Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.  
User currently offlinedoulasc From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 530 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14080 times:

Airbus started out with the A300,then A310,A320,A330 and A340.Then after the A340 they jumped to the double decker A380. They skipped A350(now on the drawing board)A360 and A370 series. I wonder why the jumping around. Boeing and Mcdonnell Douglas never did that.

88 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14095 times:

I think it had to do with the number 8... good luck in Chinese?? (I may be completely wrong on that.) But notice the recent 8s-- 747-8I/F, A380-800 (not 100,) 787-8 (not -1, or actually, -100 like it should have been, grr Boeing, way to slap all of our OCDs in the face)


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20563 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14083 times:

This is how I remember it:

http://www.csair-a380.com/en/history.html

Quote:

It was chosen because the number 8 resembles the double-deck cross section, and is a lucky number in some Asian countries where the aircraft was being marketed.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinebristolflyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 2292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14023 times:

I read once (on here probably) that the 8 represents a cross section of the 2 decks - makes sense to me. Besides, the A380 is so much bigger than everything else in Airbus's range that it had to be some radically different!


Fortune favours the brave
User currently offlineamerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3761 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 13924 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Mcdonnell Douglas never did that.

They did, if you talk about subtypes. They made the DC-9-10 thru 50, and then the DC-9-80 which is known as the MD-80. But if you notice, there was never a DC-9-60 or DC-9-70.



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3061 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 13891 times:

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Boeing and Mcdonnell Douglas never did that.

Also, not 100% true for Boeing either.

Although the Boeing 720 was at one stage of development known as 717, it never entered service as 717.

So, Boeing skipped 717, and only filled the gap with a later model.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlinebluewave 707 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3152 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 13828 times:

The original Boeing 717-100 was the civilian designation for the KC-135.

That is why the MD-95 was given the 717-200 designation, after Boeing acquired McDonnell-Douglas.



"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 13619 times:

Against the latin : "Nomen est omen" - we have a saying in German:

"Namen sind Schall und Rauch" - names are sound and smoke


- and especially in the bizzare world of PR, you shouldn't take names too seriously.   

[Edited 2013-02-18 23:14:25]


Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently onlineSYDSpotter From Australia, joined Oct 2012, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 13603 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 7):
- and especially in the bizzare world of PR, you shouldn't take names too seriously

Yes especially when you have names like A350XWB and 737MAX floating around   



319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13551 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 2):
This is how I remember it:

http://www.csair-a380.com/en/history.html

Quote:It was chosen because the number 8 resembles the double-deck cross section, and is a lucky number in some Asian countries where the aircraft was being marketed.

That is just utterly ridiculous. As if any airline decides to buy an aircraft based on the model number.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20563 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13464 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 9):
As if any airline decides to buy an aircraft based on the model number.

Then why did Boeing leap to 747-8 as the next sequence for the 747, or pass over other choices to make the introductory model of the 787 be the 787-8? It was even said that the Boeing house colors for the 747-8 were changed from blue to appeal to the Asian market.

Is it any coincidence that UA flight 888 is routed PEK-SFO? Or that UA flight 88 is routed PEK-EWR?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13404 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 10):

Then why did Boeing leap to 747-8 as the next sequence for the 747, or pass over other choices to make the introductory model of the 787 be the 787-8? It was even said that the Boeing house colors for the 747-8 were changed from blue to appeal to the Asian market.

Is it any coincidence that UA flight 888 is routed PEK-SFO? Or that UA flight 88 is routed PEK-EWR?

Please, do not tell me that you seriously believe that if the A380 or the 787 were namedthe A370 and 797 that no Asian carriers would buy them.

Also, do you really believe that anyone booking a flight from PEK to the US chooses one carrier over the other if the flight number includes an 8?



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13389 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 11):
Please, do not tell me that you seriously believe that if the A380 or the 787 were namedthe A370 and 797 that no Asian carriers would buy them.

Also, do you really believe that anyone booking a flight from PEK to the US chooses one carrier over the other if the flight number includes an 8?

It might seem all stupid to you.

However, in the real world, marketing will try and capitalise on *ANY* advantage possible, and if it means pushing the number 8 in the Asian markets, they will (even if its based on superstition).

Just to show you how real it is, many planes don't have a row 13, and many buildings don't have a floor 13.



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13348 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 12):
However, in the real world, marketing will try and capitalise on *ANY* advantage possible, and if it means pushing the number 8 in the Asian markets, they will (even if its based on superstition

I know it is a nice way to market your product, but it will have no meaning whatsoever on the decision of buying an aircraft that costs hundreds of millions.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13315 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 13):
but it will have no meaning whatsoever

How do you *know* that?



