Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Epidemic Of Cheesy Airliner Names  
User currently offlinePanAm788 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 291 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 18041 times:

I'm wondering what everyone's opinion is here about what I see is the start of a new, super annoying era of aircraft naming. Maybe I'm just being weird, but I don't like that every new aircraft model is suddenly an -800 or and -8 and has a nickname to go along with it.

1) Why is "Dreamliner" still posted next the 787's name on all the photos here. I thought that was a promotional name and would go away like the 777-200LR "Worldliner". In 25 years is it still going to be a "Dreamliner"? Didn't think so.

2) The A380-800, 747-8, and 787-8 should be named the A380-100 (or maybe the -200 b/c I get that -100 sounds antique to some), 747-500, and 787-100 or 200, respectively. It's dumb that you go from 747-400 to -8. Where are -500, -600, and -700? And why drop the zeros when you are just going to put them back on anyway with customer codes? it doesn't sound any cooler or more modern. Just cheaper and emptier. And please don't let "747-8 Intercontinental" stick like the Dreamliner name is.

3) I hate the name A350-1000XWB. Quadruple digits are just so unnecessary at all levels. So is XWB. It's not even a extra wide widebody. That name better go too. Is Airbus thinking "Ooooh let's just skip -100 through -700 and add XWB so it sounds more advanced and more airlines will buy it"? What happens when they launch an upgraded version. A350-1100?! WTF man. It'll probably have some dumb new name too.

4) The worst above all else has to be the 737 MAX. The MAX series? Really!? A third grader could come up with a better name. And the naming schemes are going to be the 737 MAX 7/8/9. With a code that would be 737 MAX 832 for example. So the MAX will replace the dash and be annoying as hell to say and write? Why can't it sound like a real machine: 737-700B or 737-700/Adv. What is wrong with those names that have been around forever? Even 737-1000, -1100, and -1200 would be better, because unlike the A350, the 737 at least deserves the quadruple digits.

Am I alone here? Maybe so, but I got my rant out so I feel better. Thanks for reading.


heroes get remembered but legends never die
98 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedavid_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7359 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 18008 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From the manufacturers point of view: "8" - number signified as being lucky in Asia. And where is a lot of growth in the industry to come from? Asia.


From the airlines point of view: what the nickname or model number is will not make any part in any decision in ordering the aircraft. It's down to economics. Though I believe Airbus had to signify that they amended the A350 that was launched in response to what customers wanted .


User currently offlineTCASAlert From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17971 times:

I do agree, they should stick totally to numbers or an original model designation. Also frustrating how they give the A380 the "A380-800" and the 787 the "787-800" designation. Why not a simple "-100" as has been the case for the last fifty years with no problem at all. What about when they start designating ICAO/IATA codes for them - it will get really confusing then.

I do think the 'Dreamliner' designation for the 787 is just marketing hype and will go away. They are trying to get the aircraft into the public's imaginations, hence why we've just had several days of blanket news coverage about a "Revolutionary, ground breaking" aircraft. Sure its a good evolution, but so was the 777-200LR and the 737NG series, and the A340-500/600, neither of which received this much publicity.


User currently offlinemaddog888 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17955 times:

You are obviously a man of some taste and therefore seriously out of touch with the rest of the world. Unfortunately the corporate clones at the top of these large multinationals all went to the same school for training and all believe that the only way to sell a product is to appeal to the lowest common denominator and make it as "cheesy" and "cheap" (style not cost - though they see nothing wrong with that as well) as possible; although heaven forbid that they should have to live in that enviroment. Even more unfortunately in general it works, it seems you can never go wrong in under estimating the heaving masses.

J


User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17945 times:

I think the "Dreamliner" name will stick, it belongs to the 787. It is a name like "Caravelle" or "Tristar" for me.


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlinePanAm788 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 291 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17856 times:

Quoting david_itl (Reply 1):
From the manufacturers point of view: "8" - number signified as being lucky in Asia. And where is a lot of growth in the industry to come from? Asia.

I get that but having the number 8 involved in every single new Airbus/Boeing aircraft's (and a majority of new derivatives') name since the year 2000 is a little much, no?

Quoting TCASAlert (Reply 2):

Glad to have an ally!

