MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 14891 times:
According to the latest Aviation Letter magazine, Boeing is not assigning curstomer codes to 787s, so they will remain referred to as simply 787-8 and 787-9s.
In captions and production lists so far, the 787s flying are already reported as 787-881 (ANA), 787-846 (JAL), 787-837 (Air India) and l/n 2 and l/n 6 have been reported as 787-83Q. Should these customer based numbers be removed from photo captions and other references to 787s ?
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9077 posts, RR: 13 Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14415 times:
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 2): All the "N" registered 787s are appearing in the FAA database as "787-8", so far anyway. No customer code.
Strange as all 787's delivered so far still use the customer codes which I think should be kept as well. It's an easy way as reference. Airbus should also have done this but I don't think they want to use the Boeing customer codes as their customer codes to have a uniform way of identifying airlines and the aircraft they initially used when originally delivered.
EY460 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 233 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14340 times:
Quoting A388 (Reply 3): Airbus should also have done this but I don't think they want to use the Boeing customer codes as their customer codes to have a uniform way of identifying airlines and the aircraft they initially used when originally delivered.
I believe Airbus numbering system is much better as it allows to determine the engine manufacturer and the engine version. I think this information is much more useful than the original customer of the airframe.
B2468 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 89 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14291 times:
While we are on the topic of Boeing customer codes, why does/did Boeing use this system of putting a customer code on the aircraft model number? While it is useful and informative for folks like us who might be interested in the history of an airframe, I can't see how it is useful for the airlines.
I think Airbus' system is better, since they use the additional digits in the model number to identify both the model and engine selection (I think...or it identifies something technical about the airframe that might be useful for dispatchers and maintenance personnel).
Maybe someone here can explain the benefits of Boeing's system? I just never understood it.
dfwrevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14233 times:
Quoting B2468 (Reply 6): While we are on the topic of Boeing customer codes, why does/did Boeing use this system of putting a customer code on the aircraft model number? While it is useful and informative for folks like us who might be interested in the history of an airframe, I can't see how it is useful for the airlines.
It is useful to know the original owner of the airframe because it communicates the airline-specific options and configurations of the particular airframe. Sometimes these options can be sigificant. We all know the case of TWA opting to have their switches throw a different direction than AA's in their 757 cockpits.
Quoting B2468 (Reply 6): I think Airbus' system is better, since they use the additional digits in the model number to identify both the model and engine selection
They serve the same purpose, Boeing's just allows a greater resolution in that the customer code can imply more information than just model and engine.
Very interesting...thanks for your response! I remember a discussion of some of the weird options TWA got on their 757s, but I forgot about them. Did AA change the switch directions after they took over TW?
So, is there a database out there that can be accessed by the dispatchers and maintenance personnel of second- and third- hand owners of Boeing aircraft that can identify the specific quirky features of each airframe (since I assume some of the later owners might not know the specific options ordered by the original customer)?
Cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1166 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 14021 times:
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 2): All the "N" registered 787s are appearing in the FAA database as "787-8", so far anyway. No customer code.
But those are aircraft either yet to be delivered (UA will get the first N-reg 787s) or on the pool of test registrations. A registration like N1786B wouldn't have any code attached to it because it used again and again on during pre-flight testing (typically assigned to a 737-800).
I haven't actually seen a build plate, but I expect that all 787s will be delivered with customer codes except for perhaps frames 4-6 - which are in a special position.
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9077 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13821 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 5): I believe Airbus numbering system is much better as it allows to determine the engine manufacturer and the engine version. I think this information is much more useful than the original customer of the airframe.
Yes, I know this but I find the history of an aircraft itself more important compared to which engine it is. Maintenance track record wise and crash investigation wise, I find the airline more important than the engine type.
aa777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1113 posts, RR: 7 Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13003 times:
I wonder if it has something to do with the adaptability of the airframe. One of the biggest options that an original carrier might choose is engines. The 787 is one of the first aircraft that can swap the engine type pretty easily. Just remove the everything from the pylon down, and swap 'er out! A little computer work, and it supposed to be a 24-48 hour job. Originally, it was designed to not even require a pylon replacement, but the ultimate complexity of the engines precluded it. Pylon down is still pretty slick. Previously, changing engine type was a pretty huge deal, ie 777 ln#1.
