Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Alaska's "Proudly All Boeing" Title  
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13224 times:

Noticed this title has been applied on some 737s when I was waiting for boarding in YVR....



So no Airbuses on the horizon at least for now and the near-term future?

88 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEatmybologna From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13148 times:

I wonder if this is something Boeing took it upon themselves in doing. I can't imagine what Alaskan Airlines would gain by displaying this.

Eat-


User currently offlineKaiGywer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13107 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 1):
I wonder if this is something Boeing took it upon themselves in doing. I can't imagine what Alaskan Airlines would gain by displaying this.

Better prices from Boeing


User currently offlineAS739X From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13063 times:

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):

No Airbus's in our future!

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 1):

No this was Alaska who did this. ALL aircraft have this painted on it, including -400 (like in the picture) which obviously our not new to the fleet.

ASSFO


User currently offlineMalaysia From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13036 times:

American Pride can be displayed as well

User currently offlineJpax From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13004 times:

Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 1):
I can't imagine what Alaskan Airlines would gain by displaying this.

Pride in that they are flying the best aircraft for their needs that money can buy?


User currently offlinePropilotJW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13004 times:

Seattle based based airline supporting the airplanes built right down the street. Good for them! Be proud of what you fly

User currently offlineYOWza From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12986 times:

If they are so proud to be all Boeing maybe they should have used titles that don't require a telescopic lens to be seen. With print that small the rampers are pretty much the only ones who are going to be able to read that.  Yeah sure

YOWza


User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12986 times:

Quoting AS739X (Reply 3):
ALL aircraft have this painted on it, including -400 (like in the picture) which obviously our not new to the fleet.

Actually not all of them because I saw some 737s didn't have that title displayed when I was at LAX.


User currently offlinePhilb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12986 times:

Doesn't make sense. Can't refer to the fleet as they still have 22 MD-83s - and they certainly weren't built by Boeing, though marketing departments can put a spin on anything.

Can't refer to the 737 either as though Boeing designed and assembled the aircraft, a great deal less than 50% of the whole is made by Boeing and many of the parts come from a vast range of companies from around the world, some of the bits not being exclusive to Boeing!


User currently offlineN1120A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12933 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 9):
. Can't refer to the fleet as they still have 22 MD-83s - and they certainly weren't built by Boeing, though marketing departments can put a spin on anything.

McDonnell Douglas is part of Boeing and has been for a decade now. They have every right to call that a Boeing aircraft.


User currently offlinePacNWjet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12918 times:

Quoting PropilotJW (Reply 6):
Seattle based based airline supporting the airplanes built right down the street. Good for them! Be proud of what you fly

PropilotJW has it right. Alaska is headquartered in Seattle (not in Alaska  innocent  ) and although Boeing's headquarters are now in Chicago it remains Seattle's hometown aircraft manufacturer. Seems almost natural that Alaska would be proud of its close connection to its local business partner.


User currently offlineJpax From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12918 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 9):
Can't refer to the 737 either as though Boeing designed and assembled the aircraft, a great deal less than 50% of the whole is made by Boeing and many of the parts come from a vast range of companies from around the world, some of the bits not being exclusive to Boeing!

Oh please!  redflag  That is one of the most asinine statements on this website. Basically you're saying that it isn't a "Boeing 737", it is just a "737" or not the "Airbus A380" but just the "380".

What a corrupt thought process.


User currently offline707lvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12848 times:

Seattle is a provincial town in many ways, like it or not, and Boeing/Alaska are still a couple of local boys, regardless of the myriad of technicalities one might look for to minimize that for some reason.

User currently offlineCirrusDriver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12799 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 9):
Can't refer to the 737 either as though Boeing designed and assembled the aircraft, a great deal less than 50% of the whole is made by Boeing and many of the parts come from a vast range of companies from around the world, some of the bits not being exclusive to Boeing!

A little bitter, are we? What, you wanted it to say :

"Proudly all Boeing/Aero-Plastics/Exotic Metals Forming Company/Korean Air Lines Aerospace Division/Pechiney Rolled Products/Vibro-Meter SA/Yokahama Rubber Company/BFGoodrich Aerospace Aerostructures Group /Bumstead Manufacturing/DME Corporation /Envirovac/Hamilton Sundstrand, a United Technologies Company /Koito Industries/Hitco Carbon Composites /Fischer Advanced Composite Components AG /Moog, Inc/Onamac Industries/Pegasus Northwest, Inc/Toray Composites (America), Inc/Walden's Machine, Inc/ETC.ETC.ETC?" on the nose?

Come on now!


User currently offlinePhilb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12746 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 10):
McDonnell Douglas is part of Boeing and has been for a decade now. They have every right to call that a Boeing aircraft.