Quoting maddog888 (Reply 3):
You are obviously a man of some taste

Thank you. I try.

Quoting maddog888 (Reply 3):
and therefore seriously out of touch with the rest of the world

I fear you are right. But I try to give the masses more credit then you do.

Quoting columba (Reply 4):

I think the "Dreamliner" name will stick, it belongs to the 787. It is a name like "Caravelle" or "Tristar" for me.

Maybe. But Boeing hasn't really done nicknames in the past and this sort of ruins the whole 7X7 naming series dynamic for me. We'll see though. Hopefully it goes away haha.

[Edited 2011-10-27 01:22:33]


heroes get remembered but legends never die
User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17817 times:

Quoting david_itl (Reply 1):
From the manufacturers point of view: "8" - number signified as being lucky in Asia. And where is a lot of growth in the industry to come from? Asia.

That's always quoted on here as reason - but that didn't stop SQ or CX or CA buying Boeing 747-400 with two unlucky 4s in it. My guess is they just want to let it sound more modern with the high digits. I also hate the -1000 series as it makes those nice A332 or B744 codes impossible to use :P...

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
747-500

This is the only version where I think the -8 can be justified. There were 745, 746, and 74G concepts which were at least unofficially offered to the airlines - but were rejected. Thus, the now realized 748 is just the next iteration of the 747-Advanced concepts.

The whole XWB, MAX, NEO (this at least explains what it is), whatever, stuff is just stupid.



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2006 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17696 times:

If 8 is so lucky and important in China, how come their own programmes are called the ARJ21 and C919, not C888? Further, stretched versions of the C919 will be called C929 and C939.

The logic of calling the base model the A380-800 was to show that it wasn't some initial, rubbish version, but rather the complete, final, all singing and dancing version. Unfortunately, the reality didn't live up to the marketing bull, and Boeing have since copied this strategy (with the late and overweight 787-8 and 747-8)



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinebluewhale18210 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17659 times:

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
1) Why is "Dreamliner" still posted next the 787's name on all the photos here. I thought that was a promotional name and would go away like the 777-200LR "Worldliner". In 25 years is it still going to be a "Dreamliner"? Didn't think so.

I think the original 707 was called the "Intercontinental" also.
727 was dubbed the "whisperjet"
AA calls its A300s the "Luxuryliner"

It's all marketing...

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
The A380-800, 747-8, and 787-8 should be named the A380-100 (or maybe the -200 b/c I get that -100 sounds antique to some), 747-500, and 787-100 or 200, respectively. It's dumb that you go from 747-400 to -8. Where are -500, -600, and -700?

As a Chinese I should be offended by this. Do Boeing and Airbus think that the Chinese are so shallow that they would flock to buy their airplanes just because they have a "8" in there? Or that it's red (748i prototype)?
Don't know about Airbus but Boeing employs enough people of Chinese decent to know better. Put forward a better product ON TIME will win them business, unless political pressure was applied for one reason or another.

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
3) I hate the name A350-1000XWB. Quadruple digits are just so unnecessary at all levels. So is XWB. It's not even a extra wide widebody.

I think the "Extra" was in comparison to its first design, which is the same width with A330. It can now seat 9 abreast, if memory serves.



JPS on A300-600RF A319/320 B737-400/800 B757-200F B767-300F CRJ-200/900. Looking to add more.
User currently offlinejoelyboy911 From New Zealand, joined Oct 2009, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17630 times:

I am of the opinion that it doesn't really matter, personally. These airliners will continue to be referred to in various ways, depending on who's talking. Most people ignore what's after the dash anyway, so it hardly matters. Have you heard the general media refer to the 787-8? A380-800? Not really.

I just don't see that the random series of digits we assign to aircraft means much at all. In fact I quite like planes with a name, rather than just a string of digits- Dreamliner and XWB are the closest things we've got. Why can't we come up with more names. Like Concorde. Stratocruiser. Constellation. Jetstream. Mercure.

The Epidemic is the prevalence of the formulaic model number. A3Boring. 7dull7.



