Boeing 7's & Airbus 3's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 7's & Airbus 3's
Does anyone know why all Boeings are prefixed with a 7 and all Airbus with a 3? Are these random numbers or do they actually mean something?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3's and 7's
Hello JL,
Boeing named it's civil aircraft sequentially. The 400/500/600 series were military aircraft or missiles. They were in the 300s when the 707 came aong.
I recall the A300 being so named for the maximum amount of passengers it could carry.
Both designations sort of stuck (marketing) and this is where we are today.
Welcome to the forums !
Boeing named it's civil aircraft sequentially. The 400/500/600 series were military aircraft or missiles. They were in the 300s when the 707 came aong.
I recall the A300 being so named for the maximum amount of passengers it could carry.
Both designations sort of stuck (marketing) and this is where we are today.
Welcome to the forums !
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello JL,
Boeing named it's civil aircraft sequentially. The 400/500/600 series were military aircraft or missiles. They were in the 300s when the 707 came aong.
I recall the A300 being so named for the maximum amount of passengers it could carry.
Both designations sort of stuck (marketing) and this is where we are today.
Welcome to the forums !
Boeing named it's civil aircraft sequentially. The 400/500/600 series were military aircraft or missiles. They were in the 300s when the 707 came aong.
I recall the A300 being so named for the maximum amount of passengers it could carry.
Both designations sort of stuck (marketing) and this is where we are today.
Welcome to the forums !
What is the next Boeing after 797?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks vapilot. Being trying to find that out for ages but no one seemed to know! I can rest easy at night now until the next obscure question comes into my head! 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go on then. How many engines does 727 have? Don't need to ask about 737 as work on it and the 777 (talk about one extreme to the other!)
Is it true that 717 was sold and became MD80? If so did it ever fly under Boeing flag?
Is it true that 717 was sold and became MD80? If so did it ever fly under Boeing flag?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Boeing merged with MD in 1996/97 it took on the MD-95 and developed it into the Boeing 717. The 717 originally started life in 1983 when a shortened version of the MD-81 was conceived and dubbed the DC-9-90. This emerged in 1991 dubbed the MD-87-105 before naming as MD-95. As an aside the original Boeing 717 was a 1960's derivative of the 707 that became the KC-135 which is what you may be alluding to.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for Airbus, the second Airbus model, the A310, was originally designated the A300-B10, so I suppose the series continued from that point to the A320 and so on.
Just to add to Golf Charlie Charlie's learned post:
In addition to the KC135 'Stratotanker', the original B717 designation also applied to the C135 'Stratolifter', the military transport version of the 707. I think 45 of the C135 As and Bs were produced for the USAF MATS (Military Air Transport Service).
In addition to the KC135 'Stratotanker', the original B717 designation also applied to the C135 'Stratolifter', the military transport version of the 707. I think 45 of the C135 As and Bs were produced for the USAF MATS (Military Air Transport Service).
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GCC, you are quite correct. I was using the derivative in the sense of "copied or adapted from others; lacking originality". The dash 80 after all was the prototype for both product lines. The lineage of the 720 would seem to infer that even within Boeing at some level there was a "derivative" mentality of the two product lines. The Boeing web site says "The 720 was a short-range, high-performance version of the 707 and was first marketed to the airlines as the model 707-020. United Airlines was very interested in the 707-020 but had previously decided to go with Douglas and the DC-8. To help United avoid any negative public relations for going back to the 707, Boeing changed the name of the 707-020 to the 720." The 720 was in fact structually and aerodynamically different than the 707 and after initially gaining the 707-020 designation became the 717-020 because the fuselage was returned to the length of the tanker (717/KC-135). It then came to be known as the 720 for the reason stated re United.
The confusion that exists and how we relate to these aircraft is shown in MrBernoulli's post.
As he says the Stratolifter was the military transport version of the 717/KC-135, not the 707. The military transport version of the 707 was the -137.
The confusion that exists and how we relate to these aircraft is shown in MrBernoulli's post.
C135 'Stratolifter', the military transport version of the 707
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks to all who have replied. I never knew it was so complicated but good to know stuff like that. Also good to know where to come when have questions though as I drive our poor engineers mad wanting to know what things do and how they work etc.
Thanks again
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Brian Abraham "GE 90 - was an underhanded reference to the Avro 707"
I'm not that old. Come to think of it, I remember topping up the high pressure bottle at the back of our VC10's as they hadn't got APU's either. But that's another topic.