Originally Posted by Gardyloo
It was their order of development and release. 707 came first (marketing-inspired name) then 727, 737, 747...777. The 717 came last, ironically, because the suits in Chicago (now) couldn't bear to keep an MD- designated plane (MD-80 aka DC-9) so they renamed it the 717.
I used to work for Burroughs/Unisys doing operating system software. The old Burroughs product names had a scheme: "B" (for Burroughs), followed by a number; the number of digits told you which broad product family, then the first digit told you more specifically, and then the second digit told you which model. B6000 and B7000 were large systems, and the B6500 and B7500 were the oldest, then came the B6600 and B7600, then the Bx700, the Bx800, and finally Bx900. Each one larger and newer than the old one. But after the B6900/B7900, no one was sure where to go next. The engineering group used "A9" as the code name, and finally, at the absolute last minute, marketing decided to ship it using that name. The entire "A Series" line had numbers that made no sense. Is an A3 smaller than an A4 or A11? How about an A15? It was crazy.
Sadly, it didn't hit the hot spot with the customers even so. Who woulda thunk? So now it's the 7E7 which is about as inspired a name as the A300-blah blah. Super Viscount. Stratoliner. Constellation. Comet. Now those were airplane names. Dreamliner? Oh please. How about the Stone Cypher? Or does that just refer to the profit margin?
The L.A. Times has a big article a few days ago on the 717 line, complete with pictures of the plant and lots of the key people. It had a number of quotes saying the company is now committed to making it a success, mostly because it would cost too much to shut it down
I agree with you -- good names would help.
Thanks for your informative post.