Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DC-8 revival?

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Newforest
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Apr 2005
    • 8887

    DC-8 revival?

    This is N782SP, c/n unknown but ex French Air Force now acquired by Samaritan's Purse, an evangelical relief organization operating mainly in Africa. Not an organization I had heard of before and googling produces some derogatory opinions of the owner. The FAA do not have this aircraft in their database yet. Other sightings record this as N728SP although it is painted as 782. Photo is taken at San Antonio, TX.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	N782SP - DC.8.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	248.0 KB
ID:	3728776
    http://www.flightmemory.com/ I have been round the world 11.83 times!
  • Hand87_5
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Jan 2000
    • 4781

    #2
    Gorgeous plane.
    The engines has been upgraded though.
    Last edited by Hand87_5; 28th April 2015, 12:57.

    Comment

    • Amiga500
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Feb 2010
      • 2166

      #3
      You gotta wonder about the cost effectiveness of that. Ongoing maintenance costs are bound to be a bit of a nightmare (?).


      Maybe buying some of the ex JCA Alenia C-27Js would have provided better disaster relief capabilities? [at the sacrifice of payload and range but the gain of genuine STOL/rough field.]

      Or buying an An-124.

      Anyone any idea of the relative prices? [I could be comparing apples with steak!]

      Comment

      • J Boyle
        With malice towards none
        • Oct 2004
        • 9791

        #4
        Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
        Maybe buying some of the ex JCA Alenia C-27Js would have provided better disaster relief capabilities?
        Do you know it's for that kind of disaster relief?
        It might be to bring in supplies from elsewhere for distribution by govts or NGOs who tend to have STOLs/bush planes/helicopters.
        In other words, short field ops may not be needed.
        There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

        Comment

        • Amiga500
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Feb 2010
          • 2166

          #5
          Originally posted by J Boyle View Post
          Do you know it's for that kind of disaster relief?
          No idea.

          However, I believe (and am open to correction) that typically charities working in Africa that distribute through the local government end up being out a relative fortune through corruption within said government and its civil servants.

          Comment

          • J Boyle
            With malice towards none
            • Oct 2004
            • 9791

            #6
            Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
            No idea.

            However, I believe (and am open to correction) that typically charities working in Africa that distribute through the local government end up being out a relative fortune through corruption within said government and its civil servants.
            My point is the DC-8 may be useful to them...and if so, I applaud that an old jetliner is getting some use. With the newer engine mod (as used by Delta and United on their DC-8s) I'd suspect the old girl has some life left in her. But it would be interesting to see how available and pricy airframe spares are.

            And re Africa...you're correct, some were probably better off in the colonial period.
            There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

            Comment

            • Meddle
              Rank Bajin.
              • Sep 2014
              • 1626

              #7
              Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
              However, I believe (and am open to correction) that typically charities working in Africa that distribute through the local government end up being out a relative fortune through corruption within said government and its civil servants.
              An excuse usually drummed out by those too lazy, poor or uncaring to donate to charity. Nothing to do with DC-8 aircraft, so I'm not sure how it helps the thread along.

              Local government rife with corruption, with vast sums of money creamed off by useless civil servants? I wonder where they adopted that model from.

              I see this outfit are a 'evangelical relief organization'. I can only assume that translates as "yes, you can have books/clothes/clean water/medicine but you must reject your own culture and let Jesus into your hearts". The sick lengths that organised religion will go to to try and get a few more members. I Won't be too upset if this crowd end up in the local cooking pot.

              "...some were probably better off in the colonial period."

              Perhaps, but did they have DC-8 aircraft? Where is that kid that was creaming it at the thought of the mighty McDonnell Douglas returning to the skies? He should be applying for a gig in Africa, I just hope his shots are up to date; malaria tablets in one hand and a bible in the other.

              Comment

              • Amiga500
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Feb 2010
                • 2166

                #8
                Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                An excuse usually drummed out by those too lazy, poor or uncaring to donate to charity. Nothing to do with DC-8 aircraft, so I'm not sure how it helps the thread along.
                If you weren't up in the clouds on your high horse, you would realise that having (say) a C-27J would allow the aid organisation to distribute directly and bypass pretty much every stage bar one of the local bureaucracy. The less stages, the less funds (or effective funds) siphoned off via corruption.


                Given the DC-8 doesn't have rough field capability, it is entirely relevant to the thread.

                However, if your still confused, just ignore it all and go back to acting very sage about what other people's motives for holding particular viewpoints are, and perhaps plot your career path to chief constable of the thought police.

