed McDonnell Douglas MD-95). The fuselage diameter is smaller than a commercial 707 (but larger than the 367-80 prototype now at the Smithsonian) and there are numerous systems differences.
The E-3 AWACS, E-6 Mercury, and E-8 J-STARS are all based on the commercial 707. (the J-STARS are all former airline 707s) The VC-137s that carried presidents and other government VIPs for decades were also 707-based.
I had heard that about the KC-135 but since forgotten, and I’m quite embarrassed that I labeled the AWACS the E-8 rather than E-3. That’s what I get for attempting to post coherently after midnight!
No one has mentioned the car parked next to the T-Bird. Looks like a ’67 or ’68 Imperial.
Looks like a ’66+ Lincoln to me.
The shape of the greenhouse and the vent window says ’65-66 Ford or Mercury to me, and I think I can almost make out the raised “fin” of the Merc rear deck.
And what about the ’59 Cadillac convertible next to the Mercedes?
A Mercedes-Benz “Heckflosse” and a Cadillac “tailfin” together.
Contrast this pic with what would be found today…..
That old West Imperial Terminal at LAX is now the Flightpath Learning Center museum. For anyone visiting LA or on a long layover, I highly recommend it. Open 10-3, Tuesday to Saturday. There is an old Union Oil Company executive DC-3 that you can tour and you never know what may be parked on the adjacent ramp, with an excellent view of the south runway complex, they will escort you outside to take pictures.
http://flightpathmuseum.com/visit-us/visitor-information/
I’m surprised that no one has mentioned the smog. The sky is filthy, unless some hard weather is coming in.
No ;
That’s how it was until the mid 1990’s here .
Drawing a deep breath on a Summer’s day , the smog felt like a knife going into your lungs .
-Nate
Great shot, and a sign of what is best about contributing to CC – you get to find photos like this.
An interesting contrast to the 1970 view of London Heathrow I posted earlier in the year.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-outtakes/car-show-classics-on-the-ramp-waiting-for-a-vc-10-a-dc-10-or-maybe-concocrde/
The Minor van in that post is in the colours of British Caledonian Airways, a successor to Caledonian Airways.
And if you like dated TV adverts, Google YouTube for “I wish they were all Caledonian Girls” to a Beach Boys tune you can probably guess