Flown: NZ, NY, SJ, QF, UA, AC, EI, BE, TP, AF
User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10589 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17600 times:

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
2) The A380-800, 747-8, and 787-8 should be named the A380-100 (or maybe the -200 b/c I get that -100 sounds antique to some), 747-500, and 787-100 or 200, respectively. It's dumb that you go from 747-400 to -8. Where are -500, -600, and -700? And why drop the zeros when you are just going to put them back on anyway with customer codes? it doesn't sound any cooler or more modern. Just cheaper and emptier. And please don't let "747-8 Intercontinental" stick like the Dreamliner name is.

I´m with you here. I know its always -8 or -800 because its targeted at (East) Asians, but do Boeings and Airbus marketing strategists really think the Asian aircraft buyers and passengers are so superstitituous that it borders to idiocy? Its as ridiculous as the non-existing row 13 on most airlines (I bet on each flight there are enough people to laugh about it and fill it. And I havent heard that row 13 crashes more often than others).

As for the 747-8, there were projected 747-500s and 747-600s, so these numbers had been taken. But I agree that dropping the 00 is stupid to say the least when two digits are added with the customer code anyway.

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
3) I hate the name A350-1000XWB

XWB should be dropped asap. Its overcomplicated and useless. And a 4-digit version designation ist unnessessary, sure. I am waiting for a A350-8800XWBER NEO F to be introduced in the late 20s.
Why didnt they at least call the largest version the -800? This kottow is becoming embarrassing.


User currently offlinehal9213 From Germany, joined May 2009, 302 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17572 times:

Quoting bluewhale18210 (Reply 8):
727 was dubbed the "whisperjet"

Now thats a funny one, from todays perspective   

Quoting bluewhale18210 (Reply 8):
AA calls its A300s the "Luxuryliner"

I can understand, if something is marketed that way to the end customer, because passengers actually do think about marketing names. However, airlines should really care less.

Well, lets all be thankful they all still use numbers! (which I personally favour). I always think that when I see German underground train designations (U1, U2, U3....) compared to the London Circle/Picadilly/Jubilee/Whatever-Line, and the US numbered street designations in big cities is a delight!

(To the OP: But I really liked your slightly cynical post, you really spoke out of my heart  )


User currently offline777way From Pakistan, joined Dec 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17541 times:

The West had given some ridiculous code names to Soviet era aircraft.

User currently offlineclydenairways From Ireland, joined Jan 2007, 1221 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17507 times:

Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 6):
The whole XWB, MAX, NEO (this at least explains what it is), whatever, stuff is just stupid.

I'll add NG to that list. I really hated that term given to an aeroplane when it came out. It was around the same time as Star Trek Next Generation was out so it was obviously taken from that by some stupid marketing person.

Then airlines started calling 747-200's and 737-300/400/500 "Classic". Another stupid marketing gimmic.

But sadly, this is going to become the norm in the future, even Engines have been hit with these stupid names
LEAP-X
GEnx


User currently offlinenonimaus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 17424 times:

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
3) I hate the name A350-1000XWB. Quadruple digits are just so unnecessary at all levels. So is XWB. It's not even a extra wide widebody.

"XWB" can be justified if you look at the cabin width of Airbus' previous twins. The A300, 310, 330 (and also via development relationship, the A340) all top out at 5.28 metres in the cabin compared to 5.61 metres for the redesigned A350. The original iteration might possibly have borrowed the dimensions of its predecessors had it not been for vocal opposition from airlines about the prospect of an updated A330 derivative.

Quoting PanAm788 (Thread starter):
With a code that would be 737 MAX 832 for example. So the MAX will replace the dash and be annoying as hell to say and write? Why can't it sound like a real machine: 737-700B or 737-700/Adv. What is wrong with those names that have been around forever?

"MAX" is a bit of a crap groupthink name, but it has no bearing whatsoever on the performance, and practically no impact in terms of marketing. I don't think it gives any allusion one way or the other as to the implication of being a "real machine", whatever that is.


User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17401 times:

Quoting bluewhale18210 (Reply 8):
727 was dubbed the "whisperjet"

Only by Eastern Airlines. Once fell asleep up against number 1 engine, PIT to TPA, woke up with an earache. Commented to Dad...."Some whisperjet". Sarcasm from a 10-year-old.

