In anticipation of it's long-awaited Dallas-Hawaii route award, Braniff placed an unannounced order for (2) 747's in 1968. Though the route was ultimately awarded in 1969, the 747 that was delivered in January 1971, would be a disappointment to "Jellybean" fans!
It was not an uncommon practice under the old system for airlines to order aircraft ahead of a hoped for new route award. The CAB was usually supportive to airlines that showed their enthusiasm for a possible new route and for BI, this would give us a giant "Jellybean", or so we thought!
Sadly, what was delivered in early 1971 was BIG and colorful but definitely NOT a "Jellybean", though the "End Of The Plain Plane" era was still in effect. The Black "BI" tail logo was body-colored, the "Braniff International" titles was smaller, White instead of Black and moved further forward & the Black Mask was nowhere to be found! We can only imagine how the real "Jellybean" White wings and engines would have looked! Though impressive, "Jellybean" fans were ultimately not happy (I remember my disappointment to this day) but let's remember the real "Jellybeans", as we take a look at the BI fleet during "End Of The Plain Plane" era (1965-71).
On June 15, 1965, BI's President Harding L. Lawrence announced that "new concepts of passenger service, as well as higher standards of operational performance [were] needed". A new and 'colorful' era had begun.

707-227/720-027....It would be the 720's that would take center stage in the 1st year of advertising.
This 1966 Ad was one of the best, showing the skies full of "Jellybeans"! The (5) 720-027's and the (4) 'Hot-Rod' 707-227's would make up BI's medium to long-range fleet.
It appears that the early "Jellybeans" were painted completely underneath in front of the wings and a small unpainted area was left behind the wings to the tail.
The above aerial image from the 1st photo shoot, shows off the White wing panels and White engines to good effect. The 720's fiberglass 'glove' shows up really nice also.
The (1) 720 A/C that would cause controversy for "Jellybean" fans was N7082.
It was (1) of (2) Aer Lingus 720-048's that was leased for (6) month periods between 1965-66 and the only one to get the "Jellybean" treatment. Though it had most of the elements for a "Jellybean" (no White engines), by keeping the Aer Lingus demarcation line, it really was more of a 1/2 "Jellybean" (IMO)!


While the 720's would make it through the "Jellybean" era, the (4) 707-227's were 'traded' in 1971 to BWIA for what would be the last (3) 2nd-hand 727 "Jellybeans" to be created in March-June '71.

727-027/C/QC
727-227......If there was (1) A/C type that would come to symbolize the "Jellybean" era, it was the 727-100.
It was a bit ironic that the 727 would require the only change in the famous "BI" tail logo during this period.
Due to the extreme angle of the 727 tail, the US flag had to be moved to the back. The 727's would be the only "Jellybeans" to wear this alteration. The 727-027's began to arrive in May '66 (N7270) and would have the unpainted area underneath but unlike the early paint jobs, the entire fuselage would have this unpainted strip below. The 727 paint scheme would remain constant throughout August 1967.
After their 1st year in service, BI would discover the dreaded exhaust build-up at the rear. Some 727 operators, like National Airlines, planned for this problem from day 1 in 1964 but BI as well as others would make the alteration in their factory deliveries. Braniff had Boeing make this alteration during the fall of 1967 (somewhere between N2790-95/Aug.-Oct. '67)

The (26) BI 727-100/QC's were delivered during 1966-67 and included the (4) -162's that were canceled by Pacific Northern Airlines. Reg#'s were N7270-96. Beginning in 1969, BI began purchasing 2nd-hand 727-100/C's.
The 'rule of thumb' on the 2nd-hand "Jellybeans" is the Reg#'s, all (11) ending in 'BN' (N297BN-308BN...as far as I could tell!)
This 1969 painted ex-Frontier -191 shows the typical look of these beautiful A/C! Though the 'Boeing 727' titles on the nacelle are missing, this seems to not be the norm for the (11) 2nd-handers. My 'hats off' to the BI paint crews! From the 1st 727 "Jellybean" in 1966 to the last 2nd-hand 727 in 1971, there was no noticeable difference in the "Jellybean" paint application other than the Reg#.
The one BIG disappointment for 727 fans, would come late in the "Jellybean" era, when in May 1971, BI leased N530EJ, originally owned by Executive Jet Corp (A/C leasing company). The 727-155C was delivered in a White fuselage/lower NMF scheme. A small Black-dot radome was soon replaced by a full Black one. Sadly, had Braniff just applied the Black Mask, we would have had the "Albino Jellybean"!
(the best I could create is this 'fake' hand-painted Black Mask that was added to the actual Mel Lawrence photo!)
NO 'faking' needed here , as the only (3) 727-227 "Jellybeans" arrived in June 1970.

