7E7 is now 787...
- Thread starter Joe
- Start date
Sprint100
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
in terms of coolness, I think 5 sounds the best. "five o five," and so on. lol, I knew somebody would just be like "808, moron" but I just had to say something.
[/ QUOTE ]
808 is da bomb. That is the name of the OG drum/beat machine for rap music. No other machine could produce bass like it.
But when it comes to current names for planes 787 is simply wack!!!!!
in terms of coolness, I think 5 sounds the best. "five o five," and so on. lol, I knew somebody would just be like "808, moron" but I just had to say something.
[/ QUOTE ]
808 is da bomb. That is the name of the OG drum/beat machine for rap music. No other machine could produce bass like it.
But when it comes to current names for planes 787 is simply wack!!!!!
FutureLeader
New Member
They changed it to the 787, because of the Chinese orders -- notice the name change right after the preliminary signing of the orders. China is the next up and coming airplane market outside the US. This was one of the reasons Airbus went with the name A380 and not the A360 or A370. In China, the sound 8 has is similar to the sound, "to make money" and they find it LUCKY. Thus, I think it is a great marketing move, plus it follows in the Boeing tradition.
CaptainChris87
New Member
How many pax can the 7e7 hold?
av8trxx
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry if this has been covered, but what is the origin of the "7_7" names?
[/ QUOTE ]
The Boeing historian Mike Lombardi replied to my Email about this very subject a few years ago. He told me that the marketing department was responsible for the 7x7 designators with the birth of the "707" as they thought the illiteration of the format was very favorable, in addition to sevens being 'lucky' and -700 series for commercial a/c concepts. The mathematics idea about the 707s wing was nice, but someone showed how it didn't truly work out and it's an urban legend. (Can't find it right now.) However, here's an excerpt about this topic-
Whatever happened to the 717?
by Ed Brown
Fortune magazine; 2/2/1998
Boeing announced in early January that it is rechristening the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 as the Boeing 717-200. But why wasn't there already a 717 in the skies? There's the 707, the 727, the 737.... The gap hints of an Edsel-like disaster in the company's past. But it's not that. The first 717 had its day--as a military cargo and airborne-refueling plane called the KC-135.
In the early days, says Boeing historian Mike Lombardi, the company numbered its products sequentially, starting with 1. Boeing kept this up until the 1950s, when it assigned a set of numbers to each of its product lines--600 for missiles, 700 for commercial jets, etc. Every significant initiative within a given series, even if it was just a sketch, got a number, which explains why Boeing's first commercial airliner, unveiled in 1954, was not the 700 but the 707. Then the marketers decided they liked the palindromic ring of "707" so much that every 700-series jet name would end with 7.
The prototype that produced the 707 also spawned a military jet, which was marketed as the 717. Once the U.S. Air Force renamed the plane according to its own classification system, however, everyone--including the folks at Boeing--started calling it the KC-135. Boeing stopped making the plane in 1965, but about 550 of them are still in use by the Air Force. "
Sorry if this has been covered, but what is the origin of the "7_7" names?
[/ QUOTE ]
The Boeing historian Mike Lombardi replied to my Email about this very subject a few years ago. He told me that the marketing department was responsible for the 7x7 designators with the birth of the "707" as they thought the illiteration of the format was very favorable, in addition to sevens being 'lucky' and -700 series for commercial a/c concepts. The mathematics idea about the 707s wing was nice, but someone showed how it didn't truly work out and it's an urban legend. (Can't find it right now.) However, here's an excerpt about this topic-
Whatever happened to the 717?
by Ed Brown
Fortune magazine; 2/2/1998
Boeing announced in early January that it is rechristening the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 as the Boeing 717-200. But why wasn't there already a 717 in the skies? There's the 707, the 727, the 737.... The gap hints of an Edsel-like disaster in the company's past. But it's not that. The first 717 had its day--as a military cargo and airborne-refueling plane called the KC-135.
In the early days, says Boeing historian Mike Lombardi, the company numbered its products sequentially, starting with 1. Boeing kept this up until the 1950s, when it assigned a set of numbers to each of its product lines--600 for missiles, 700 for commercial jets, etc. Every significant initiative within a given series, even if it was just a sketch, got a number, which explains why Boeing's first commercial airliner, unveiled in 1954, was not the 700 but the 707. Then the marketers decided they liked the palindromic ring of "707" so much that every 700-series jet name would end with 7.
The prototype that produced the 707 also spawned a military jet, which was marketed as the 717. Once the U.S. Air Force renamed the plane according to its own classification system, however, everyone--including the folks at Boeing--started calling it the KC-135. Boeing stopped making the plane in 1965, but about 550 of them are still in use by the Air Force. "
flyover
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
One of the stupidest marketing moves ever known to man. You've established a brand, the 7E7. You've got over 100 orders for it.
And now you go and change the name?
Is Boeing TRYING to get its ass kicked?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, in my memory this is the way Boeing always introduced a new airplane. Airbus adapted it too.
You have to imagine that people that make multi-billion dollar aircraft orders care whether it's a 7E7 or 787, or instead look at things like fuel specifics. I'm guessing the 20% fuel savings will be more of a marketing draw than the E.
One of the stupidest marketing moves ever known to man. You've established a brand, the 7E7. You've got over 100 orders for it.
And now you go and change the name?
Is Boeing TRYING to get its ass kicked?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, in my memory this is the way Boeing always introduced a new airplane. Airbus adapted it too.
You have to imagine that people that make multi-billion dollar aircraft orders care whether it's a 7E7 or 787, or instead look at things like fuel specifics. I'm guessing the 20% fuel savings will be more of a marketing draw than the E.
mpenguin1
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
How many pax can the 7e7 hold?
