Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Does A And B Keep Some Planes?  
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2304 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5971 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?

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineHZ747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1647 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5943 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A Google and Ask.com search of your query returned nothing, so I will speculate.

1. To test product enhancements and upgrades on base models
2. For general demonstration purposes for models still available for sale
3. For nostalgia



Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16908 posts, RR: 67
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5893 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."
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3149 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5826 times:

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 1):
test product enhancements and upgrades on base models

You can see this for example on the Airbus 320-100 Airbus owns. It has been modified by adding the winglets that are standard on the -200 model.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Daniel R. D'herbe - Iberian Spotters



User currently offlineBigsmile From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 161 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5651 times:

It's all research and development. Testing modifications to the product just like any other company would.

It is very interesting work in Flight Test Centre where these Aircraft are used.


User currently offlineCV580Freak From Bahrain, joined Jul 2005, 1033 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5559 times:

I thought Etihad were taking the 4 A380's


One day you are the pigeon, the next the statue ...
User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5449 times:

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.

User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4264 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5425 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?
User currently offlineVlada From Serbia, joined Aug 2005, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5391 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 7):
Airbus kept frames of most types but sold the proto Airbus 310

But not the A300 frame #1, or? What happened to that one?

Regards,
Vlada


User currently offlineClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4599 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5363 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!
User currently offlineOHLHD From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5241 times:

Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 9):
The first A300 was scrapped

^

The hull I think is in Belgium stored somewhere. I think BRU. But there is nothing left over.


http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...nr=5&prev_id=653598&next_id=429828


Here it is. I did a search  Smile


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4091 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5199 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!

User currently offlineAMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5142 times:

Quoting OHLHD (Reply 10):
The hull I think is in Belgium stored somewhere. I think BRU. But there is nothing left over.

July 9th 2003:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pieter Declerck


it was the second A300, not the prototype


User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1892 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5075 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


User currently offlineAMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5057 times:

To add to it:
The first prototype of the A300 seems to have been scrapped at Auguts 27th, 1974 already according to this pic:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Miguel Snoep


it was the first of only two A300-B1, together with OO-TEF shown above

The second prototype of the F50 is on display at the Aviodrome Theme-park at Lelystad airport, The Netherlands (LEY)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders


Interesting detail: it's an F27 with fake F50 windows painted on the fuselage and dummy F50 engines
The first prototype has been broken up.

The first prototype of the F100 is/was stored at WOE:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Menno Marrenga


I am not sure whether it is still there

The second one was converted to the F70 prototype:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andries Waardenburg
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Malcolm Clarke


It was broken up in 2000 (what a waste!!) and only cockpit and aft fuselage were retained

[Edited 2005-09-02 21:57:18]

User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3148 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5034 times:

Quoting AMSSFO (Reply 14):
The second one was converted to the F70 prototype:

Really? How's that possible? Have they cut the fuselage and made the planes shorter? Isn't that much more work than producing a new aircraft?

Georg.


User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1892 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4308 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.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16908 posts, RR: 67
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4200 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.

Shameless self plug: http://www.rosboch.net/aviation.htm#BoeingVersionCodes



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4185 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.


User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1892 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3973 times:

Quoting AMSSFO (Reply 18):
Anyway, thanks for correcting and expanding my post, but please could you be a little bit more friendly next time? Thanks.

Sorry AMSSFO, I did not mean to reply as sharply as it looks but you're right. Won't do it again  Smile


User currently offlineAMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3920 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

[Edited 2005-09-03 00:34:27]

User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3557 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...
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2304 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3470 times:

Anyone know exactly how many A380s will stay? When I said 2 on the post, I wasn't absolutely sure.

User currently offlineTavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3203 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.
User currently offlineRichard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1595 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3189 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.


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4264 posts, RR: 34
Reply 25, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2463 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?
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 Does AC Keep Changing YYZ CCS POS? posted Thu Dec 29 2005 17:13:55 by CayMan
Why Does UA Has Some Many 744´s? posted Mon Jun 11 2001 01:19:58 by TOMASKEMPNER
Why Does UAL Keep On Buying Airbus? posted Mon Oct 9 2000 17:41:40 by United Airline
Why Does NW Only Let MX Push Planes? posted Sun Aug 21 2005 01:33:15 by HPRamper
Why Does JL: Buy, Lease, And Rebuy Ac? posted Wed Apr 6 2005 07:42:16 by Ktachiya
Why Does AF Operate Both A32X And 737s? posted Sun Sep 12 2004 20:52:08 by GoMEA
Why Do Some Planes Have A/C Type On Fuselage? posted Mon Aug 23 2004 18:28:35 by SafetyDude
Why Does A-330 And A-340 Have Sidesticks? posted Fri Apr 23 2004 07:45:03 by QIguy24
Why Does Air Canada Promote .com And Not .ca posted Sun Feb 22 2004 20:41:19 by Yegbey01
Ford Commercial Shows MHV And Some Planes. posted Thu Nov 28 2002 04:43:12 by CcrlR