http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2013/0...ow-youre-riding-in-old-plane-when/
Saw this article this morning while drinking my coffee and did not see it posted here. Interesting beginning part of the article mentions older planes basically to avoid. Amongst the list of "older" planes is the 717, while not brand new I definitely would not consider it to be an older model to avoid as the writer suggests but then again this is basically journalism for the low-information folks.
Just an interesting article to start the morning.
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
-
- RightRudder
- Posts: 174
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
I would say most domestic legacies no longer keep their planes more than 20 years. Due to the "bathtub curve" such as Aloha 243 on the back-end or new / newer planes on the front-end.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana".
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1): "Boeing 767s are no longer made" |
Cut him some slack; he's just trying to maintain some journalistic integrity. You can't always trust Wikipedia, and I suppose Boeing would put anything on their website to make themselves look good.
And never mind the fact that I've seen plenty of sparkly new airplanes that still had a "no smoking" light. And that there's a fair number of 772s flying around that are older than any of those "old" 717s.
Good night, and keep watching the skis. Uh, skies.
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting deltadawg (Thread starter): Amongst the list of "older" planes is the 717, while not brand new I definitely would not consider it to be an older model to avoid as the writer suggests but then again this is basically journalism for the low-information folks. |
Probably the writer is not an aviation enthusiast. Perhaps his claim to fame is that he knows '1' comes before '2' and his knowledge of aircraft is that '8' is Boeing's latest. So surely '1' must be very, very, very old.
-
- mtnwest1979
- Posts: 2211
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting VV701 (Reply 4): Probably the writer is not an aviation enthusiast. Perhaps his claim to fame is that he knows '1' comes before '2' and his knowledge of aircraft is that '8' is Boeing's latest. So surely '1' must be very, very, very old |
LOL so true. Kind of like folks that think 737 has 3 engines, 727 has two because 747 has 4 type of thing.
But, the 717-100 is truly and old bird........-200 not so much.
Riddle: Which lasts longer, a start-up airline or a start-up football league?
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
It's old if it has an ashtray in the lav? Is the 787/A380 THAT old??
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
-
- RightRudder
- Posts: 174
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting VV701 (Reply 4): |
LOL, maybe true. Yet, it might of been a typo and meant a "2" instead of a "1".
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana".
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
Boeing 767s are no longer made
Doesn't know much about aviation.
The venerable 757 debuted in 1981, which means that there are some examples plying the airways that could be 26 years old.
Pretty bad at math too.
Doesn't know much about aviation.
The venerable 757 debuted in 1981, which means that there are some examples plying the airways that could be 26 years old.
Pretty bad at math too.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 5): Kind of like folks that think 737 has 3 engines, 727 has two because 747 has 4 type of thing. |
then the 707 had none???
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 5): Kind of like folks that think 737 has 3 engines, 727 has two |
Although the 727 concept was way earlier than the 737, I had always felt that Boeing missed the "publicity" angle of it. Surely, Boeing would've switched the model numbers had they known almost a decade ahead that they'd be building a twin...or were they not too keen then that people would naturally associate 2 with the twin and 3 with the trijet?
| Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 5): because 747 has 4 type of thing |
Which got turned on its head again when the 757, 767, 777 and 787 came out as twins. In fairness, the 747 was also conceived as a three-holer until the scheme was dropped.
Makes one wonder if 797 would ultimately be a three or nine engined BWB.. 
.
| Quoting kanban (Reply 9): then the 707 had none??? |
Or 10 ... and the 717 one? However, we could disregard the 717...it being an adopted orphan.
[Edited 2013-08-10 14:58:17]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
-
- RussianJet
- Posts: 5983
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting kanban (Reply 9): then the 707 had none??? |
Yes, and the 777 has seven - which makes it so awesome!
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting PROSA (Reply 8): The venerable 757 debuted in 1981, which means that there are some examples plying the airways that could be 26 years old. |
This one
Photo © David Bracci
will be 31 years old come 25 October next.
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting RussianJet (Reply 12): Yes, and the 777 has seven - which makes it so awesome! |
They thought of three first...
...
http://airchive.com/galleries/19115.jpg
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting PROSA (Reply 8): The venerable 757 debuted in 1981, which means that there are some examples plying the airways that could be 26 years old. Pretty bad at math too. |
His statement isn't false by any means. There probably are some 26-year-old 757s flying around these days (i.e. any that were built in late 1986 or early 1987).
