Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why The X?  
User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2829 posts, RR: 13
Posted (16 years 2 months 1 day ago) and read 1205 times:

Why not just call the 777-200X the 777-200LR before it debuts - why give it the X until its birthday? Like the 747-600 - right now it's just the 747-400X... what gives?

5 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineAirliners rule From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (16 years 2 months 1 day ago) and read 1112 times:

As far as i know it means experimental.

User currently offlineSammyk From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1702 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (16 years 2 months 23 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yes, X is for eXperimental. No point in using up a name before everything is official and losing it.


User currently offlineTurbulence From Spain, joined Nov 1999, 963 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (16 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1083 times:

For me, this is an over-use of that letter. X for eXperimental id different from X for future versions, or for commonality. For example, I understand to use 32x to refer to the family Airbus 318, 319, 320 and 321.
Also to call 73x any 737 version from 200 to 800 since they can be refered to as 732, 733, 734, etc, so the x stands for any number, and also to 74x
Same again with M8x, since MD80, MD82, MD83,..., MD88 & MD90 exist.
What I do not understand is why people in this forum refer to the possible future 747 as 747-400X. Presumabily, it will be not 747400anything, but 747-500. So, if 747-100=741, 747-200=742, etc, and generally any 747=74X why not to refer to that as 747-X or simply 74X? In the same case, A3xx is used because the figures following the number 3 in the future Airbus type are not defined (although they would probabily be 350, for continuing the series)

O have I misunderstood the question?

Best turbulences

User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2829 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (16 years 1 month 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1067 times:

The FAA will probably certify the 747-500 before the paint dries. With the technology (computers) we have today, and the tradition of experience, there's just about nothing to experiment with on anything but totaly off or radical ideas like the A3XX.

User currently offlineSashA From Russia, joined May 1999, 869 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (16 years 1 month 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1067 times:

Looking at this topic, Cessna Citation X bizjet comes to mind   - claimed to be second fastest commercial aircraft after Concorde. It's the official designation, where X stands for Roman 10 (ten). This is probably unique case in aviation industry for now.

For the rest, X is indeed experimental.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why The Preoccupation With 'Air', 'Airlines'...? posted Sun Jun 7 2009 15:59:39 by WeirdLinguist
Why The Stop @ YYZ For BA LHR-PHX Today? posted Sun Apr 26 2009 19:45:23 by 4holer
Why The Lack Of Billboard Jets posted Sat Aug 30 2008 03:28:54 by BA787
BA LGW-WAW Service, Why The Change Back To LHR? posted Mon Apr 21 2008 18:48:56 by BY188B
Why The End Of The AZ MXP Hub? posted Sat Apr 5 2008 18:28:16 by AFKLMLHLX
Why The MD 11's Did Not Last Long In Service? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 17:55:41 by KU747
Hub To Hub - Why The High Frequency? posted Wed Mar 12 2008 15:14:57 by DL757FAN
BA- Why The Split Hub? posted Sun Jan 27 2008 18:36:43 by BOStonsox
VH-JQW: Why The Hybrid Jetstar Scheme? posted Sat Jan 5 2008 04:29:20 by Allrite
Why The Trend Towards 3-3-3 Seating Vs. 2-5-2? posted Tue Jan 1 2008 15:15:02 by 1337Delta764