doulasc
Topic Author
Posts: 729
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:12 pm

Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:47 am

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.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:51 am

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 :)
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:54 am

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
 
bristolflyer
Posts: 2103
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 1:35 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:00 am

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 avatar
American 767
Posts: 3923
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:36 am

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
 
CXfirst
Posts: 2875
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:13 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:44 am

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
 
Bluewave 707
Posts: 2793
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 8:21 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:19 am

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
 
oldeuropean
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:19 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:08 am

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
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:13 am

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_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:24 am

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
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:46 am

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
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:00 am

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
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:05 am

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
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:14 am

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
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:18 am

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
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:19 am

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
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:26 am

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
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:27 am

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
 
777way
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:43 am

^ 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.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 2078
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:20 am

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,
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:22 am

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
 
starrymarkb
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:19 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:25 am

I always thought of it as Double A340...

Also originally the A330 was to be the Quad and A340 the twin
 
okay
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:46 am

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 avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:19 pm

If i recall correctly the A370 is reseverd for the next Gen A320.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
ExL10Mktg
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:39 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:40 pm

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!
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:42 pm

Quoting ExL10Mktg (Reply 24):
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.

The 80 was named as such due to its introduction in 1980.
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22930
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:49 pm

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

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 in the sequence for concepts.

Boeing have stated that they chose 747-8 to leverage the link to the 787 (in terms of engine generation).

As to why the 787 launched with the 787-8 and 787-9 instead of the 787-2 and 787-3, I believe part of it was based on the projected range when the project was launched: the 787-3 had a nominal range beyond 3,000nm, the 787-8 beyond 8,000nm and the 787-9 close to 9,000nm.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:54 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 26):
the 787-3 had a nominal range beyond 3,000nm, the 787-8 beyond 8,000nm and the 787-9 close to 9,000nm.

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 they'd in past used -100 and -200 for the sequential series numbering?
International Homo of Mystery
 
Rara
Posts: 2296
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:05 pm

Regarding the number 8 fixation because of Asian superstitions: the problem is that businesses went completely over the top with what would otherwise be a legitimate issue.

Will Chinese people prefer a flight with the number UA888 over a flight with the number DL446? Yes, absolutely. Will Chinese companies buy even a single more 787-8 than they would have a 787-1? No, definitely not. But tell that to marketing geniuses with their indefinite wisdom.

Having said all that, we just registered our new car with a 888 number plate, and my fiancee is mightily excited.  
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
futureatp
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2000 3:07 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:46 pm

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 believe Northwest thought that the -20 designation made it seem inferior to the -30.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 3368
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:08 pm

It was flight tested as the DC10-20, prototype N141US was however delivered as a DC10-40!
 
135mech
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:56 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:13 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 1):
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)



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 numbering...it's for the capable range of the aircraft now, and not the series numbers anymore. -8 means it's capable of up to 8,000nm and the -9 (not 900) means up to 9,000nm. The 737's were developed before this change was made and they kept the sequence numbers since they were already up to a -900 series.

As Stitch adds too:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 26):
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 in the sequence for concepts.

Boeing have stated that they chose 747-8 to leverage the link to the 787 (in terms of engine generation).

As to why the 787 launched with the 787-8 and 787-9 instead of the 787-2 and 787-3, I believe part of it was based on the projected range when the project was launched: the 787-3 had a nominal range beyond 3,000nm, the 787-8 beyond 8,000nm and the 787-9 close to 9,000nm.
Quoting CXfirst (Reply 5):
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.
Quoting B747forever (Reply 9):
That is just utterly ridiculous. As if any airline decides to buy an aircraft based on the model number.



After reading in my Boeing 707 books, when United REFUSED to buy any "707", the next model available was the new version which was named the 720, so that United wouldn't be accused of recanting their words.

The 717 DID exist but was a military variant only (KC-135 aka 717-148). When Boeing bought/took over McDonnell Douglas,
they renamed the MD-95 (released that same year) the 717-200, as the missing commercial 717.

Quoting futureatp (Reply 29):
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 believe Northwest thought that the -20 designation made it seem inferior to the -30.



I read that same book, and they did rename it for specifically that reason!  

Regards,
135Mech
135Mech
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2378
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:29 pm

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?
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.

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 doing......no one's saying that Asian airlines would not have brought the aircrafts or taken the flights if there wasn't an 8 in it, but it just adds to the feel good sensation.....

In the western world, as pointed out, people make enough of a sensation of the number 13, so let's not scoff at Asian traditions.....

[Edited 2013-02-19 11:32:51]
 
brilondon
Posts: 3013
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:48 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 11):
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?

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 quite a bit more superstitious. The rather have an 8 in their address and think it is lucky to live on 8th street/ave, so yes the Chinese are superstitious.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:07 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 33):
Quoting B747forever (Reply 11):
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?