Quoting bluewhale18210 (Reply 8):
AA calls its A300s the "Luxuryliner"

AFAIK, AA calls ALL of its wide-bodies "LuxuryLiners".



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9097 posts, RR: 29
Reply 16, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17333 times:

When I read the title I immediately thought - what's so bad about calling an airline "SWISS"???

Quoting columba (Reply 4):
I think the "Dreamliner" name will stick, it belongs to the 787. It is a name like "Caravelle" or "Tristar" for me.

I think so too, although it still is a nightmare for Boeing

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 5):
But Boeing hasn't really done nicknames in the past and this sort of ruins the whole

Well Boieng hasn't except for the ones mentioned altready but the marketing departments of many airlines thought things up, like Astrojet, or with LH City Jet for the 737-200 (also called "Schweinchen" ((Piggy)) internally) , 727-200 was the Europa jet and so on.

Quoting hal9213 (Reply 11):
Now thats a funny one, from todays perspective

yes, but compared to the early 707/720/ DC8s it was an improvement. I lived underneath the flight path for LGA in Forest Hills Queens and I had no complaints.

Three engine generations later people claim new aircraft are noisy, they don#ät know what they talk about.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineHELFAN From Finland, joined Aug 2011, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17301 times:

IIRC Lufthansa named all its Boeing jets in the 70's as follows:

737 - City Jet
727 - Europa Jet
707 - Intercontinental Jet
747 - Jumbo Jet

Don't know how official these names were. Dreamliner might as well remain in the public discourse since it's not a bad name as such. It's up to the public to decide what becomes a common name. People everywhere still talk about Jumbo Jet when they refer to 747 but I seriously doubt that Whale Jet will ever become a common nickname for A380.
Some names just stick, some don't.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9097 posts, RR: 29
Reply 18, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17263 times:

The LH names where official, except "Schweinchen" of course. .The then LH subsidiary Condor inherited 2 of the first LH747-100 LH got and called one MAX and the other MORITZ after the 2 rascalls created by the inventor of the comic strips, Wilhelm Busch.


E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinecgnnrw From Germany, joined May 2005, 1135 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 17144 times:

Don't forget the AVRO "Jumbolino". Kinda like it personally myself.


A330 man.
User currently offlineHELFAN From Finland, joined Aug 2011, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 17022 times:

BTW, wasn't there a name contest when A380 entered service at LH? And the winning proposal was "Lady Bee"
Is this name being used somewhere? I haven't seen it since, to be honest.
Was the contest just waste of money with such an outcome? It was indeed a silly name, if you ask me.


User currently offlineavalon2862 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 17010 times:

The "Dreamliner" moniker won't be going away any time soon... it's painted on every 787...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Air-I...d=7777eb2a9d14d94649b41e9957f923c2
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Japan...d=7777eb2a9d14d94649b41e9957f923c2
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Royal...d=7777eb2a9d14d94649b41e9957f923c2
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Air-I...d=7777eb2a9d14d94649b41e9957f923c2


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30397 posts, RR: 84
Reply 22, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 16888 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting david_itl (Reply 1):
From the manufacturers point of view: "8" - number signified as being lucky in Asia. And where is a lot of growth in the industry to come from? Asia.

While this is commonly suggested, I'm not sure it's absolutely true. After all, "4" is unlucky in Asia and they soaked up 747-400s like a sponge.

I've heard one of the rationales for Airbus starting -800 for the A380 was because it was two passenger decks, so the "8" symbolized two fuselage barrels on top of each other, even if the A380's actual structure is a single fuselage barrel.

I've also heard the -8 in the 7E7/787 was to recognize the original nominal range of 8,000+ nautical miles.

As noted, Boeing launched the 747-500X and 747-600X (and also showed a 747-700X concept) in 1996, but the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis killed the MoUs they had secured with MH, TG and BA and therefore the planes never went forward into production. I also believe Boeing have stated they went with 747-8 instead of 747-800 (or 747-500) to link the plane with the 787-8.




Quoting bluewhale18210 (Reply 8):
727 was dubbed the "whisperjet"
Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 15):
Only by Eastern Airlines. Once fell asleep up against number 1 engine, PIT to TPA, woke up with an earache. Commented to Dad...."Some whisperjet". Sarcasm from a 10-year-old.