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20563 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13313 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 11):
Please, do not tell me that you seriously believe that if the A380 or the 787 were namedthe A370 and 797 that no Asian carriers would buy them.

No of course not, but it shows a deference which could be useful in developing relationships, which could lead to orders. Why else go through the trouble?

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 12):
However, in the real world, marketing will try and capitalise on *ANY* advantage possible, and if it means pushing the number 8 in the Asian markets, they will (even if its based on superstition).

  



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineflyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1016 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13267 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 13):
I know it is a nice way to market your product, but it will have no meaning whatsoever on the decision of buying an aircraft that costs hundreds of millions.

While I agree with you that the benefit in terms of actual aircraft orders is probably questionable, there is one crucial point you're forgetting:

It doesn't cost Airbus or Boeing anything to somehow work an 8 into the model number or variant number, so they'd be stupid not to try.



Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13268 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 14):

How do you *know* that?

Do all Asian carriers operate the 737-800 instead of the A320-200?



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offline777way From Pakistan, joined Dec 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13200 times:

^ and everything that came before the 738 dating back to the 1960s, that didnt include 8 in it, what BS, I'd find it very insulting as an Asian, its making them appear like gullible fools with all this, PIA launched PK 888 to Urumqi in 2005 that service didnt not last more than six months, so much for the luck bit.

User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13078 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 10):

the UA 8xx flight numbers were a holdover from Pan AM, UA805 was for YEARS SFO-HKG, Until the merger where it now is UA869,


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20563 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13072 times:

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 19):
the UA 8xx flight numbers were a holdover from Pan AM

I realize that, but what you're saying doesn't address the point of UA maximizing its use of the number 8 for Beijing-originating flights.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinestarrymarkb From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2011, 158 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13062 times:

I always thought of it as Double A340...

Also originally the A330 was to be the Quad and A340 the twin


User currently offlineokAY From Finland, joined Dec 2006, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12884 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 9):

I find it silly, too. As I find silly that some airlines do not have row 13. But when passengers, not just one or two, but in masses start creating problems refusing to sit on row 13, you as an airline make adjustments. Also, if you notice you can sell more planes by inserting a specific number on the type-name, heck you'd be stupid not to do so! It is amazing how many of us believe in superstition and magic etc.


User currently offlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1595 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 12110 times:

If i recall correctly the A370 is reseverd for the next Gen A320.


“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineExL10Mktg From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 11752 times:

Quoting american 767 (Reply 4):
They did, if you talk about subtypes. They made the DC-9-10 thru 50, and then the DC-9-80 which is known as the MD-80. But if you notice, there was never a DC-9-60 or DC-9-70.

Just because they were never built (or marketed) doesn't mean they didn't exist in an engineering study and were subsequently passed over for the -80 version. I don't know if that was the case but it's very possible. At Lockheed, the Constellation models built (049, 649, 749, 1049, 1649 and waaaay before my time) would appear to be jumping in sequence but I have seen documentation of the variants in between. For various reasons they were never produced but once the model number was assigned, that was it. In fact, 4 model 1249s were built for the military as a trial for fitting turboprops to the Connie although they were only known by their Air Force or Navy names and were never marketed commercially. One very cool looking plane though!