The MD-83s were built by Mc Donnell Douglas and are certificated by the FAA as McDonnell Douglas airframes.

Boeing took over the manufacturer but that doesn't make the aircraft built before the take over Boeing.

Quoting Jpax (Reply 12):
That is one of the most asinine statements on this website. Basically you're saying that it isn't a "Boeing 737", it is just a "737" or not the "Airbus A380" but just the "380".

What a corrupt thought process.

Nice of a school kid to be so rude to someone 3 times his age. No aircraft is 100% anything so the "proudly all Boeing" title does not stand up. If you knew anything about use of English the word "all" is specific. If the sticker said "Proudly Boeing" it wouuld make sense.as that is the manufacturer. When the radios fail they won't go back to Boeing, they'll go to Collins, Bendix or whoever. When the windshield fails it won't be Boeing who provides the new one. The galleys din't come from Boeing and may not even have been fiitted there. That, and thousands of other examples of parts, is why the word "all" is incorrect.

So before getting on your kiddy high horse and blowing raspberries, get to know a little about the language you are supposed to have learnt as your mother tongue.


User currently offlineLegoguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12725 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 9):
Can't refer to the 737 either as though Boeing designed and assembled the aircraft, a great deal less than 50% of the whole is made by Boeing and many of the parts come from a vast range of companies from around the world, some of the bits not being exclusive to Boeing!

Perhaps a little crazy.

The titles are tiny as YOWza pointed out. They should have made the titles larger. Seems pointless when so few people can actually read whats written. But good for them that they're confident they have the best aircraft.


User currently offlineColumba From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12685 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 10):
McDonnell Douglas is part of Boeing and has been for a decade now. They have every right to call that a Boeing aircraft.

Still I can not stand it if somebody refers to an aircraft as Boeing MD 80 or Boeing MD 11. It just does not sound right for me. An aircraft designed and build by McDonnel Douglas will never be a Boeing for me.


User currently offlineNewark777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12667 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 15):
No aircraft is 100% anything so the "proudly all Boeing" title does not stand up.

You are over analyzing a silly little sticker on the side of the plane. It seems some people open their mouths just to make arguments.

Harry


User currently offlineN328KF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12668 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 17):
Still I can not stand it if somebody refers to an aircraft as Boeing MD 80 or Boeing MD 11. It just does not sound right for me. An aircraft designed and build by McDonnel Douglas will never be a Boeing for me.

So how do you feel about the Hughes AH-64A Apache?


User currently offlineSEPilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12632 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 15):
Boeing took over the manufacturer but that doesn't make the aircraft built before the take over Boeing.

But legally when Boeing bought MD they also bought the MD-83 type certificate, so as far as the FAA is concerned it is now a Boeing aircraft, as is the DC-3 and every other McDonnel or Douglas aircraft ever built. The FAA is concerned with who is legally responsible for the aircraft today, not when it was built. Any issues with it need to be addressed by the current type-certificate holder.


User currently offlineFlight152 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12567 times:

Quoting Philb (Reply 15):
No aircraft is 100% anything so the "proudly all Boeing" title does not stand up.

That is probably one of the most ridiculous comments I have read on this website after 6 years; excellent job.


User currently offlinePhilb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12535 times:

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 18):
You are over analyzing a silly little sticker on the side of the plane. It seems some people open their mouths just to make arguments.

Like you.

I'm not over analysing anything. I'm being accurate with my mother tongue, English, in which I have a third level honours qualification.


User currently offlinePhilb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12520 times:

Quoting CirrusDriver (Reply 14):
A little bitter, are we? What, you wanted it to say :

No just accurate - something a good number of people care little about today. As I said Proudly Boeing would be fine, Proudly all Boeing isn't.


User currently offlineEA CO AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 12520 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Philb (Reply 15):
No aircraft is 100% anything so the "proudly all Boeing" title does not stand up.

Yes it does. You're just thinking of it the wrong way - and I'm not sure if it's your way of just stirring the pot or not.

The "Proudly All Boeing" titles refer to the fact that Alaska's FLEET does (or 'will' depending on whether or not you want to be a stickler about the MD80s, which are gone by 12/08 anyway) consist only of Boeing aircraft.

I think you're intelligent enough to know that the "all" refers to the fleet itself and not the components of each aircraft.