Eastern was correct in applying that appellation to the L-1011, however. That plane was amazingly quiet inside at cruise.


User currently offlineHomsAR From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 16448 times:

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 13):
I'll add NG to that list. I really hated that term given to an aeroplane when it came out. It was around the same time as Star Trek Next Generation was out so it was obviously taken from that by some stupid marketing person.

I've always thought that names like "Next Generation" (and add NEO/New Engine Option to that list) have a limited life.

I mean, is the 737-700 really "next generation" any more? No, it's current generation, and has been for 15 years. In 2025, will the A320neo still have the "new" engine? No, it will be the current engine.

And +1 to all those complaining about how the new counting system starts with 8.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlinespartanmjf From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 15939 times:

And all of the United aircraft, back in 'the day,' were referred to as FriendShips..... And nothing will ever, ever take the place of 'Clipper' in my heart.

I do kind of like Dreamliner, but the specific model designations such as -800XWB are getting way too long....

[Edited 2011-10-27 06:49:17]


"Nuts to the man in 21D!"
25 XaraB : Most of the comments above sound a bit like examplifications of the saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", or in laymen's terms, "Old habits die ha
26 Post contains links and images VV701 : Like it! Made my day. But can you say that if the 744 had been the 748 that SQ, CX or CA might not have bought more? Actually they probably would not
27 Post contains links and images OzarkD9S : Yes I have, actually: View Large View MediumPhoto © N94504
28 Post contains images Avi8r747 : 8 may be a lucky number for Asia, but not so much for Boeing
29 rdh3e : My one comment for this whole ludicrous thread. You complain about this, but then you make it part of your user name. Just a touch hypocritical, IMHO
30 konrad : A350-11000WTF sounds like a great idea!
31 aviateur : I agree with the thread starter on all counts. What ever happened to modesty, understatement, and elegance in commercial aviation? Everything now is s
32 airplanenut : My understanding is that the 747-8 got its name in part to recognize the significant amount of technology it used that originally came from 787 develo
33 cgnnrw : Oh I forgot about AA branding their wide-bodies as "luxury jets"
34 Post contains images PanAm788 : Well dumb name aside, the 787-8 is still my favorite airplane. And PanAm is/was my favorite airline so I just put the two together. Not trying to be
35 KarlB737 : The long numerical value for an aircraft type I dislike as well. A single word or two words put together to form one like Dreamliner, WhisperJet, Lux
36 474218 : But the name "Wisperliner" was applied to the L-1011 because of its community noise footprint. The L-1011 was by far the quietest first generation wi
37 ABQopsHP : I would have to say, this whole line of logic, could also be applied to paint schemes as well. The overwhelming abundance of Euro-white schemes out th
38 Post contains images mayor : Obviously not people that ever worked at or lived around an airport that handled BAC1-11s or CV880s.
39 PanHAM : BAC 1-11 served THF on multiple flights daily, BEA operated from HAM, HAJ, DUS STR and I believe CGN as well, up to a dozen flighs on some routes. . W
40 Post contains images CrimsonNL : I couldn't agree more! In spoken language, or when typing, I usually refer to the 747-400 as 744, or A330-300 as 333, how the heck will you abbreviat
41 ghifty : LOL. The progression of your negativity was funny to read. I have to admit that the whole time I was chuckling, and wondering "what about the Max?!" I
42 Markam : I will not go into whether the XBW tag should be dropped or not, but mind that, as someone has already mentioned, the A350 XBW really IS wider. Airbu
43 RubberJungle : There's nothing wrong with giving an aircraft a name, but 'Dreamliner' is a pretty naff name. It's not the least bit interesting or intriguing, and wo
44 Post contains images Stitch : But when they do announce it, will they title the invitation "Meet the Fokker"? [Edited 2011-10-27 12:18:13]