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12905 times:
Correct.
Since there ultimately are no customer-defining options available for the 787, the resolution of initial customer is no longer required.
Robk From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3932 posts, RR: 19 Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12692 times:
Quoting A388 (Reply 3): Strange as all 787's delivered so far still use the customer codes
According to whom?
Quoting Cargolex (Reply 9): But those are aircraft either yet to be delivered (UA will get the first N-reg 787s) or on the pool of test registrations. A registration like N1786B wouldn't have any code attached to it because it used again and again on during pre-flight testing (typically assigned to a 737-800).
I haven't actually seen a build plate, but I expect that all 787s will be delivered with customer codes except for perhaps frames 4-6 - which are in a special position.
Boeing has their own code of 3Q so if they were using customer codes in the sub type as some here like to believe then why do they not show as 787-83Q on the FAA register? Your comparison with 737 test reg N1786B is invalid because that is only a temporary registration that is never officially assigned to a specific airframe, unlike the six test 787s which are all fully assigned to individual airframes.
The reason my Boeing source gave for the dropping of the customer code was a combination of a management change and the desire to make data administration easier for those that have to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, RR: 24 Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 12275 times:
Quoting Robk (Reply 14): Boeing has their own code of 3Q
Isn't 3Q only for the Boeing leasing operation? I thought "20" was the primary Boeing customer code. When the 707 went into service the customer code of the first operator (Pan Am) was 21. Codes then continued through 99 and then started from 01 to 19, leaving 20 as the Boeing generic code. When they ran out of 2-digit codes the began using alpha-numeric codes.
homsaR From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 804 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11094 times:
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7):
It is useful to know the original owner of the airframe because it communicates the airline-specific options and configurations of the particular airframe. Sometimes these options can be sigificant. We all know the case of TWA opting to have their switches throw a different direction than AA's in their 757 cockpits.
Quoting A388 (Reply 10):
Yes, I know this but I find the history of an aircraft itself more important compared to which engine it is. Maintenance track record wise and crash investigation wise, I find the airline more important than the engine type.
I'm not really sure these explanations really make the Boeing customer code useful.
For example, I believe TWA had both 757-231s and 757-2Q8s. What's the difference between the two, other than one set happened to be bought by TWA, and the other set happened to be bought by ILFC and then leased to TWA?
Didn't United pick up a couple of 747-451s that Northwest ordered and never took delivery of (or maybe I have that backwards, and they were 747-422s that went to Northwest)?
Likewise, an airline can buy the same type of plane with different options and still get the same customer code. British Airways bought their first 777-200s with GE engines, and their next batch with RR engines. They are both called 777-236s (or -236ER, or whatever).
Northwest's first batch of 757-251s were different from their second batch of 757-251s.
Even when the engines are the same, there can be a number of differences. A newly delivered AA 737-823 with the latest refinements and the Boeing Sky Interior is going to be a bit different from a 737-823 delivered in 1999 or 2000 or whenever they received their first batch.
The customer code doesn't tell you anything about the maintenance history of a plane. You could hypothetically have two Boeing 737-3XXs delivered to the same airline 20 years ago. One of them stayed with that airline and is still flying with them to this day. The other was sold after five years and wound up flying for some startup airline in a third-world country with minimal safety regulations and oversight. They're both still technically 737-3XXs.
In the end, the only thing that a Boeing customer code tells you is who originally bought the plane (and sometimes, from what I understand, it doesn't even tell you that).
Cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1166 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10896 times:
3Q is Boeing Equipment Leasing - usually for BBJ's or other specialty items as far as I know.
Interestingly, five of the six test 787s have only 787-8 on their registration. But one, N787EX, uses 787-83Q. I don't know how to look up a Japanese official registration.
sphealey From United States of America, joined May 2005, 361 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9734 times:
Ah, the age old argument over significant vs. non-significant part numbers. Probably first held among the designers of the Pyramids (although perhaps the designers of the Babylonian irrigation system), never has been and never will be resolved!
sPh
Personally I side with the non-significant argument.
Robk From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3932 posts, RR: 19 Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9272 times:
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 20): The new 747 won't have customer codes either, as it's officially the 747-8, or -8F for freighter and -8I for passenger, not -800.