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 quite a bit more superstitious.

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)
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22930
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:11 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 34):
There must be some value to it. I also found:

CX888 HKG-YVR-JFK
AC88 PVG-HKG-AMS (currently KL890)

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 unfavorable in a number of Asian cultures.  

[Edited 2013-02-19 14:12:11]
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:15 pm

Quoting 135mech (Reply 31):
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 numbering...it's for the capable range of the aircraft now, and not the series numbers anymore. -8 means it's capable of up to 8,000nm and the -9 (not 900) means up to 9,000nm. The 737's were developed before this change was made and they kept the sequence numbers since they were already up to a -900 series.

So the 787-10 will have up to 10,000 nm range?
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22930
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:21 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 36):
So the 787-10 will have up to 10,000 nm range?

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 fly 7,000-9,000nm and while the 777-8 should clear 8,000nm, the 777-9 won't clear 9,0000nm.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18831
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:32 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 34):
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)

And AC's daily HKG-YVR is AC8. They inherited that number from CP
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:36 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
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 unfavorable in a number of Asian cultures.  

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 a subliminal thing. Can you imagine if they came out with the Boeing 666-13?

Also, what is the thing with "4"? Doesn't it sound like "death" in Mandarin? I had a Chinese friend say something like that long ago
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:24 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 39):
Also, what is the thing with "4"? Doesn't it sound like "death" in Mandarin? I had a Chinese friend say something like that long ago

Not only in Mandarin but in the dialects of Cantonese, Hokkien (actually Minnanyu), Teochew (Chaozhou) and a host of other minor vernacular. It simply sound like "death" as 8 is akin to "prosper".
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
cha747
Posts: 753
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 1:07 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:39 pm

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):
^ 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.

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 about things than the subcontinental variety and Westerners.

Wikipedia has an interesting entry for those of you interested in WHY certain numbers are lucky and unlucky. Decide for yourselves why an airline may or may not place an order or assign certain flight numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_in_Chinese_culture
You land a million planes safely, then you have one little mid-air and you never hear the end of it - Pushing Tin
 
os787
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:46 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:22 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 33):
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 quite a bit more superstitious. The rather have an 8 in their address and think it is lucky to live on 8th street/ave, so yes the Chinese are superstitious.

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, because they have the phone numbers with most 8s.
 
speedygonzales
Posts: 518
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:01 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:02 am

Quoting os787 (Reply 42):
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, because they have the phone numbers with most 8s.

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 impressed by out phone number, and think that we paid good money for it.
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:41 pm

Quoting B747forever (Reply 9):
That is just utterly ridiculous.

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 from HKG to JFK is CX888

The KLM HKG-AMS flight is KL888

The United Airlines PEK-SFO flight is UA888

All Singapore Airlines flights between SIN and the PRC and Korea start SQ8 . . .,

The Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony started at 8 minutes and 8 seconds past 8 o'clock on the 8th day of the 8th month in, yes, 2008.

The Chengdu telephone number made up only with the figure 8 was sold for over US $ 270,000 while a Hangzhou man offered his car number plate, "A88888", for sale at almost US $160,000.

But of course it is not only the Chinese who are suspicious. Amongst many airlines that have a Row 12 and a Row 14 but no Row 13 on their aircraft are SK. Ridiculous?

If you want a successful business in countries with a different culture to that of your homeland it is advisable to understand their culture. The Chinese word for 8, "pinyin", is the same as their word for "wealth". And the Chinese are a suspicious people.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13753
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:05 pm

Quoting os787 (Reply 42):
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, because they have the phone numbers with most 8s.

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_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks

According to my machine, google uses 8.8.8.8 for google-pubic-dns-a.google.com so the Chinese must be envious...
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18831
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Fri Feb 22, 2013 1:53 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 44):
But of course it is not only the Chinese who are suspicious. Amongst many airlines that have a Row 12 and a Row 14 but no Row 13 on their aircraft are SK. Ridiculous?

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 been on with a row 13 are British carriers. It's very rare to find a row numbered 13 in continental Europe.

In North America I believe the only major carrier that used to skip row 13 on their aircraft was CO. Not sure if that's changed since the merger with UA.

It's also very rare to find a hotel in continental Europe and in many other parts of the world with a floor numbered 13.
 
777way
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:10 am

Quoting cha747 (Reply 41):

Yes, i know you werent referring to our lot and I meant that East Asians should find it insuting, but I guess they dont.
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:14 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 45):
pubic-dns

  

Quoting 777way (Reply 47):
I meant that East Asians should find it insuting, but I guess they dont.

Just out of interest, why should they find it insulting? Just because you think they should?
A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
 
777way
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: Airbus Planes Not In Sequence.

Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:42 am

^ yes I think its insulting, anyone with an iota of intelligence can fingure out what I mean exactly by that.