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting HomSar (Reply 16): Quoting PROSA (Reply 8): The venerable 757 debuted in 1981, which means that there are some examples plying the airways that could be 26 years old. Pretty bad at math too. His statement isn't false by any means. There probably are some 26-year-old 757s flying around these days (i.e. any that were built in late 1986 or early 1987). |
Well of course, but the way I interpreted his statement, which I believe is the most reasonable interpretation, was that the oldest 757's are 26 years old. Which is obviously untrue.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting kanban (Reply 15): that's kind of hindsight 20/20 vision.. |
I did qualify it with the following...and asked if Boeing just didn't mind.....
| Quoting Devilfish (Reply 10): Surely, Boeing would've switched the model numbers had they known almost a decade ahead that they'd be building a twin...or were they not too keen then that people would naturally associate 2 with the twin and 3 with the trijet? |
As a shorter range, lower capacity, twin-engine derivative, was it too farfetched to think that Boeing had an inkling early on that they'd be doing the 737? As shown by the photo in #14, Boeing was quite prolific at churning out airplane models (a lot not getting past that stage) I suppose many years in advance of assumed EIS. Unless, of course, if the photo was a fake or the archive was not Boeing's.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
The
the 737 was in the idea stage.. however those were simpler times without all the PR hype and number associations of today.. the series numbers were just the next in the block.. 707, 717 (KC135''s), 727,737,747.. etc. And yes Boeing didn't even think about numbering based on number of engines.. there were many retired military in the ranks that a straight numeric was comfortable.. it was also an engineering company first and foremost.. jumping around and airy-fairy relationships were hippie traits..
| Quoting Devilfish (Reply 18): I did qualify it with the following...and asked if Boeing just didn't mind..... |
the 737 was in the idea stage.. however those were simpler times without all the PR hype and number associations of today.. the series numbers were just the next in the block.. 707, 717 (KC135''s), 727,737,747.. etc. And yes Boeing didn't even think about numbering based on number of engines.. there were many retired military in the ranks that a straight numeric was comfortable.. it was also an engineering company first and foremost.. jumping around and airy-fairy relationships were hippie traits..
-
- starrymarkb
- Posts: 285
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
Airbus did do a swap, originally the A330 was going to be the Quad and the A340 the twin
-
- skywaymanaz
- Posts: 719
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting starrymarkb (Reply 20): Airbus did do a swap, originally the A330 was going to be the Quad and the A340 the twin |
That explains the gap between them and the A380. Must have 4 engines on the main deck and 4 on the upper deck
Seriously though that is kind of interesting to make A340 the 4 engines 4 long haul. I'm pretty sure the gap to the A380 was to cash in on 8 being lucky in the Asian market. Boeing no doubt playing that up with the 787 and 747-8 skipping a few numbers up from the 747-400, although isn't 4 unlucky in Asia?
-
- jetsetter1969
- Posts: 71
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
I read somewhere that the 8 in a380 was the fuselage cross section was a double bubble like an 8......interesting thought as it seems to make some sense if you look at them.
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
As much as most of the article made me cringe, I must admit I liked the last 4 clues that the plane could be old
10) The company that made it no longer exists
11) The economy class seating is more like a La-Z-Boy than a church pew
12) There's a landing gear over the tail instead of at the front (a DC-3)
13) There's no landing gear. But then you'd be flying in a Pan Am Flying Boat. And you'd be time traveling.
10) The company that made it no longer exists
11) The economy class seating is more like a La-Z-Boy than a church pew
12) There's a landing gear over the tail instead of at the front (a DC-3)
13) There's no landing gear. But then you'd be flying in a Pan Am Flying Boat. And you'd be time traveling.
-
- starrymarkb
- Posts: 285
- Joined:
RE: Newcomers Guide To Planespotting
| Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 21): That explains the gap between them and the A380. Must have 4 engines on the main deck and 4 on the upper deck Seriously though that is kind of interesting to make A340 the 4 engines 4 long haul. I'm pretty sure the gap to the A380 was to cash in on 8 being lucky in the Asian market. Boeing no doubt playing that up with the 787 and 747-8 skipping a few numbers up from the 747-400, although isn't 4 unlucky in Asia? |
Unofficially I've heard it suggested as 2 x A[3]40
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 330lover, 744lover, 76er, aerace, airtechy, anair79, ArcticDog, atrude777, AVENSAB727, avion660, B777lover, ba319-131, Baidu [Spider], bar1, BOSMEMFlyer, bwaflyer, Captaincurious, chonetsao, clrd4t8koff, CMHtraveler, Deltran757, diamondchap, dolphinflyer, dtw9, ericm2031, factsonly, FGITD, fly2lax, frigatebird, Gangurru, gdavis003, Google Adsense [Bot], Guillaume787, hummingbird, Iggy500, ikolkyo, InopGauge, JBirdAV8r, jbs2886, jplatts, leader1, LHUSA, Meff56, miaami, MILakes, mooseofspruce, mwmav8r01, N437QX, nascar1, pdxav8r, PVDCMHOZ, RL757PVD, RockAir, SamYeager2016, ScottB, slowrambler, Spetsnaz55, SyracuseAvGeek, TFdude15, TFlintoff24, Theseus, tofen, TWA772LR, TYSflyer, Updraft27, USAIRWAYS321, VZLA787, WidebodyPTV, Wneast, wnflyguy and 235 guests