That's actually incorrect. Boeing has continued issuing the customer codes as the base model number is still the same.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, RR: 65 Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9135 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 5): I believe Airbus numbering system is much better as it allows to determine the engine manufacturer and the engine version. I think this information is much more useful than the original customer of the airframe.
Agreed.
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7): They serve the same purpose, Boeing's just allows a greater resolution in that the customer code can imply more information than just model and engine.
Not always. See below.
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7): It is useful to know the original owner of the airframe because it communicates the airline-specific options and configurations of the particular airframe.
Oftentimes it will not even be able to identify the engine.
Quoting homsaR (Reply 17): I believe TWA had both 757-231s and 757-2Q8s. What's the difference between the two, other than one set happened to be bought by TWA, and the other set happened to be bought by ILFC and then leased to TWA?
Indeed. And what of all the other ILFC, GECAS and whoever codes?
Quoting homsaR (Reply 17): Likewise, an airline can buy the same type of plane with different options and still get the same customer code. British Airways bought their first 777-200s with GE engines, and their next batch with RR engines. They are both called 777-236s (or -236ER, or whatever).
Quite.
Quoting homsaR (Reply 17): In the end, the only thing that a Boeing customer code tells you is who originally bought the plane (and sometimes, from what I understand, it doesn't even tell you that).
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, RR: 21 Reply 25, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9022 times:
Quoting B2468 (Reply 6): why does/did Boeing use this system of putting a customer code on the aircraft model number?
In the Spares dept. these were extremely useful in the pre computer, pre leasing and pre service cetner days for determining whether a part was applicable to the airline ordering.. they were very helpful in matching serial number controlled parts in manufacturing and BFE. They started to become a problem when the leasing companies bought large numbers and when airlines like Air France started performing maintenance for other customers. Illustrated parts catalogs were sorted by customer codes.. sometimes a customer "x" would forget to tell Boeing that they were performing maintenance for carrier "Y" and we would not process the order because because the it wasn't applicable to the planes carrier "x" had.
That has since changed..
I think the numbering has hung on long after it was needed because "we've always done that" ... and today people are questioning non productive processes and procedures.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 26, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7772 times:
Quoting A388 (Reply 3): Strange as all 787's delivered so far still use the customer codes
I haven't seen a customer code on any 787-8 from Boeing (as opposed to come foreign regulator adding one)...is there an example out there?
Quoting B2468 (Reply 8): So, is there a database out there that can be accessed by the dispatchers and maintenance personnel of second- and third- hand owners of Boeing aircraft that can identify the specific quirky features of each airframe
Boeing has the master database. Airlines can choose to order customized manuals that will document exactly which airframe has what (this comes included for first-tier customers, it's a paid extra for 2nd+ customers). If an airline choses not to order customized manuals that's legal but they have to convince their regulator that they have adequate documentation to maintain continued airworthiness, which could be tricky.
Bralo20 From Belgium, joined exactly 5 years ago today! , 585 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 6777 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 26): I haven't seen a customer code on any 787-8 from Boeing (as opposed to come foreign regulator adding one)...is there an example out there?
N787EX is registered with the FAA as a Boeing 787-83Q (3Q = BCC Equipment Leasing), the other US-registered testplanes are registered as 787-8's.
gatechae From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 80 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 6470 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 15): Isn't 3Q only for the Boeing leasing operation? I thought "20" was the primary Boeing customer code. When the 707 went into service the customer code of the first operator (Pan Am) was 21. Codes then continued through 99 and then started from 01 to 19, leaving 20 as the Boeing generic code. When they ran out of 2-digit codes the began using alpha-numeric codes.
This is very interesting. Did they assign an airline a customer code on order or on delivery of the first frame? If it was on order, were there any cancelled orders such that an airline had a Boeing customer code but never flew any Boeing aircraft?
What are these?Pancakes?*gets force fed one*Oh oh, these are delectable.Good news Flappy, I've decided not to kill you!
gipsy From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 100 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5738 times:
Quoting A388 (Reply 10): Yes, I know this but I find the history of an aircraft itself more important compared to which engine it is. Maintenance track record wise and crash investigation wise, I find the airline more important than the engine type.
