CEO@AFG From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 253 posts, RR: 3 Posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5356 times:
Just wanted to ask people how much you feel the new names on the A350 and B787 will be used?
Personally it's a 787 to me, not a Dreamliner. In addition I was corrected quite sternly on the Boeing tour when referring to the 787 as the 787-800 and not just -8. It was one of those eye-rolling moments for me, as I'm sure we'll see the B787 feature Boeing customer codes. Hence:
Lufthansa would be B787-830
SAS would be B787-883
United would be B787-822
Air Canada would be B787-833
British Airways would be B787-836
and so on.
Similarly the A350 is just the A350 to me, I think the XWB is a marketing gimmick and hope it fades away, as it's such a stupid name. Ok it's wider then the A330, but dear Airbus the 777 is wider still.
What do the rest of you good people think?
"Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue." Steven McCroskey, Airplane!
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6091 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5222 times:
The XWB moniker was always sort of a joke to start with. Extra Wide Body??? It's not as wide as certian other Boeing products, OR certain other Airbus products. Granted, it's wider than itself was, about eight months prior, when it was narrower than itself.
Make sense? Didn't think so.
RJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4983 times:
Yeah i think we all hope it dies out. Unfortunately RR have the Trent XWB - I suppose the 1100 doesn't have a ring to it.
I was thinking ealier on a slightly similar note how it's funny that first the -100 series was unfashionable and most aircraft ended up as -200 and -300. I guess that kinda came around with often the -100 series ending up as almost a prototype, particularly with the 727 and 737. But now even that's gone out of window and the -800 appears to be the baseline.
I wonder if we'll ever see a -200 from A or B again.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 32249 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4805 times:
Quoting RJ111 (Reply 5): Yeah i think we all hope it dies out. Unfortunately RR have the Trent XWB - I suppose the 1100 doesn't have a ring to it.
When China Airlines ordered the A350XWB, their press release noted it would have "Trent 1800" power, but so far that is the only time I have seen that term applied to the A350XWB's engines. However, I believe Rolls now differentiates their engines by using even-numbers for Boeing and odd numbers for Airbus, so "Trent 1800" would not be the right one. As such, I think China Airlines just added 100 to the Trent 1700 Rolls named the proposed engine to power the original A350.
Quoting Pilotboi (Reply 7): For example, the 777 was/is the Worldliner, but you rarely see it labeled as such anymore.