CEO@AFG From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 238 posts, RR: 3 Posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3066 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!
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26925 posts, RR: 83 Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Within the industry, I expect most will append the model number (787-9 or A350-900), but won't bother with the title (Dreamliner or XWB).
Outside the industry, I expect most won't bother with the titles nor the model numbers or customer codes and just call it a 787 or A350.
DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2953 times:
I'm hoping Airbus drops the stupid XWB designation and does something about the A350-1000 (maybe just -10 and move on) othwerwise you have an A350XWB-1000
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5381 posts, RR: 11 Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2932 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.
PGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2518 posts, RR: 44 Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2723 times:
I think it's only nomenclature, and as such really doesn't matter.
RJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2693 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.
Pilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2533 times:
That's just a marketing name. Most don't stick too long after EIS. For example, the 777 was/is the Worldliner, but you rarely see it labeled as such anymore.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26925 posts, RR: 83 Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2515 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.
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 238 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26925 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11995 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