25 AeroWesty : The 80 was named as such due to its introduction in 1980.
26 Stitch : Boeing had announced the 747-500X and 747-600X in 1996 and also floated a 747-700X concept at that time. So, arguably, 747-800X was the next number i
27 AeroWesty : Oh, that could be. Did Airbus use the same logic when naming the first version of the A380 the -800, as well as starting with -800 for the A350, when
28 Post contains images Rara : Regarding the number 8 fixation because of Asian superstitions: the problem is that businesses went completely over the top with what would otherwise
29 futureatp : The DC-10-40 was supposed to be the DC-10-20. It was changed to -40 as a request from Northwest. Its been a long time since I read the article but I b
30 skipness1E : It was flight tested as the DC10-20, prototype N141US was however delivered as a DC10-40!
31 Post contains images 135mech : The reason Boeing jumped to the -8's like the 747-8i/F and the 787-8 and stopping the sequential numbering was in part due to the new "way" of number
32 gr8circle : You're thinking too clinically and logically....as pointed out, in the real world of marketing, anything that makes the customer "feel good" is worth
33 brilondon : Well actually they do, I have Chinese clients in Hong Kong who tell me that the flight numbers are important to the elders of their society who are q
34 AeroWesty : There must be some value to it. I also found: CX888 HKG-YVR-JFK AC88 PVG-YYZ KL888 used to be HKG-AMS (currently KL890)
35 Post contains images Stitch : And I would not be surprised if both CX888 and KL888 have been operated in the past with 747-400 equipment even though the number 4 is considered unf
36 cmf : So the 787-10 will have up to 10,000 nm range?
37 Post contains images Stitch : If your payload is just two pilots and full tanks... Clearly, this is no longer Boeing's criteria for numbering since we know the 737 MAX's will not
38 Viscount724 : And AC's daily HKG-YVR is AC8. They inherited that number from CP
39 DeltaMD90 : Yes but the flight number is changed a lot easier than aircraft type. I'm sure the 8 thing isn't huge in decisions, but I could definitely see it as
40 neutrino : Not only in Mandarin but in the dialects of Cantonese, Hokkien (actually Minnanyu), Teochew (Chaozhou) and a host of other minor vernacular. It simpl
41 Post contains links cha747 : LOL...being Pakistani, you are NOT the Asian being referred to (neither am I being of Indian origin). The Chinese are a little more superstitious abo
42 os787 : The same is true for phone numbers. In my company it's easy to determine the important people of our Beijing office without looking at job titles, be
43 speedygonzales : The company i work for has (completely by chance) front desk phone number xx88xx88. The sales and marketing guys say that Chinese customers are very
44 VV701 : But no more ridiculous than : The Air Canada PVG to YYX flight is AC88 The Air Astana flight between PEK and ALA is KC888 The Cathay Pacific flight f
45 Post contains links Revelation : I wonder if they bicker over IP addresses too? According to the below, L3 Communications owns 8.x.x.x ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assign
46 Viscount724 : I would call that superstitious, not suspicious. SK is far from the only European carrier without a row numbered 13. About the only carriers I've bee
47 777way : Yes, i know you werent referring to our lot and I meant that East Asians should find it insuting, but I guess they dont.
48 Post contains images Speedbird128 : Just out of interest, why should they find it insulting? Just because you think they should?
49 777way : ^ yes I think its insulting, anyone with an iota of intelligence can fingure out what I mean exactly by that.
50 Speedbird128 : Well pardon me. Must be dizzy up there where you live. Have you ever been to China? I have found they appreciate the (what some think is token) usage
51 travelavnut : I think of myself as a person with at least an iota of intelligence and I really have no idea why this would be in any way insulting. Maybe you care
52 Post contains images Speedbird128 : What's probably insulting to the Chinese, is saying their beliefs are stupid. THAT is likely to be insulting. In any event, the marketing departments
53 777way : Some posts that clarified my explanations have been removed wont repeat much, the fact is the China has purchased B and A planes with no issues dating
54 VV701 : You seem to be missing the point. Some - not all - Scandinavians would prefer not to fly in Row 13 on an aircraft. Some - not all - French - would pr
55 neutrino : Correction: they are homophones, not synonyms. The sounds are similar but not the words.
56 VV701 : Thanks. I cannot read Chinese, But I guess that the reason the spelling in Latin script, "pinyin", is the same is simply because they are homophones.
57 Post contains images Semaex : Another homophone: Why is Seven afraid of Eight? ... If you don't know then your children will In all seriousness. If Airbus, Boeing, BMW or Motorola
58 Post contains images neutrino : My pleasure. Still, further correction is in order: Their pinyin is also different: eight is "ba" whilst the lucky sound is "fa". And while I am at i
59 Post contains links and images AeroWesty : And in this vein, HA has just announced its flight schedule for its new service to Taiwan. The TPE-HNL flight number is: 808. HA Announces Taipei Flig