45 Post contains links imiakhtar : Gulfstream renamed their G250 for that very reason: SAVANNAH, Ga., July 18, 2011 — Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. announced today that it has renamed t
46 eldanno : Hmm.. I don't recall having seen a 751, 761, or 771. I heard somewhere that Boeing started skipping the -100's due to the perception that they would b
47 Stitch : Boeing did plan a 767-100 at around 180 seats, but the economics were not good compared to the 757-200, which offered similar capacity, so it was dro
48 Post contains images AirbusA6 : I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the worst current name of the lot... the Sukhoi Superjet
49 gasman : Clearly you're not alone, and I'm joining your club! Taking things sideways a notch. The most utilitarian of aircarft names was surely the "Boeing 70
50 CapEd388 : I don't really see why everyone gets all worked up over names and numbers. Does any of that really matter?? Do airlines care what the name of the airc
51 type-rated : At least nobody has named their plane the "Raindeer" as they did in some Jimmy Stewart movie "No Highway In The Sky", now THAT was a cheesy name!
52 HomsAR : Of course they won't. They'll name it the F-800.
53 ghifty : I don't think aircraft having nicnkames is anything new. Jumping around numbers is though, as is excluding the last two 00s. But like the guy above..
54 Post contains links and images einsteinboricua : Are we really having this discussion? What's next? A topic on how the number system of the airplane work (Boeing's 7X7 and Airbus's A3XX)? Or on which
55 MEA-707 : The irony is that in 20 years, the -800 or -8 versions of the 787, A-350 and A-380 will be seen as exactly such, the early and least efficient and de
56 474218 : Why not adopt the US military system. Start with the -A, then -B, then -C and so on. That way you could have 26 different models of the same basic ai
57 Max Q : Agree, I'm not necessarily against names it's just that these 'modern' ones are useless. The Jumbo and Tristar were unforgettable and unmistakable. Al
58 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : Eastern also used the Whisperjet name on DC-9s for a while. View Large View MediumPhoto © Bob Garrard Eastern called the L-1011 "Whisperliner", not
59 CapEd388 : Yeah you're right. They got rid of these names years ago, early 2000s IIRC. They called their larger jets (DC-10/B767/A300) "LuxuryLiner" They called
60 Max Q : Yes, 'Whisperjet' on a DC-9 Maybe on the inside..
61 ghifty : Why is LH so proud of their Boeing heritage? They haven't flown the 757, 767, and have yet to order the 787. Airlines like UA have operated all the B
62 AirFrance744 : The -8 in the 747-8 comes from the fact that almost all of its improvements over the -400 version came from using the same revolutionary technology t
63 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : But they were the launch carrier for the 737, and have ordered 323 Boeing aircraft since their first 707 order. That makes LH Boeing's 2nd largest Eu
64 maxpower1954 : I didn't see it mentioned, but Boeing initially marketed the "707Jet Stratoliner" which by service introduction in 1958 had already almost faded away.
65 Viscount724 : "Stratocruiser" for the Boeing 377 never faded away. In fact the name was used more than the official model number. The same applies for many other p
66 ghifty : I think that's quite clear, and has been re-iterated numerous times throughout this thread already. What's not clear is why Boeing decided not to app
67 woodsboy : The new silly names are, as we seem mostly to agree are crap, complicated and needlessly. The even more ridiculous version numbers combined with acron
68 RIXrat : I could be wrong, but I seem to remember Boeing running a name the plane contest while it was still the 7N7. "Dreamliner" was the winner and then the
69 maxpower1954 : Right you are, but with the exception of the Comet, Caravelle and Trident I can't think of any jetliner manufacturer's names that stuck. When I flew
70 Post contains images sovietjet : Who cares anymore. All the new planes now look the same, are quiet as a feather, and don't project any sort of attitude or individuality. The names ar
71 Viscount724 : Yes, and a few other R-R "river" engines, including the Dart, Spey, Nene and Tay.
72 rheinwaldner : The parents give names. I think it is a bit sad and a moot point if you hate the names other "parents" give to their "children". You can give the nam