25 Ulfinator : I know how you feel. But to be fair in from 1998 (Post perger) Boeing built and delivered, 26 MD-11s, 34 MD-80s, and 52 MD-90s. In fact if you look a
26 Post contains links Philb : WRONG Go to : http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_inquiry.asp Type in any Douglas built aircraft tail number and see the manufacturer as reg
27 Philb : I just hope you aren't majoring in English
28 Philb : No I'm not - I'm applying logic to a claim that is currently false which ever way you look at it. If it does refer to the fleet it is currently inacc
29 Legoguy : Just to add to this, the aircraft are still known as McDonnell Douglas MD-80's... not Boeing MD80's. But as mentioned, Boeing bought McDonnell Dougla
30 Philb : Amazing how people here, especially those under 35 and from the US , are happy to accept a terminological inexactitude. Language is a means of communi
31 Post contains images Newark777 : Good comeback. As EA CO AS, said, the 'all' refers to the fleet, not the components. Harry
32 Post contains images Ptugarin : Also, you can�t call all those Dash-8 flown by Horizon Air, Boeing
33 Post contains images Terryb99 :
34 Newark777 : Amazing how a retired old Irishman is the only one who seems to be confused over the sticker. Harry
35 Columba : Actually I have no feelings at all about that. You know with military aircraft and the designations AH, KC, F, B or whatever it does not bother me at
36 Antoniemey : Except that "Proudly Boeing" would indicate that they are the Boeing Corporation, which is even more incorrect than the way you're claiming the "Prou
37 Stitch : Well look at it this way, all the MD-8x's are going away, to be replaced by 737-800's. So semantics aside, AS' fleet will eventually be composed solel
38 Philb : You can't even get that right. I'm a Brit, nearly 60 isn't old and I'm not in the least confused - just being accurate. Still inaccurate.
39 BrianDromey : Personally, I think it is a nice thing for Alaska to put on their fleet. Its a little bit out of the ordinary and it is a demonstration of the pride t
40 Post contains links Khobar : Really? From the Boeing website: "The Boeing MD-80, a quiet, fuel-efficient twinjet, was certified by the Federal Aviation Administration in August 1
41 Zeke : I think they would distance themselves as quick as possible from calling a MD-80 a Boeing if they had another accident like Alaska Airlines Flight 26
42 SEPilot : But if there is an issue with a Douglas-built plane who does the FAA go to? Granted, I agree that a MD build MD-83 is more properly called an MD airc
43 Post contains images Newark777 : Not the same airline, though. It's certainly not young... It's a simple marketing tool stamped to the sides of the planes. Simple as that. Since you
44 Post contains images Stitch :
45 Philb : If you really want to nit pick you've got the degree of "Boeingness" the wrong way round. Proudly all Boeing can, in the context you are using, be re
46 Legoguy : Obviously as its from the Boeing website. On most aviation websites, such as the one your are posting on now, the series is refered to as the McDonne
47 XT6Wagon : The Douglas history is Boeing history now. IN REAL LEGAL TERMS. If there is a defect in the design of a MD-80 or any other plane made by MD, Boeing is
48 Khobar : Completely irrelevant, I'm afraid. The manufacturer in question has demonstrated ownership of the name, and what we post on "aviation websites" doesn
49 Philb : One day you'll grow up - then you'll get old. On the way you might just learn something about the importance of accuracy and also manners especially
50 Legoguy : I'm not saying Boeing or the sticker isn't wrong. I'm saying many will always consider the aircraft in question as McDonnell Douglas aircraft. I will
51 Post contains images Newark777 : Sounds like they're associated with Boeing in some way. What gives you that impression? I'll get back to you when I hit that age. Oh wait, nevermind.
52 Jpax : For the sake of not starting an argument, and letting you do the name calling (and hence being the kiddy on the high horse), you should look at what
53 PiedmontINT : Ford owns Land Rover and Jaguar now, does that mean that we should go around calling those cars Ford Range Rovers or Ford XKR's?
54 DeltaDAWG : Boeing owns the name and rights to MD as well as all designs, patents, etc. as well as liabilities. Therefore, Boeing can call the 83's and 88's and
55 Newark777 : If Ford decided to start calling them that, then yes. And in the end, they are vehicles produced by the Ford Motor Company. Harry
56 Philb : Just thinking about the Boeing ownership of MDD and their rush to claim all Douglas designs as their own - I can't wait to see the finger pointing the
57 PiedmontINT : Mercedes did that here in the US. The Chrysler Crossfire is really a gussied up Mercedes CLK...
58 UnknownUser : Seems like YOU are the one who can put a spin on anything: Most ridiculous thing ever said. I suppose using your assinine logic, we could not refer t