Airbus has it's own numbering system. You can only read out engines and model from it's name but there still is the fleet serial number (101, 102, 401, 402 etc..) and the version (DLH01 /DLH02 etc). You can also look up the standard it's built to and all it's owner and user history. If an aircarft gets sold to another airline all it's documantation will get migrated to his new version. As an example hawaiaan buys 5 used airbus aircraft, and they are their first ever Airbus aircraft for them. They get FSN HAL01 and everything gets adapted to how things are right now on that particular aircarft. The customer gets a HAL documentation just done for him delivered with the aircraft and exclusively representing this aircaft.
Eagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1621 posts, RR: 2 Reply 30, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5667 times:
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7): It is useful to know the original owner of the airframe because it communicates the airline-specific options and configurations of the particular airframe.
Quoting gigneil (Reply 13): Since there ultimately are no customer-defining options available for the 787, the resolution of initial customer is no longer required.
Thats what I had been told by an airline mgnr about 18 montha ago. By not having individual interior configs Boeing maintains the second hand value of the B787 airframes. And with so many B787 being owned by leasing companies perhaps they had a bit of influence here?
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Reply 31, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days ago) and read 5403 times:
Quoting gatechae (Reply 28): id they assign an airline a customer code on order or on delivery of the first frame? If it was on order, were there any cancelled orders such that an airline had a Boeing customer code but never flew any Boeing aircraft?
They were assigned on order (at least quite a while before delivery), there are some interesting ones, 63 for Ghana Airways (cancelled 707-400s), 39 for Cubana (707-100s were assigned as such but went to Western Airlines), 99 for British Caledonian (cancelled 737-200s) X4 for Supair Germany (cancelled 737-200s) and many more.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
skyhawkmatthew From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 32, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days ago) and read 5339 times:
Back in the 707 days, there could be massive differences in airframes, beyond just interior and avionics fit-out, between different customer codes: Qantas' short-bodied 707-138 variant is a prime example.
Even through to the '80s there were still significant variations - some 767s (e.g. BA's -336ER) were built with four full-size exit doors per side, while others (QF's -338ER) instead have overwing exit hatches.
With different airlines operating with increasingly similar configurations (and, nowadays, near-identical avionics/instruments), the need to differentiate between different original customers becomes less important.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 33, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3974 times:
Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 30): Thats what I had been told by an airline mgnr about 18 montha ago. By not having individual interior configs Boeing maintains the second hand value of the B787 airframes.
Something sounds fishy about that; the interior configuration is one of the things that absolutely is individual to each airline.
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, RR: 21 Reply 34, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3450 times:
Quoting gatechae (Reply 28): If it was on order, were there any cancelled orders such that an airline had a Boeing customer code but never flew any Boeing aircraft?
several were noted above, plus all those sold to leasing companies carried a the owners code not the operators.
Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3573 posts, RR: 52 Reply 35, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3310 times:
The customer codes have no purpose at all and should have discarded a long time ago.
Exactly identical aircraft at different airlines have different model numbers.
Completely different aircraft at the same carrier have the same model number.
What's the whole point?
Soren
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
Eagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1621 posts, RR: 2 Reply 36, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3229 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 33): Something sounds fishy about that; the interior configuration is one of the things that absolutely is individual to each airline.
It was referring to toilet and galley placement rather then seating config.
flyPBA From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3111 times:
Quoting homsaR (Reply 17): I'm not really sure these explanations really make the Boeing customer code useful.
For example, I believe TWA had both 757-231s and 757-2Q8s. What's the difference between the two, other than one set happened to be bought by TWA, and the other set happened to be bought by ILFC and then leased to TWA?
Didn't United pick up a couple of 747-451s that Northwest ordered and never took delivery of (or maybe I have that backwards, and they were 747-422s that went to Northwest)?
Delta has (or had) a bunch of 767-324s that Continental had once ordered then cancelled before delivery
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1600 posts, RR: 4 Reply 38, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
Quoting kanban (Reply 25): I think the numbering has hung on long after it was needed because "we've always done that" ... and today people are questioning non productive processes and procedures.
I agree. Boeing tends to change it's processes really slow. The 787 and to some extent the 777 were revolutionary planes, not necessarily because of the advances in technology but the mind set and procedural changes that needed to happen within the company in order to push them though.