                Comment

                • Meddle
                  Rank Bajin.
                  • Sep 2014
                  • 1626

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
                  If you weren't up in the clouds on your high horse, you would realise that having (say) a C-27J would allow the aid organisation to distribute directly and bypass pretty much every stage bar one of the local bureaucracy. The less stages, the less funds (or effective funds) siphoned off via corruption.
                  No high horse involved, I don't donate more to charity because I'm lazy and I rather like having money.

                  You seem to have a good idea on your hands here though. Simply bring in more roughty toughty aircraft into Africa and watch the corruption vanish overnight. Perhaps you should be working for an aid agency as clearly they lack your astonishing insight at the moment!

                  Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
                  Given the DC-8 doesn't have rough field capability, it is entirely relevant to the thread.
                  Tenuous at best. It is only 'relevant to the thread' in the sense that you started offering up fairly obvious pointers that don't refer to either of the previous posts purely so that you can soapbox about some sh!t nobody cares about. Look at the thread:

                  Post 1: "Look at this DC-8 that is being run by a charitable organisation in Africa".

                  Post 2: "Looks like the engines have been replaced".

                  Your post: "Well if I were running a charitable operation out of Africa then I wouldn't have blah blah blah blah, maintenance costs, blah blah blah corruption".

                  And now you are arguing that this is all 'relevant to the thread'. Amazing.

                  I clearly missed the thread here, where Samaritan's Purse were looking for a new aircraft that must be able to handle rough field conditions and were fielding the internet for unqualified opinions. There must be a subtle subtext to the opening post in this thread because I read it as merely pointing out that a DC-8 was still in active service, something of a novelty for an aircraft of this vintage. Perhaps the thread should be re-titled "I run a Bible-thumping charity and I'm looking for an aircraft to ship aid around Africa in. Some guy on Craigslist is selling a DC-8 but I'm not convinced it is the best aircraft for the job. Plz advise thnx, xxxxx".

                  Is the usual "bwaaaah, charity money is siphoned off by corrupt locals in Africa" stock post triggered by any mention of Africa or only those posts where charitable deeds are mentioned? Does this thread really need the same tired, jaded observations pointed out? Do you just happen to be another boring armchair commentator on the Internet? I just Googled "Africa, Charity, Corruption" on Google and I got 2,050,000 results. What makes you think you are either making an original observation or that your arguments haven't been better hashed out elsewhere?


                  Originally posted by Amiga500 View Post
                  However, if your still confused, just ignore it all and go back to acting very sage about what other people's motives for holding particular viewpoints are, and perhaps plot your career path to chief constable of the thought police.
                  Hysterical at best. No confusion here, in your case it is just another armchair philosopher hijacking a thread about a fairly dull aircraft so that they can get their voice heard.

                  Comment

                  • Amiga500
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Feb 2010
                    • 2166

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                    You seem to have a good idea on your hands here though. Simply bring in more roughty toughty aircraft into Africa and watch the corruption vanish overnight.
                    Its quite obvious your reading abilities are limited... at best. My time is too valuable to be wasted educating you on the fundamental differences between what was stated in the post and what you interpreted it to state.



                    Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                    Tenuous at best. It is only 'relevant to the thread' in the sense that you started offering up fairly obvious pointers that don't refer to either of the previous posts purely so that you can soapbox about some sh!t nobody cares about.

                    Post 1: "Look at this DC-8 that is being run by a charitable organisation in Africa".

                    Post 2: "Looks like the engines have been replaced".

                    Your post: "Well if I were running a charitable operation out of Africa then I wouldn't have blah blah blah blah, maintenance costs, blah blah blah corruption".
                    My first post (#3) mentioned corruption?

                    Very, very limited reading abilities.



                    Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                    And now you are arguing that this is all 'relevant to the thread'. Amazing.
                    Entirely relevant. Does a DC-8 best fit their need? Possibly as an aircraft, but would it really be cheaper than having the stuff lugged in commercial freighters or in the bellies of passenger aircraft?


                    Unless you want discussion to centre solely around the aircraft they've bought? Would be pretty boring - although it might conform to the desires of the thought(less) police constable called meddle.

                    Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                    Hysterical at best. No confusion here, in your case it is just another armchair philosopher hijacking a thread about a fairly dull aircraft so that they can get their voice heard.
                    Yes. You've done a superb job of f**king up the thread so far.