59 Post contains links and images EYKD : I really like this picture: Taken from Boeing's Frontier on-line article. Enjoy!
60 Philb : So calling someone's statement asinine (pertaining to asses; stupid) is just friendly banter I suppose? Nothing has been disproved - certainly not me
61 Philb : Not by a million miles. I can think of plenty worse. Want to start at a big white building in DC in an office shaped like a football?
62 Philb : As it is currently 1.10 in the afternoon in Seattle can someone in the region call Alaska HQ after lunch and ask the PR department what the hell they
63 SEPilot : There will be no finger pointing; Boeing has total and sole responsibility and will not duck it. When Flight 261 went down it was after Boeing had bo
64 Post contains images Flysherwood : Do you mean the rotunda at the Capitol? Isn't a football from your part of the world round?
65 Post contains images Khobar : That I agree with 100%. But it's Alaska Airlines that is making the statement. AFAIK, it's only Alaska doing this. The office is oval shaped, not rou
66 DIA : This is an entertaining thread. Just a few points: 1. The Boeing 717 started as the MD-95 2. Alaska can state that they are all-Boeing and be legally
67 Flysherwood : Are we bitter that Boeing wouldn't give you a job?
68 Philb : As I was addressing an American comment I had the courtesy to use the correct term. Had I meant soccer, in the context i would have used it. I am wel
69 Flysherwood : I was just trying to lighten up the thread. I am sure that you are very aware and concious of the USA. I didn't mean to offend and if I did, I apolog
70 JRDC930 : I think you going to deep into semantics. The 737 was DESIGNED by boeing,i dont think its a big deal where the parts came from, the fact is it is des
71 Post contains images Plunaaircanada : same, I like to call them boeings to, if boeing took them over puac
72 Philb : Not in the least offended. Don't mind leg pulling
73 Post contains images JRDC930 : This post seems to be rapidly degrading into a tit for tat semantics match...
74 BrianDromey : Not really. In many mergers between rivals, one of the brands disappears quite quickly. The purchase of Roches Stores by Debenhams is a good example.
75 Philb : Don't disagree. I just wonder what howls of rage there will be when I publish my history of the Boeing C-47 in the post war airline boom, my deeply r
76 CirrusDriver : Well, you can't call it "leg pulling" then. It would actually be called: calcaneous-cuboid-cuneiforms-navicular-calcaneous-cuboid-cuneiforms-navicula
77 Post contains links Khobar : Please note the smiley I included. As long as you attribute the designs appropriately, as Boeing does, you shouldn't have a problem. For example: "Th
78 6YJJK : Suggested deletion of the entire sorry mess for precisely that reason. Can I have a Disrespected Users list?
79 Philb : It's there now - it was an asterisk for some reason when I read and replied to the post!! I was having a "dig" at those on here who are happy to have
80 JAL : Nicely done, I have to admit!
81 Post contains images Sllevin : Heck, after Boeing bought McDD the controllers kept trying to address an DC-3 I was flying as "Boeing DC-3" ! They are like the Borg in that respect.
82 Post contains links and images MDorBust : View Large View MediumPhoto © Dim. Pol. RUH ROH SHAGGIE!
83 Post contains images NW7E7 : ...so uh, speaking of DC, when is NW going to get rid of their DC-9's??
84 Post contains images SEPilot : The very instant that Fedex delivers you a certified snowball from Hell. Learn not to blaspheme.
85 USAIRWAYS321 : Guess what? None of us care. You're the one who seems to have difficulty flying the proper flag. I'm sure I speak for many of us here when I say that
86 Post contains images DIA : You're refering to tennis-elbow. Painful inflammation of the tendon at the outer border of the elbow resulting from overuse of lower arm muscles (as
87 Srbmod : Enough is enough! Because some of you can't seem to play nice in this thread, it is now locked.
88 EA CO AS : And since you're so intent on arguing semantics and logic - no you can't. At least not to anyone other than yourself.
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...
Alaska's "Starliner 75" Debuts Feb 27th posted Wed Feb 21 2007 10:05:45 by AS739X
Why DL Shuttle 738 To PHX All "Y"? posted Thu Feb 17 2005 00:48:58 by AV8AJET
Where Have All The "good Jets" Gone? posted Tue Aug 24 2004 15:47:37 by B727
What Justifies The Title "International Airport?" posted Fri Mar 5 2004 18:00:51 by Ssides
Alaska Airlines: New City "Rumor" posted Tue Dec 16 2003 19:14:20 by As739x
All Of You "Airport 79" Fans....good News! posted Tue Oct 28 2003 22:44:18 by Thomasphoto60
All This New Security Stuff Is Just "feel Good" posted Thu Sep 13 2001 05:16:32 by DC10@DFW
Why Is SAS Moving "all" Aircraft To LN- Reg? posted Mon Jul 9 2001 14:41:00 by TR
Ahoy All "ramp Rats"! posted Tue Jan 4 2000 22:19:09 by Ratzz
Eos Airlines: "'Uncrowded. Uncompromising." posted Mon Apr 30 2007 18:17:20 by FA4B6