pl4nekr4zy
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 12:03 pm

What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:07 am

I did a search and didn't find anything about this topic, but sorry if it has already been discussed.

Can someone tell me why Boeing started designating the first version of their aircraft as the -200 series instead of -100? After the 747, the first versions were all -200...
"Don't forget to bring a towel!"
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 3649
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:30 am

I believe the -100 series was to designate a shorter version of the -200 series, if there was a desire to have one. It was once mentioned to have a 777-100, which was shorter than the 777-200. But none were sold.
 
747buff
Posts: 676
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2001 3:05 pm

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:43 am

I think the -100s actually had a shorter range than any other model. KLM was the launch customer for the -200 series, and after the -200s were launched very few, if any -100s were manufactured. Some of the early -200s (in pictures) looked identical to the 100s, because some of them had only three upper deck windows.
At Eastern, we earn our wings every day!
 
POSITIVE RATE
Posts: 2121
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 11:31 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 11:39 am

I often wonder the same thing. How come there is no 767-100/757-100/777-100? When the first 707 model came out it was the 707-100, same as the 727-100 and the 737-100/747-100. It stopped with the 757 for some reason and only the -200 was available.
 
Jayce
Posts: 502
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 1999 10:36 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 3:42 pm

I once heard a rumor many years back that the "-100" made it sound like less of an aircraft, so they started using "-200" as the standard for the basic model. Haven't heard that since.

On a nowhere similar note, I've always wondered why a stretched A320 is called an A321, but a stretched A340 is a A340-500, not an A341. Anybody know about this?
"Trying is the first step towards failure" -Homer Simpson
 
aq737
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2000 10:47 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 3:47 pm

For the 757, didn't they make a 757-100 design, but all the customers opted for the -200 because it was slightly larger, so Boeing dropped the -100?

Aq737
 
aviatortj
Posts: 1694
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 9:15 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 3:48 pm

Jayce-

Why do you drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?  Nuts

~TJ
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 4:07 pm

I believe the reason is because Boeing usually originally deigned a -100 series, such as the 777-100, but no airline wanted it. Boeing came out with the 777-100 and the 777-200, and every airline chose the 777-200. Therefore, they never built the -100. Same thing with the other planes.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
Rick767
Posts: 2613
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2000 8:11 pm

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 4:53 pm

Initially, a 757-100 was offered to airlines but with no orders for the (smaller) derivative it stayed on the drawing board and was never produced.

The same applies for the 767-100, also never produced.
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 5:19 pm

The Boeing 747 was originally certificated in December 1969 and PanAm put the "Jumbo" into service across north Atlantic in January 1970.
The early variants all became 747-100 when the designation 747-200 was adopted for a version first flown in Oct.1970 as the 747B, with increased weight, more fuel and uprated engines. The -200 was certificated in Dec.1970 and entered service with KLM in 1971.

It is true that some version of the -200 had only three windows at the upper deck, as well as certain -100 had the more "traditional" serie of 10 windows.

You can easily recognize a -100 from a - 200 : the -200 has two emergency doors at the upper deck, one on each side, while the -100 has only one on the right side.


a B747-100 :
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner




a 747-200 :
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Noack

 
AJ
Posts: 2295
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:54 pm

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 5:27 pm

From an old thread:

"Also, why did the 757/777 series begin with a -200 model? The rest of their A/C started with a -100."

The 757 and 767 were both designed with both stretched and contracted models in mind, with the -200 being the medium size and the first built. Both models were eventually stretched into -300s, but the 737 filled the lower end 727 replacement market so the -100 was never built. The 717 follows the same theory, with the -200 being the only model built so far."

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1133410/4/
 
godbless
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2000 5:26 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 6:21 pm

From the stretch-and-shrink-planes I guess the A330 is the only one that was not born a -200 but later on shrinked to one. I guess that has to do with the fact that the A330-300 has the same fuselage length as the A340-300. So in this case it is to not mix people up.

Max
 
tbear815
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 7:00 pm

FLYSSC, I think your theory of telling the difference between a -100 and -200 is somewhat flawed when it comes to UD emergency doors. I worked for World Airways (we won't go there right now) and we flew B747-273C's. One emergency exit door on the UD and on the right side. There is an escape "hatch" on the roof, however. I know - I had to jump that UD slide for training.....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John P. Stewart

 
UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 8:00 pm

Going back to the Airbus question :
The A340-500/600 have a lot more differences with the A340-200/300 than just a fuselage plug : (and speaking of plugs, Big grin)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © William Ronciere


On the above picture, you will notice that the wing is a totally different design , i.e, larger wingspan, taller winglets, different materials (different composites), etc..
The A321 uses the same wing as the A320.
Totally different engines; Rolls-Royce Trent 500 whereas the A340-200/300/8000 had CFM 56-5C2 or 5C4 engines.
The A321 uses either the same engines as the A320 or "upgraded" evolutions of that same engine, i.e CFM56-5B1/B2, etc...
The A340-500/600 cockpit have a slightly different layout due to the use of LCD screens as compared to CRT screens for A340-200/300's.
(however, the recent A330's and A318's also have LCD screens, maybe recent A340's also have them).
The FMC's are different, and the MCP seems different too.
The A321 cockpit is exactly the same as the A320's and A319's.
Hope this helps,

Will
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
HlywdCatft
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:21 am

RE: What Happened To The "-100" Series?

Fri Aug 15, 2003 11:30 pm

There is a 757-100- its called the 737-900 though

There was a Boeing book I had seen at Borders Bookstore that was pretty interesting, it shows 3 view drawings of many of the Boeing proposals. In there they have a picture of the 777-100 in a 3 view drawing. Obviously it is short and stubbier looking, but it has the same 6 wheel bogies and the same huge engines.

I do not recall if they had the 757-100 in there or not.

I think it has the orriginal 767-400 with the winglets instead of the raked wingtips and I believe they also show a 777 with winglets.

They also show the 747-500X, 600-800 and show the difference in size between the 400 and 800 series. That 800 although not double decker, just an extended upper deck makes the A380 look tiny.

Now with Airbus, why couldn't they be orriginal and give their series a different designation other than the 200, 300 etc like Boeing.

Why couldn't they be like the orriginal A300 with the B2, B4, B6 and put that designation on their A340s?