Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
After The 7X7 Series  
User currently offlineTrippleseven From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 996 times:

What model naming scheme do u think Boeing will use after all of the 7X7 numbers are taken..were getting close.
MSN

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAhlfors From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 1346 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 968 times:

I think they have lots of possibilities to do 7X7-XXX. For example, a future jet may be amed 757-600 or 767-800 or even 747-900

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 961 times:

Well, you have to keep in mind that we have a long time before we run out of 7X7 designations. I mean, we are still using 737 after more than thirty years. and 747. And the desig 757/767 is also twenty years old.
I do however think that this is the last generation of 737. I don't think we will ever see another version. I mean, what would it be, 737-1000? That could be confused with 737-100. Okay sure, none of those still exist but none the less, you see the problem.
I for one am hoping for a T-tail design with tail mount PRATT AND WHITNEY (they build the best, but no one uses them) engines designated 787.
Just my twenty bucks.


User currently offlineCAETravlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 908 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 954 times:

If Boeing ever goes forward with the Blended Wing Bodies, then that will be the next big thing after the 7X7 series that requires a new designation. I watched a Discovery Channel special on it recently. I am sure that Boeing will come up with something totally new and creative to call it.


A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 951 times:

They jumped directly from 367 and 377 to 707. If that means that when they hit x77, then next jump is plus 330, then the next one will not be 787, but 1107. Then in a few million years our descendants may fly on a 77777.
They could also be taken over by Microsoft. Then what we might expect to be named 787 would be something like
"Non-simulated Flight 2010 Professional 5.5 Extended for Windows".
Best regards, Preben Norholm



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 925 times:

Taken over by Microsoft???

Well, that'll make things very simple indeed. All new aircraft will only need 3 buttons in the entire flight deck -- Ctrl / Alt / Delete !!!!

'949


User currently offlineWatewate From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 2284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 921 times:

Re:N949WP

Imagine if Microsoft made airplanes. It would crash every 5 minutes and would take forever to startup. Not to mention that its engine would take up half of its weight.


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 916 times:

Not only that, but they would cost much much more than any other airplane, but everyone would buy them because airports would only support Microsoft planes.

User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 23
Reply 8, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 901 times:

You would also need a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering just to change a light bulb.


"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
User currently offlineAstrojet From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 565 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 899 times:

They jumped from 300 to 700 because the other series where caught, ie. the model 464 is the B-52.
But htey still have 787 and 797, and just notice from the 747 to the 777 it took close to 30 years.


User currently offlineERJ135 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 679 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 894 times:

I guessing the question was along the lines of what comes after 787 and the 797 models which at the present moment are not in the planning stages.
My guess would be along the lines of a 7-10-7, and the 7-11-7 etc etc.

Just have to wait and see.



I remember when the DC-3 was new!
User currently offlineERJ135 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 679 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 891 times:

I'm guessing the question was along the lines of what comes after 787 and the 797 models which at the present moment are not in the planning stages.
My guess would be along the lines of a 7-10-7, and the 7-11-7 etc etc.

Just have to wait and see.



I remember when the DC-3 was new!
User currently offlineCorey777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 862 times:

...I do however think that this is the last generation of 737. I don't think we will ever see another version. I mean, what would it be, 737-1000? That could be confused with 737-100. Okay sure, none of those still exist but none the less, you see the problem...

Maybe they'll use letters...737-Axx, 737-Bxx, etc. I don't think the 737 is going anywhere; it's still the most-used airliner worldwide. Besides, what would WN do without the 737 to fill its fleet?  

Corey777
VOTE We're Nuts/GUNDU 2000!


User currently offlineKonaB777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 855 times:

Most likely 807, 827, 837...

User currently offlineSurf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 847 times:

2707 (the Boeing designation for it's SST that was scrapped) 2717, 2727, 2737, 2747, 2757, 2767, 2777.

User currently offlineSAS_A330-300 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 826 times:

How about 7117 (seven-eleven-seven)?  

Best Regards, Simon Larsson


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...
Midwest After The 717's? posted Sun Apr 12 2009 14:55:05 by ATLFlyer323
US Airways And The Bombardier C Series? posted Thu Jan 15 2009 19:50:04 by 747400sp
QF 744's After The A380 posted Sun Oct 12 2008 23:09:39 by Ben175
9/11 Moments After The Attacks Info posted Tue May 20 2008 21:58:17 by AEroc
What Will WN Do After The 737 Production Ends? posted Thu Jan 10 2008 15:45:41 by Jetblueguy22
After The Sale Of VLM -what's New? posted Sat Jan 5 2008 08:51:21 by Beaucaire
The A380 - After The Hype, What's It Really Like? posted Wed Jan 2 2008 14:12:29 by Biddleonia007
SAS Short-Terms Lease Contracts After The Q400 posted Tue Nov 27 2007 05:05:33 by Vfw614
Southwest And The Bombardier's C-Series posted Sat Nov 24 2007 22:10:36 by Cloudy
After The Q400 Grounding: SAS May Cut 230 Jobs posted Fri Nov 16 2007 01:20:15 by Vfw614