Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Dumb Question About The A320  
User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1808 times:

Why was the A319 given the "19" designator? I realize that on the surface it makes sense because it is shorter than the 320, thus giving it a "shorter" number.
But on a purely mathematical level, isn't the A319 part of the A310 block of numbers? So in that narrow, technical sense, it can be argued (albeit in vain) that the A319 is actually a member of the A310 "family"?

If the A320 "family" is A32X, (20-29), then shouldn't the A310 "family" run the gamut of A31X (10-19)?

Why not make the shortened version the A321 and the lengthened version the A322 just for numerical continuity?

3 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5771 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1735 times:

yeah, kinda like boeing did with the 737. The -300 was one size, the -400 was the largest, and the -500 was the smallest. Fortunately, they got it right this time. 736 short, 73G medium, 738 long, 739 just a little longer than 738.

I don't know why they chose A319. Maybe just for simplicity. It's CLOSE to the 320, but not quite. Dunno about that one.

R


User currently offlineOO-AOG From Switzerland, joined Dec 2000, 1426 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1673 times:

I guess it's because the A320 was launched under the A320-100 serie designator. So the shortest version (A319) could only use the A320-300 designator...which doesn't make sense. (The A321 would then had to be called A320-400 and the A318 A320-500).


Falcon....like a limo but with wings
User currently offlineEl Al 001 From Israel, joined Oct 1999, 1063 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (13 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1634 times:

Well, this one gonna be dumb too, but OO-AOG, the A321 came before the A319, so it would have been:

A321-100--> 320-300
A319-100--> 320-400
A321-200--> 320-500
A318-???--> 320-600      


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...
Question About The A320/19 posted Sat Nov 25 2000 08:18:39 by VIflyer
Question About The Runway System At FRA posted Wed Oct 25 2006 00:29:53 by Stylo777
Question About The Labeling Of Class Of Travel posted Fri Aug 4 2006 03:13:40 by Scalebuilder
Question About Martinair A320 Colour Scheme posted Sun Jun 18 2006 19:40:50 by KL5147
Question About The Cost Of Insurance For Airlines posted Thu May 11 2006 03:14:52 by Scalebuilder
A Question About The 747-8 posted Sat Apr 1 2006 15:53:17 by Boeingguy1
Question About The 319 posted Wed Feb 22 2006 14:12:37 by AirCop
Question About The NWA Livery posted Sat Feb 4 2006 17:22:03 by NA
Question About The EVA Air Name posted Sun Jan 15 2006 10:47:19 by Airimages
Question About The Cass Program posted Fri Nov 4 2005 00:29:04 by Apodino