L-188A/C.... The (10) L-188A's (N9701C-10C) and (1) leased L-188C from F.B. Ayer (N16816) would not make it to the end in 1971 but apparently were the only really solid "Jellybeans", so to speak.

The best 'belly' shot I could find, seems to show a solid paint job underneath, other than the wing area of course!
Those massive White nacelles were really the most impressive feature (IMO). Another unique L-188 "Jellybean" feature was up at the front.
Unlike all the other real "Jellybeans", the Black Mask did NOT come across the top of the cockpit area. I could think of no reason why this was done. The BI paint crews seemed to have trouble with the Black Mask angle from the windows to the nose-perhaps a lack of reference points?
Sadly, the impressive Electra "Jellybeans" were gone by mid-1969.

One-Eleven 203....There were almost no factory-deliverd One-Eleven's as the "Jellybean" era was introduced just as the final 1-11's were being prepared! Only (2) "Jellybeans" would leave Hurn, N1543 (Beige), would be featured in an 'End Of The Plain Plane' brochure , while her sister-ship N1544 (Orange) would smile for the pre-delivery photo shoot!
Originally the center-box/wing area was painted but by 1969, the unpainted areas were getting larger.
The One-Elevens began to be sold off prior to the end of the "Jellybean" era ([3] to lsd to Mohawk in'69-becoming the only Mohawk "Buckskins").

DC-8-33/55F
DC-8-62.... The DC-8 was not ever envisioned as a "Jellybean" but the 1967 Panagra merger changed all that! The (4) original Panagra -33's were taken in but it appears only (3) were repainted in "Jellybeans" and those were leased out within a few months, making them really RARE photos! Only (1) from the old ATP collection is known. The leased -55F was also quickly leased out. Now the soon-to-be delivered -62's were a much different story!

BI loved the -62's so much that that ordered (2) of their own, being delivered in 1969 as N1808E-09E.
(this belly shot shows the unpainted areas really nice).
The DC-8's would be the winner in the largest Black Mask contest!
(the 747 "Jellybean" would have won hands down!)

707-327C
707-138B....BI was a little late to the long-range Fan-jet but finally got there in 1967, when the (6) -327C's arrived mostly for the growing Military Airlift contracts in SE Asia.

(this T/O shot is the best I could find to show the unpainted areas).
The RARE 707C would be this Gray "Jellybean"!
(only kidding folks!....One of the quirks of film in camera's was the developing process in which the Blue N7099 appears Gray!)
One new development I did find was when BI started removing the White paint from the 707 engines. This George Hamlin photo from January 1970 gives us a verification date, as the engines have had their paint removed but the pylons are still White.
A December 1969 photo of the same 707-138B on Aussie Airliners website clearly shows it in White engines, so now have at least a time frame for the final alteration in the 707 "Jellybean" scheme. It would be the -327C's that would first fly the Dallas-Hawaii new route award in 1969, holding the fort until the non-'Jellybean' 747 arrived in Jan. '71.

I wish I had more time but our Braniff crew is waiting for us to get aboard our "Jellybean"!.........John3 (Special thanks to Chuck Gowing/Airlinecolors.com for his finding the RARE "BI-Jellybean" 1968 illustration-he also found a RARE American Airlines 747 in LB scheme for a future "LS", Rene Dannies/Airlines-Airliners.de, GoNavy.jp, Dave Jones/60'a Antique Airliners.com, JetPhotos.net, Airliners.net, WilliamDemarest.com & BraniffPages.com. Photographers: Bob Polaneczky, Terry Waddington, George W.Hamlin, Steve Williams, Mel Lawrence, Mike Martin, John P. Stewart & Terry Kincaid).

Planning a Pan American-Grace "LS" DC-8-62 (1965) down the road that will cover Panagra history and have been doing some research on his son's excellent website! Looking forward to posting that one. Thanks for your input on the DC-8 vs 707. I'm guessing that was probably one of the reason's for Seaboard World Airways short use of their 707C's? ("LS" #201-pg. 7 [pics removed] )



John

Great article, John- I look forward to all of the "Lost Schemes" threads.

I have always wondered why early 727 operators left the tail feather section unpainted, I even brought it up in a thread a while back asking if anyone knew why this was and someone explained that it had to do with balancing the rudder and that it was just less complicated to leave it unpainted. Your theory of soot accumulation makes sense too in that it would be easier to clean up the oily mess left behind from those early engines. Nevertheless, the unpainted rudder and center engine exhaust was kind of a hallmark look of early 727's!