The merger with MD did stir things up a little - whether it was helpful can be up for debate.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, RR: 24 Reply 39, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2858 times:
Quoting flyPBA (Reply 37): Delta has (or had) a bunch of 767-324s that Continental had once ordered then cancelled before delivery
Not a bunch. DL has never had more than one of the 5 763s ordered but cancelled by CO. Three others are with Thomson Airways in the UK and one is with North American Airlines. The one with DL (N394DL) below
kanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2468 posts, RR: 21 Reply 41, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2662 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 40): I suppose the interesting thing will be to see if Boeing issue new customer numbers to new customers
gradually customer codes will cease for all models.. the 737 probably at the switch to the MAX.. 777 at the switch to the X.. 767 probably not because it's a limited production nearing the end.
Antoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1505 posts, RR: 4 Reply 42, posted (1 year 1 month 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2311 times:
Quoting skyhawkmatthew (Reply 32): Back in the 707 days, there could be massive differences in airframes, beyond just interior and avionics fit-out, between different customer codes: Qantas' short-bodied 707-138 variant is a prime example.
This was my first thought when I saw the topic...
The customer codes started, it seems, with the 707... on the 707 Boeing was willing to make nearly any modification that could be certified to sell the frames (whether that was a good policy or not is a different debate, but it seems to have worked out in the end). Thus, back then, the customer code could tell you exactly how the plane was configured because each airline had their own quirks and they ordered all their planes of the same model identical, or at least very similarly.
These days there's far less in the way of major differences between planes bought by different airlines and far more difference in the cabin fittings and galley and lav placements... which can all be changed without a huge amount of difficulty when the aircraft changes owners...
Add in huge fleets of aircraft owned by leasing companies and it is now logical to drop the customer codes on new models. It's still somewhat sad, from the perspective of something unique to Boeing going away.
Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 43, posted (1 year 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2080 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 5): I believe Airbus numbering system is much better as it allows to determine the engine manufacturer and the engine version. I think this information is much more useful than the original customer of the airframe.
Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 7): They serve the same purpose, Boeing's just allows a greater resolution in that the customer code can imply more information than just model and engine.
Exactly.
Quoting B2468 (Reply 8): Did AA change the switch directions after they took over TW?
Since there ultimately are no customer-defining options available for the 787, the resolution of initial customer is no longer required.
Also, engine configuration no longer matters, because of the easy interchangability.
Quoting homsaR (Reply 17): Didn't United pick up a couple of 747-451s that Northwest ordered and never took delivery of (or maybe I have that backwards, and they were 747-422s that went to Northwest)?
UA did buy 2 -451s and I believe is still flying one, with another parked somewhere.
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 35):
The customer codes have no purpose at all and should have discarded a long time ago.
That is completely untrue.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, RR: 24 Reply 44, posted (1 year 1 month 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1911 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 43): Quoting homsaR (Reply 17):
Didn't United pick up a couple of 747-451s that Northwest ordered and never took delivery of (or maybe I have that backwards, and they were 747-422s that went to Northwest)?
UA did buy 2 -451s and I believe is still flying one, with another parked somewhere.
Latest A.net photo of the other former UA -451 (N106UA when with UA). It was disposed of around 2003, possibly returned to the lessor as part of the UA bankruptcy filing. Apparently now owned by Phuket Air. It was operating for SV in the photo.
The customer codes have no purpose at all and should have discarded a long time ago.
That is completely untrue.
There was a time they assisted tracking customer configurations, however they were not the only method. They came about before computers and were a nightmare to maintain. Drawing parts lists had pages devoted to them and so many flag notes mistakes were more common than correct first reading. Engineering release process and format changes as well as other documentation advances rendered them no value added. They could have disappeared 15-20 years ago however the 757/767/777 were to far along to make the change. So the 787 today, 737 Max tomorrow, the 777X after that have new drawing trees and configuration controls that allow the deletion of the customer code.. The 747 is the old drawing system and will probably keep them even if not published until a new design replacement appears.
I'm not sure from an outsider's standpoint where your absolute statement comes from however it is untrue.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 2381 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3249 posts, 
From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9077 posts, 
to have a uniform way of identifying airlines and the aircraft they initially used when originally delivered.
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21495 posts, 
From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2314 posts, 
A considerable part of my time required for keeping my logbook up-to-date was to find out the production code for the Boeings.
From Belgium, joined exactly 5 years ago today! 
, 585 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1621 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 99 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