60 777way : What happened to the BMW 8 series? I dont think Chinese are falling for this as far as the 787 cancelled order shows, also Hong Kong airlines A380 mi
61 Post contains images Semaex : Replaced by the 6-Series Coupé and 7-Series. Oh lala now Boeing is going crazy on the number! Typo I guess. Still surprised?
62 VV701 : No. Here are some of BA's flights to Asia: BA5/6: to/from NRT BA7/8: to/from HND BA9/10: to/from BKK BA11/12: to/from SIN BA15/16: to/from SIN BA25/2
63 777way : no i'm asking was it hit in China? why didnt they continue it for that region should have been a hot seller to keep the line active and bring in newe
64 Post contains images Speedbird128 : Wow the concept of marketing is really lost on some people... I wonder why the 777 next version is slated as an -8X.
65 777way : I expect the Chinese to be wiser and order the aircraft for its worthiness and not some gimmik, just as they did the 777-200/300 and prior to that the
66 Post contains images AeroWesty : And that's all it is, a gimmick. It's not anything to make an international incident over. You do realize the fallacy in your statement, yes? China w
67 777way : Hunh? thats what I said, when they opened up they started buying Boeing and from the 80s Airbus, neither of the two lured them with such gimmiks, Chi
68 Speedbird128 : Chip off the old block? I have *never* heard a chinese person rant like you have about a culture to which you don't belong.
69 AeroWesty : Companies go out of their way to make sure that their products aren't offensive to other cultures, so would you say that that's patronizing as well?
70 777way : I'm just talking common sense based on looking back from the 1980s and their earlier dealigns with these two companies, I also have no chips, my ance
71 Post contains images Rara : Perhaps they're too polite. But I can confirm that the sentiment exists. The Chinese are quite amused that Westerners now fall over themselves in del
72 Post contains images travelavnut : Djeez, are we still debating if it is offensive using the number 8 marketing wise? Really 777way, give it a rest man, or take some marketing courses a
73 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : Really, it's a gimmick... just like having the multiple flags or airline logos on the side, or making concept liveries of potential airlines. Had the
74 777way : Marketeing courses that are meant to fool people in this manner and make fools of the companies using these ploys? Are you still not getting it? . th
75 grimey : and no one here noticed this about the number 748 "748: "七四八" In mandarin this number is pronounced "qī sì bā". If these numbers are stated
76 Post contains images Speedbird128 : Quite the contrary
77 777way : Read again.
78 Speedbird128 : I read it. So what? Reading it again most certainly isn't going to make me suddenly "get" your hatred of marketing practices. Quite the contrary, it
79 777way : Bye??? but I'm not adressing you exclusively here and this isnt even you thread. Didnt you also say you wouldnt be posting in this topic a few posts a
80 travelavnut : 777way, do yourself a favor and let this rest. You're not convincing anybody and you're making a bit of a fool of yourself. We get it, you don't like
81 VV701 : Well you are certainly not getting it. Boeing manufactured the 377 Stratocruiser and then the 707, the 727, the 737, the 747, the 757, the 767, the 7
82 jbmitt : I seem to recall DL flying flight#s 717, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777 to and from SEA. I just checked and it doesn't appear these numbers are in servi
83 Post contains links AeroWesty : DL737 flew JFK-SEA, but the last one was 2 years ago, operated by a 757. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL737
84 TWA772LR : Weren't Boeings 7-series because the prop passenger planes were 3xx, and missles, space craft, and other applications were designated with a 5xx or 6
85 VV701 : But which is the horse, which the cart? Or, put anoher way, why did Boeing use "7" as first number in its designation for jet airliners as opposed to
86 Speedbird128 : Because an -8 designation is 8 times more awesome than a -1 LOL Or maybe its marketing?
87 Viscount724 : AC's current "Boeing" flight numbers and aircraft type: AC707 LGA-YYZ E-175 AC717 LGA-YYZ E-190 AC720 YYZ-LGA E-190 AC727 LGA-YYZ E-175 AC737 YYZ-SFO
88 Post contains links and images longhauler : When AC first flew to Asia, it was their LHR-BOM-SIN flight. And it was originally AC858. This made sense, as AC856 was the earlier YYZ-LHR flight, an
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...
Planes Not In Use posted Fri Oct 5 2001 03:37:23 by Flywithken
Nice Liveries On Planes Not In Fleets posted Tue Sep 7 1999 20:51:16 by Boeing757/767
Why Not Price Airbus' Planes In Euros? posted Sat Nov 27 2004 20:15:49 by A380900
Airbus Near A 150-200 Planes Order In China posted Sun Sep 12 2010 23:55:21 by FCKC
US Airbus Planes Have Minor Collision In CLT posted Sat Jun 5 2010 17:47:01 by Atrude777
Airbus To Assemble A/C In USA? OK Not Really... posted Tue Dec 19 2006 16:36:58 by Tak
SIA Not In The Market For Long-range Planes posted Thu Feb 17 2005 21:09:30 by Singaporegirl
Airbus Planes In New Colours posted Tue Jan 25 2005 03:37:22 by Sunnyb
Little Airbus Planes In USA, How? posted Mon Dec 29 2003 21:57:55 by Lugonza_2001
Which Planes Are Not In Production Anymore posted Sun Apr 15 2001 04:31:12 by SEA nw DC10