                    Comment

                    • J Boyle
                      With malice towards none
                      • Oct 2004
                      • 9791

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                      I see this outfit are a 'evangelical relief organization'. I can only assume that translates as "yes, you can have books/clothes/clean water/medicine but you must reject your own culture and let Jesus into your hearts". The sick lengths that organised religion will go to to try and get a few more members.
                      At least they're doing something to help in times of need.

                      Originally posted by Meddle View Post
                      I Won't be too upset if this crowd end up in the local cooking pot. .
                      A bit of a racial and cultural stereotype? What are you doing, applying to be Jeremy Clarkson's writer?
                      To say nothing of seemingly wishing other people ill....

                      You've yet to add anything to the discussion of the aircraft....you do know this is an aviation forum, not an insult chamber.
                      There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

                      Comment

                      • mrtotty
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Mar 2008
                        • 1062

                        #12
                        Beautiful aircraft but not so keen on the 'relief organisation'.

                        Comment

                        • J Boyle
                          With malice towards none
                          • Oct 2004
                          • 9791

                          #13
                          Originally posted by mrtotty View Post
                          Beautiful aircraft but not so keen on the 'relief organisation'.
                          Based on what?
                          Direct knowledge or personal experience of this organization
                          Or an enmity to faith-based organizations in general?
                          There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

                          Comment

                          • Meddle
                            Rank Bajin.
                            • Sep 2014
                            • 1626

                            #14
                            Faith based organisations will always garner attention from critics. Corrupt organisations, or charities that take 90% of your money and spend it on their middle men are plainly bad. Religious organisations that do a lot of good but require the needy natives to change their faith can, rather easily, be seen to have a vested interest rather than carrying out good deeds for the sake of carrying out good deeds. Mrtotty may well know something about this organisation that we don't, but going on the name alone I dare say something is amiss.

                            Fear not, it isn't the war on Christmas or anything!

                            Comment

                            • J Boyle
                              With malice towards none
                              • Oct 2004
                              • 9791

                              #15
                              Most of your financial complaints also apply to governments...but unlike charities, we don't have a choice to give them money.

                              I know a pilot who just returned from two years bush flying for a faith-based organization. There he acted as the local airline....he did what was necessary, I don't believe he questioned anyone before flying them off the mountainside and to a hospital. Plus passengers got more leg room in his Turbo Porter than you get on EasyJet. :0

                              I fear some/much of the antagonism towards religions is based on old stereotypes...and painting everyone with a rather broad brush. That's why I asked the previous poster if he had any direct experience or knowledge.
                              There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

                              Comment

                              • Newforest
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Apr 2005
                                • 8887

                                #16
                                Interesting discussion so far folks! No one seems to have yet picked up on my comment about the owner of the plane and his connection with a prominent, no, not prominent, a self aggrandising US politician! Enough fodder there for another round or two chaps!!!!
                                http://www.flightmemory.com/ I have been round the world 11.83 times!

                                Comment

                                • J Boyle
                                  With malice towards none
                                  • Oct 2004
                                  • 9791

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Newforest View Post
                                  ... a self aggrandising US politician!
                                  That description doesn't limit the field much!

                                  But I see the charity is run by Franklin Graham, son of famed evangelist Billy Graham...who was credited by the author of Unbroken with helping turn his life around.
                                  The Grahams have been around forever, and friends to Presidents on both sides of the isle.

                                  They're squeaky clean financially....but there will always be guys that like to throw mud, rather like the UK writer who wrote a book critical of Mother Theresa (probably to prove it could be done...sounds like a bar bet to me ).
                                  Last edited by J Boyle; 6th May 2015, 00:50.
                                  There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

                                  Comment

                                  • Scouse
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Mar 2006
                                    • 856

                                    #18
                                    Samaritans Purse was the organisation behind the Operation Christmas Child runs, which saw Antonov An-124s operating out of Liverpool on a number of occasions. More info on Google.

                                    Comment

                                    • J Boyle
                                      With malice towards none
                                      • Oct 2004
                                      • 9791

                                      #19
                                      If the previous posters have an issue with the group, then they should come out and say what they are instead of hiding behind innuendo, and hidden comments.
                                      There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

                                      Comment

                                      • FLY.BUY
                                        Clear-Water-Islands
                                        • Jun 2004
                                        • 1302

                                        #20
                                        Love the DC-8, had the pleasure of flying on a Spantax DC-8 60 series many moons ago returned back home on a Spantax CV990. If only charter flights still offered this type of variety against the sterile A320's.

                                        Comment

                                        Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                        Collapse

                                         

                                        Working...
                                        X