73 AirPacific747 : I agree.. all these names are stupid. And I especially don't like the "MAX" name. It's like 'this is the final version. There is no way to further upg
74 RubberJungle : Not quite. My understanding is that it wasn't driven so much by the desire to include an '8' but by the unpleasant connotation of the '250'. In certa
75 Max Q : You have to remember that LH started operating the B707 not so long after WW2, it, and subsequent Boeing Models were the 'tool' with which they re en
76 uapremier : I thought the original 707 was called Stratoliner, of course I could be mistaken.
77 PanHAM : They started with Convairs and Supr Constellations. The first Boeing 707 entered commercial service in 1960, 5 years after Lufthansa was founded and
78 474218 : L-1011 was used by US based operators, while the foreign operators seemed use TriStar. Delta with the L-1011 logo on the No. 2 engine duct and TW wit
79 Post contains images VV701 : BA also had "TriStar" and the model number on #2 engine::
80 notaxonrotax : I liked the F-27 "Friendship" and the F28 Fellowship". Nice names......... No Tax On Rotax
81 AirbusA6 : As BEA/BA already used Tridents (nobody called them HS-121s), it was logical to use the Tristar name. Yes, Conway is a river, though now known in its
82 mirrodie : Not worth another thread but falls along the same lines..... Whats with Peach Airlines? In an odd pinkish color?! Talk about cheesy
83 Viscount724 : If memory correct, Boeing tried to resurrect the Stratoliner name, which had been used for the Boeing 307 4-engine piston airliner of 1938 (the first
84 Max Q : As I said, not so long. Fifteen years is nothing. Of course they operated piston Aircraft before then but these early Boeing jets really put them on
85 HomsAR : That's true. I remember the contest. One of the options (my choice) was "Global Cruiser." There was at least one more option, but I don't remember wh
86 Post contains images spacecadet : "MAX" probably *is* because of Asia, and specifically Japan (remember, they buy 737's too!). This is a name that would remind them of the latest Shink
87 polot : I'm pretty sure Caravelle refers to Caravel (the french spelling?), which is old type of ship. While I agree most current names are cheesy, I think,
88 mayor : At DL, in common usage, we just called them Tristars or ten-elevens. Some people who were not so fond of them called them Tribuckets.
89 yeelep : Yup, Dreamliner won out over Global Cruiser, Stratoclimber, and the eLiner.
90 OzarkD9S : Never heard that one before!
91 474218 : I though I had heard just about every derogatory name for the L-1011, but that is new to me. Additionally, I would have been "fired" (sacked) if my b
92 aviateur : My favorite is "TriTanic" PS
93 Coal : Ever seen BR's 77Ws? I'd post a photo but I'm on iPad and thus too lazy, but do a search on the db. Cheers Coal
94 spacecadet : That's really not much of a choice. "Should we call it 'The Dump Truck', 'The Pug Nose', 'The Water Lander' or "The Dreamliner'"? Uhhhh... well, when
95 mayor : Well, without naming anyone, specifically, I can say it was in SLC, in the mid to late 80s and it was mostly people that were used to the DC-10 and n
96 LimaNiner : Wait -- so there will be a "Boeing 737-700" and "Boeing 737 MAX 700"? What will the IATA/ICAO codes look like for these? "7M7/8/9"?
97 yeelep : Yeah, pretty lousy choices. From what I read, Global Cruiser would have been the name if the result was based only on the US votes.
98 aviateur : How about the 757s first flown by Eastern?
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...
When Does An Airliner Reach The End Of Its Life? posted Sun Jun 4 2006 18:51:59 by BA787
Short Names Of The Airports Of The World posted Sat Aug 31 2002 09:03:05 by LOT767SP-LPA
The Fate Of Airliner Prototypes posted Wed Dec 13 2000 04:53:49 by L-1011-500
The Logic Of Joint BA/QF SYD-LHR Via BKK posted Wed Oct 26 2011 06:06:53 by bastew
The Future Of The Current SQ 777-200ER Routes posted Tue Oct 25 2011 12:54:23 by SASMD82
Can Everybody Personalize The REG Of Its Jet? posted Fri Oct 7 2011 05:35:20 by Gonzalo
NY Times On The Demolition Of NA Sundrome posted Thu Oct 6 2011 09:38:06 by psa188
The End Of The Production Of The CRJ In Sight? posted Tue Sep 20 2011 08:32:41 by SASMD82
What Is The Status Of FRA Expansion? posted Thu Sep 8 2011 17:52:56 by YYZAMS
Will The Growth Of AUH And DOH Effect DXB? posted Fri Sep 2 2011 08:23:40 by IndianicWorld