Hello John,

I can't tell you how airline boards choose their airplane types because there are so many variables involved, and price, delivery schedules, spare part commonality with other types in the fleet, as well as the operational considerations all play a part in their decisions.

I have the Barry Schiff 707 book and I always thought that the "DC-Late" reference was referring to the DC-8 entering service later than the 707. Having said that, the higher speed difference that so many people attribute in favor of the 707 is something that my experience indicates to largely be fiction. The various model DC-8s have an Mmo of M.88 which is the same as the 707-320B/C, and our long range cruise to save fuel on both airplanes was M.80 at heavy weights and reducing as fuel was burned off to about M.78 and most long haul operations in the early days cruised both airplanes at M.82 on most stage lengths. The speed records that mostly belong to the 707 were accomplished with the small 707 or the 720 by American Airlines and were done for prestige purposes. Once they set those records, they never flew fast again. On the other hand, here at my current employer we flew the DC-8 using a cruise of M.84 on our flightplans when we needed to for the purpose of package delivery on time. Bad winds or other weather delaying our sort frequently called for this. The DC-8 can certainly go fast, but it is not really practical to do it for cost reasons on either the DC-8 or the 707.

As far as the airframes are concerned, the DC-8 is the stronger of the two. You do not see external straps riveted over the skin on a DC-8 to hold the skin on the frame, but you do on the 707. The DC-8 was not subject to the aging aircraft programs that the 707, 727, 737 and 747 were. You do not hear of cracks in the wing and horizontal stabilizer skins and spars on the DC-8, but you do on the 707. A DC-8 is docile and can be dispatched with the yaw damper inoperative, but the 707 cannot be. The DC-8 has four sets of leading edge slots, each operated by a single drum actuator for a total of four. The 707-320B/C have thirteen individual pieces of leading edge flap on each wing, each with an actuator for a total of twentysix. Yes, the actuator brackets do break. The skins on the pylons of the DC-8-62 and -63 do develop cracks from inflight reversing induced flexing over time, but so do the skins on the 707 pylons. In turbulence the electrical generators on the 707 would unparallel with great regularity, but I have never seen one do that on the DC-8. In 7,000+ hours on the DC-8 I never had a windshield crack, but I had four of them in less than a year when I was flying the 707. When starting a descent in the DC-8-62/63/50 you need to keep a small amount of power (about 1.1-1.2EPR) on the two inboard engines to keep the cabin descending when above 30,000 feet, but in the 707 it was necessary to do that all the way down almost to landing elevation. The DC-8 has enough bleed air to anti-ice/de-ice the airplane with idle power, but the 707 requires well above idle power to maintain its anti-icing capabilities. I never had a reverser stick in reverse on the DC-8-62/63/50, but it happened frequently on the fan sleeve reverser of the 707. I never had a hydraulic failure on the DC-8, but I had two of them on the 707. Admittedly, I have been very lucky on the DC-8! Come to think of it, I never had one in ten+ years on the 747 either, and it has four systems!

I could go on with comparisons, but you get the picture. In spite of appearances, I really DO like the 707! I just like the DC-8 more, that's all.

Later on I could give you a few stories...... I did fly a DC-8-55F (I also flew the DC-8-54F) on a military contract. The airplane was a former KLM bird and had a 328,000lb taxi weight and the rear pressure bulkhead moved further back.

Regards,
Jeff Jarvis

I think we just found us a new Contributor!!! I did double check that ARCO 707 book and it mentions that the DC-8 was as much as 20 minutes late when compared to the 707 on the same route, maybe that was speaking of the earlier turbine engines? It usually seemed that the U.S. Supplementals that did use both, got rid of their 707-320C's first! I hope you can post more of these really interesting stories in the future. Nothing better than 1st-hand information and a very good story-teller!



John

Greetings!

John, where do you want me to post any stories or anecdotes? Do you want them on these LS threads or on something like "707 War Stories" and the like?

Regards,
Jeff Jarvis

Hello John,

I just saw (first time) your PM to me from 02-08-12 when I was redirected after logging on. I'm very sorry it took so long to respond! I tried to PM you back, but it would not work (something about a URL failure?) no matter what I did. The answer is yes to Fred, and thanks for asking first, which is the proper thing to do!

Regards,
Jeff Jarvis

So that's you over on the NASCAR forum doing those posts...I don't know why it took me so long to put two and two together!

Which NASCAR site are you on John,from a long suffering Richard Petty Plymouth fan.
Sparky

Thanks....."Ol'e Days" are on the Randy Ayers NASCAR Modeling Forum. They are in the 1948-73 and 1973-89 sections. I'm starting to get RARE e-mailed photos sent to me. It's like deja vu all over again! Modelers are nice people no matter what they're building!!!



John