Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2210 posts, RR: 3 Posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4912 times:
During the test phase of individual aircraft models, Airbus or Boeing use the first production prototypes to do the testing. And then they typically modify prototypes into a passenger aircraft and sell them. My question is, why hasn't Boeing and Airbus sold all of them?
In Boeing ownership, they have:
1 707 (stored) (prototype)
1 717 (stored) (prototype)
4 737s
1 757 (prototype)
1 747 (stored) (prototype)
1 767 (stored) (prototype)
In Airbus ownership, they have:
1 A318 (prototype)
1 A320-100
1 A340-300 (prototype)
1 A340-600 (prototype)
and the first 2 A380s are expected to stay.
Yes, I know, keeping the first 707, the first 747, and the first A380 for historical purposes is logical, but what about all the others? What do they do with them?
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15904 posts, RR: 66 Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4834 times:
4. The second and later planes often diverge quite a bit from the prototype due to improvements made after testing. Even plane two and three are often slightly different from "final" production versions. It would cost quite a bit to modify plane one to something that an airliner would want to buy. It's often very much a one off.
Note that the first 707 was, in fact, not a 707. The 367-80 was the prototype for the 707 and the (old) 717 (more commonly known as (K)C-135) was so different from what went into production that it's not even close to the same plane.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4124 posts, RR: 37 Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4366 times:
Usually the prototypes indeed are different, retrofitting them wouldn´t generate enough revenue, as obviously the selling price would be lower then a brandnew frame fully built to the buyers specifications. So it´s more normal then not that the prototypes remain with the manufacturer. Noteworthy exceptions are for instance the 777. I think frame #1 was matching enough the A model, plus the purchase price of any other 777 (no second hand market yet at the time) was exceptionally high, that Cathay wanted to buy it. Also 737 #1 was sold to NASA but donated back to Boeing for nostalgia purposes. The 4 737-frames now at Boeing are probably just awaiting delivery or withdrawn museum airplanes (like the USAir front fuselage). All 737s have been or will be delivered to an actual operator.
Airbus kept frames of most types but sold the proto Airbus 310.
[Edited 2005-09-02 16:45:53]
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
ClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4528 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4304 times:
The first A300 was scrapped. I don't remember if it was sold to an airline, served and was then scrapped. I believe the second one suffered the same fate.
The first VC10 was scrapped after a hard landing. The first Super VC10 is still in service with the RAF. The first Comet was scrapped (an absolute scandal). I am not sure about the Douglas aircraft, the Convairs, Caravelles or Fokkers.
Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4015 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4140 times:
I thought the first 707 (367-80) was sitting in a museum in DC...in fact, I saw it with my own eyes...does Boeing still own it? Cause it sure as hell ain't going anywhere soon!
Breiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1815 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4016 times:
Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 9): The first A300 was scrapped. I don't remember if it was sold to an airline, served and was then scrapped.
The A300 prototype remained Airbus' property till it was scrapped in May '76.
The cockpit section is preserved at the "Musée de l'Air" at Le Bourget, while the left wing and 4 fuselage frames are preserved at the "Deutsches Museum" in Munich
Breiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1815 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3249 times:
[quote=AMSSFO,reply=14]The first prototype of the A300 seems to have been scrapped at Auguts 27th, 1974 already according to this pic:
Ok, wise guy.
The first A300 was formely withdrawn from flying on the August 31th, 1974, its certificate expired in October 1974, and it was ACTUALLY SCRAPPED in May 1976.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15904 posts, RR: 66 Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3141 times:
Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 11): I thought the first 707 (367-80) was sitting in a museum in DC...in fact, I saw it with my own eyes...does Boeing still own it? Cause it sure as hell ain't going anywhere soon!
the 367-80 was in service as a testbed for Boeing until 1972, doing all sorts of tests. It was recently on loan back to Boeing for renovation, and as you say currently resides at the Air and Space Museum's Udvar-Hazy center in Dulles.
