So, the other day I was getting ready to fly from Madrid to Paris. It’s a tough gig but someone has to do it. Hey, I didn’t claw my way to 12% on the 767 First Officer list to fly crappy trips.
In Madrid they park us freighters way out on the ramp. Probably so we don’t stink up the place. A huge bus that must seat something like 100 people then drives the two of us from the terminal out to the airplane.
On this day, as the bus was taking us to our plane, I caught sight of something I couldn’t quite identify.
It was long, with a T-tail and what looked like two engines at the back. At first look I thought maybe an MD-80 but it wasn’t a McDonnell-Douglas. Certainly too big to be a regional-jet. Plus it looked a bit…..off. Then I started thinking maybe it was a TU-134, which was the Russian equivalent of a DC-9/MD-80.
As we got closer, I counted not two but four engines in the back. Holy crap! That’s an IL-62!
You’re probably wondering right about now “what’s the big deal?”. In my 35 years of flying it was the first time I’d seen one for real.
This was a real piece of history sitting on the ramp at Madrid. The Ilyushin IL-62 was Russia’s oringinal entry in the long-range jet airliner contest.
The IL-62 goes back to 1960 with a requirement for a long range jet airliner to replace the turboprop TU-114. If you don’t know what a TU-114 was, imagine a Bear bomber except filled with (presumably hearing impared) passengers.
I posted the picture on one of the aviation forums and got the expected results.
What’s the shortest interval of time known to science? It’s the time it takes for some aviation geek to reply “It’s just a copy of a VC-10!” in an aviation forum. Especially if you’re talking to a Brit. Look, I love you blokes but you didn’t invent everything.
To be fair, it certainly looks quite a bit like a VC-10.
So was it a copy of the VC-10? I’d say it’s more likely a case of parallel development. They share a common layout, but the similarity ends there. The IL-62 is a good bit larger and had greater range.
If you’re building a long-range jetliner with early 1960’s technology it’s probably going to have four engines and you have to stick them somewhere.
You can put them inside the wing root: “It’s just a copy of a de Havilland Comet!”
You can sling them under the wing on pylons: “It’s just a copy of a 707!”
You can stick them back in the tail: “It’s just a copy of a VC-10!”
You can see where I’m going with this.
The Soviets were “Schrodinger’s Enemy”. They were ten feet tall and about to take over the world on any given day but so laughably primitive they could only build cheap inferior copies of our airplanes.
Note that the Lockheed Jetstar had the same configuration several years before the VC-10. If you don’t know what a Lockheed Jetstar was, it was featured in the movie Goldfinger. In the Air Force it was a C-140.
The VC-10 was specifically designed for operating from “high and hot” airports in places like India and Africa and could operate from underdeveloped airports. Unlike most Russian airliners, the IL-62 needed a smooth runway and could only operate from “main line” airports. So here we have a case of different specifications leading to the same solution.
From a technical standpoint, the VC-10 was one of the most advanced designs of its day. Superior to the 707 and DC-8 in many ways except for operating cost. That’s why they only sold 54 of them. The CEO of British Airways declared that they were in business to make a profit, not to subsidize the British aircraft industry.
The IL-62, on the other hand, was your typical basic but sturdy Russian design. It has the dubious distinction of being the largest plane ever built with manual flight controls.
For the life of me I can’t figure out why it has that double yoke on the Captain’s side. I was told that one was for high speed flight and the other for low speed flight but I can’t confirm that. If that was the case it seems odd that they would only give one to the Captain. It’s possible it was for steering the nosewheel on the ground but I’m just guessing here.
I can only imagine this thing was a handful to fly. Max takeoff weight was around 360,000 pounds. Early versions didn’t even have spoilers for roll control. I wouldn’t get into an arm wrestling match with an IL-62 driver.
Putting the engines in the tail lets you keep the wing “clean” and also run full leading-edge flaps and slats for better takeoff and landing performance. That was the reasoning behind the VC-10 and the 727.
There is also less asymmetric thrust in the event of an engine failure. You can get by with a smaller rudder and vertical fin which reduces drag.
Putting the engines in the back also reduces cabin noise. I can recall Eastern 727’s with the moniker “Whisperjet”. Although they were anything but quiet on the outside.
Since everything in aviation is a compromise, there are disadvantages as well. At high angles of attack, a t-tail aircraft can get into a “deep stall”, where the elevator is blanked out by the airframe. That’s a really bad situation, because you need the elevator to get out of the stall.
Having the engines that close together means that if one fails catastrophically, it can take out the engine next to it.
Having the engines in the back also puts a lot of weight in the back of the aircraft. An empty IL-62 required a tail-stand on the ground to keep it from doing a “wheelie”. The rear stairs on the 727 served the same purpose.
There can’t be too many of these things still running around. Wiki claims that the Russian Air Force has seven in service at this time. North Korea has exactly two. There are a handful of freighter conversions out there but I don’t know how many.
The one I saw belonged to Rada Airlines out of Belarus, who has exactly two of them. This one had flown a charter from South America.
I would think spare parts would be a problem but with 292 built there may be enough to keep the remaining ones flying for a few more years. The big problem is they don’t meet modern noise restrictions, which will keep them out of a lot of airports. I’m actually surprised they let one into Madrid, because that’s a very noise sensitive airport.
The NATO codename for the IL-62 was “Classic” which seems appropriate.