[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts_sr.html
787-3
296 passengers in two-class configuration
Range = 3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km)
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts.html
787-8
223 passengers in three-class configuration
Range 8,500 nautical miles (15,700 km)
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts_stretch.html
787-9
259 passengers in three-class configuration
8,300 nautical miles (15,400 km)
How many pax can the 7e7 hold?
[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts_sr.html
787-3
296 passengers in two-class configuration
Range = 3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km)
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts.html
787-8
223 passengers in three-class configuration
Range 8,500 nautical miles (15,700 km)
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts_stretch.html
787-9
259 passengers in three-class configuration
8,300 nautical miles (15,400 km)
mpenguin1
Well-Known Member
mpenguin1
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
What was the time line of the 707 vs the DC-8? As for design, both seem to follow-ons to prop designs that had 4 engines, DC-6 and Consellation come to mind.
[/ QUOTE ]
707
First Flight = 20-December-1957
855 were delivered
(The Dash 80 was the prototype for the 707)
DC8
First Flight = 30-May-1958
Douglas built 556 DC8's
(The DC7 was the last propeller powered transport for Douglas)
What was the time line of the 707 vs the DC-8? As for design, both seem to follow-ons to prop designs that had 4 engines, DC-6 and Consellation come to mind.
[/ QUOTE ]
707
First Flight = 20-December-1957
855 were delivered
(The Dash 80 was the prototype for the 707)
DC8
First Flight = 30-May-1958
Douglas built 556 DC8's
(The DC7 was the last propeller powered transport for Douglas)
FlavorFlav
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what's boeing goingto do when they run out of numbers for the 7 series? lol, there wasa 707 (i,think) and a 727,737,747,757,767, and a 777, and now we've got the
787. so after 797, whats next? lol
[/ QUOTE ]
You should be sure that there was a 707. That was such a classic.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was almost 100 percent positive there was a 707, but I really don't know much about aviation, thats why I'm here, to learn. I said "I Think" because i've noticed then when your wrong, people on forums really jump on you, and I'm tired of that. Both seeing it, and getting it.
[ QUOTE ]
what's boeing goingto do when they run out of numbers for the 7 series? lol, there wasa 707 (i,think) and a 727,737,747,757,767, and a 777, and now we've got the
[/ QUOTE ]
You should be sure that there was a 707. That was such a classic.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was almost 100 percent positive there was a 707, but I really don't know much about aviation, thats why I'm here, to learn. I said "I Think" because i've noticed then when your wrong, people on forums really jump on you, and I'm tired of that. Both seeing it, and getting it.
Mariano
Well-Known Member
You should be sure that there was a 707. That was such a classic.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
SickBird
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
[/ QUOTE ]
People need to stop getting so butthurt over the internet. And you need to realize some real aviation enthusiats come on these forums and some are bound to poke at someone who doesn't quite know things that they think are very basic. But I gaurantee you if you ever need help with an aviation related issue you will promptly get some help.
Lighten up buddy.
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
[/ QUOTE ]
People need to stop getting so butthurt over the internet. And you need to realize some real aviation enthusiats come on these forums and some are bound to poke at someone who doesn't quite know things that they think are very basic. But I gaurantee you if you ever need help with an aviation related issue you will promptly get some help.
Lighten up buddy.
Mariano
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
[/ QUOTE ]
People need to stop getting so butthurt over the internet. And you need to realize some real aviation enthusiats come on these forums and some are bound to poke at someone who doesn't quite know things that they think are very basic. But I gaurantee you if you ever need help with an aviation related issue you will promptly get some help.
Lighten up buddy.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just because someone is a "real aviation enthusiast" with a certain level of knowledge, doesn't excuse him/her to "poke" on other "real aviation enthusiast" who knows less, even if is something basic. Making the other person feel stupid is just not right( obviously FlavorFlav didn't liked Brian de Jesus post) . There is always somebody who will know more than you, and I'm sure you wouldn't like to be "poked" when you ask or say something that the other person thinks as "basic".
To put it in another way, English it's not my first language, if somebody corrects me when I say or write something, I don't feel offended since that person is helping me to improve. But if he/she makes a comment with the intention of letting me know how knowledgeable he/she is and what a dumb $ss I am I will probably tell him/her to F&#* OFF.
[ QUOTE ]
This is for Brian De Jesus. Let me tell you something: The quote above shows very little respect, and a big deal of ignorance. Tell me a valid reason why he should KNOW!!
Or maybe you know everything?. I'm going to excuse you based on the fact that you are probably a kid, but let me tell you something, the more you learn in this life, the more you are aware of your own ignorance.
One more thing, being humble goes a long way, being arrogant NOT.
[/ QUOTE ]
People need to stop getting so butthurt over the internet. And you need to realize some real aviation enthusiats come on these forums and some are bound to poke at someone who doesn't quite know things that they think are very basic. But I gaurantee you if you ever need help with an aviation related issue you will promptly get some help.
Lighten up buddy.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just because someone is a "real aviation enthusiast" with a certain level of knowledge, doesn't excuse him/her to "poke" on other "real aviation enthusiast" who knows less, even if is something basic. Making the other person feel stupid is just not right( obviously FlavorFlav didn't liked Brian de Jesus post) . There is always somebody who will know more than you, and I'm sure you wouldn't like to be "poked" when you ask or say something that the other person thinks as "basic".
To put it in another way, English it's not my first language, if somebody corrects me when I say or write something, I don't feel offended since that person is helping me to improve. But if he/she makes a comment with the intention of letting me know how knowledgeable he/she is and what a dumb $ss I am I will probably tell him/her to F&#* OFF.