Note that it is NOT the first 707. The 367-80 is a common ancestor and prototype for the 707 and the (original) 717, but it is quite different from those planes. Among other things, it's fuse width is 11 feet as opposed to the 12 feet 4 inches of the 707. This in response to customers wanting 3-3 seating.
AMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10 Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3126 times:
Quoting Breiz (Reply 16): Ok, wise guy.
The first A300 was formely withdrawn from flying on the August 31th, 1974, its certificate expired in October 1974, and it was ACTUALLY SCRAPPED in May 1976.
Take it easy, man! First, I wrote my post, while you were writing yours. My post was not in reply to yours. I only saw it afterwards. Second, I was just repeating what the caption told me. That's why I stated "acoording to this pic". Captions are often wrong; I can't help that. Anyway, thanks for correcting and expanding my post, but please could you be a little bit more friendly next time? Thanks.
AMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10 Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2861 times:
Quoting Breiz (Reply 19): Sorry AMSSFO, I did not mean to reply as sharply as it looks but you're right. Won't do it again
It's OK, no hard feelings
Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 15): Have they cut the fuselage and made the planes shorter? Isn't that much more work than producing a new aircraft?
That's indeed exactly what they did. They cut the F100 prototype, removed two fuselage parts and got the shortened F70. It apperently was cheaper or easier than to build the prototype from scratch. Obviously, it's not the way they built the production F70s; only the prototype was 'created' this way.
see also: http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=220
SATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2498 times:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in addition to the expected enhancements and fine-tuning that occurs during the early testing stages, I also understand that the first prototype or two will often have a fair bit of internal testing equipment installed that could be difficult, time consuming, and costly to remove. If left alone, it would almost certainly add additional unnecessary weight and would possibly present unexpected maintenance issues over the life of the aircraft. Having a higher fuel-burn rate and additional maintenance issues is presumably not very desirable for a commercial airline. However, all this extra testing equipment apparently makes some prototypes perfect for continued developmental use as a test bed for evaluating post-introduction enhancements. Thus, it would seem to make sense for a manufacturer to keep some prototypes around so they can be adapted for supplementary testing as it becomes necessary.
Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2210 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2411 times:
Anyone know exactly how many A380s will stay? When I said 2 on the post, I wasn't absolutely sure.
Tavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, RR: 5 Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2144 times:
Quoting Luisca (Reply 6): I know that the first A340-600 Cant be sold for passenger use because of the distance between the emergency exits, someone really f*d up there.
You're right, the FAA forced Airbus to add the 5th emergency exit cause the distnace issue, that made that the first A340-600 could be sold to anyone. Airbus tried to change this by saying that their doors where bigger but the FAA refuesd this reason so the plane couldn't be sold.
Gus
SKBO
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
Richard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1570 posts, RR: 6 Reply 24, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2130 times:
Quoting Tavong (Reply 23): Quoting Luisca (Reply 6):
I know that the first A340-600 Cant be sold for passenger use because of the distance between the emergency exits, someone really f*d up there.
You're right, the FAA forced Airbus to add the 5th emergency exit cause the distnace issue, that made that the first A340-600 could be sold to anyone. Airbus tried to change this by saying that their doors where bigger but the FAA refuesd this reason so the plane couldn't be sold.
IIRC Airbus expected a revision to the FAA rules that never transpired, hence the prototype was left with a different door configuation to the production model.
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4124 posts, RR: 37 Reply 25, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1404 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 22): Anyone know exactly how many A380s will stay? When I said 2 on the post, I wasn't absolutely sure.
Airbus is planning to keep frame #1, F-WWOW. The other early aircraft will in the end be delivered to Etihad, Singapore and others. Maybe later they might hang on to the first A 380-900 etc as well but the early frames are all allocated to airlines except for #1.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2210 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1598 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3131 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 143 posts, 
From Bahrain, joined Jul 2005, 1033 posts, 
From Serbia, joined Aug 2005, 158 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4528 posts, 
From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2005, 1815 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3144 posts, 
From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
