Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models? - DA.C
 

Go Back   DA.C > Local Control > 1:1 Scale Commercial Aviation
Supported by:

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 05-02-2016, 02:25 PM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 436
Default Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

As everyone here knows, sometimes there is quite a big difference in terms of appearance and performance from the base model in an aircraft family to the newest model of aircraft in the same family.

For example, a Boeing 737-100:



And a newer Boeing 737-900:



While I know that some people tend to like the newer models of aircraft, such as a 737-900, some people also prefer the original 737-100. Are there any aircraft families where you like the base model more than the later models?

Last edited by Sub-Zero; 05-02-2016 at 07:50 PM.
Sub-Zero is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-02-2016, 04:34 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master Collector
 
newCDN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 911
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

757

757-300 just looks weird
newCDN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2016, 07:45 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 436
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by newCDN View Post
757

757-300 just looks weird
Thanks for the reply, and I also prefer the original 757-200.
Sub-Zero is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 05-02-2016, 10:23 PM   #4 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
CathayPacific's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hong Kong - Vancouver
Posts: 1,460
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I'm starting to like the dimensions of the 788 whereas for the longest time I much preferred the 789.
CathayPacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2016, 04:03 AM   #5 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Sgt Caribou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 58
Posts: 1,987
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Definitely 747-100/200 over anything later. Never cared for the extended hump of the -300/400 and am likely in the minority in thinking the 747-8 is among the most ungainly contraptions out there with wings. The original 747 just looked nicely proportioned and mighty. The original was also very first of the widebodies and introduced much innovation. The later models, not so much exciting about them.
__________________
Brian

Last edited by Sgt Caribou; 05-03-2016 at 04:06 AM.
Sgt Caribou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2016, 05:16 AM   #6 (permalink)
Complete Wacko!
 
AIR FRANCE 340's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 49°18'55" N 000°00'19" W
Age: 78
Posts: 5,074
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I love all of them but it is mistake to ignore the B 707-120 and the Comet I, just to name a few.

Jean Pierre.
AIR FRANCE 340 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2016, 11:12 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 436
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CathayPacific View Post
I'm starting to like the dimensions of the 788 whereas for the longest time I much preferred the 789.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Caribou View Post
Definitely 747-100/200 over anything later. Never cared for the extended hump of the -300/400 and am likely in the minority in thinking the 747-8 is among the most ungainly contraptions out there with wings. The original 747 just looked nicely proportioned and mighty. The original was also very first of the widebodies and introduced much innovation. The later models, not so much exciting about them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AIR FRANCE 340 View Post
I love all of them but it is mistake to ignore the B 707-120 and the Comet I, just to name a few.

Jean Pierre.
Thanks for your replies, and I really appreciate them.
Sub-Zero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2016, 01:28 AM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Patman252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Medford, NJ
Posts: 187
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Generally I like the later versions because they tend to be longer. The extra length adds to the sleek look that I like.
There are a couple exceptions.
The 757-200 looks great, but the 757-300 looks awkward. It looks too long.
And for the 747, the -400 and -8 are my favorite, but I will say that I much prefer the -100 over the SP. That SP looks ridiculous, in my opinion.
Patman252 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 09:44 AM   #9 (permalink)
Collector
 
Skystar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 53
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I liked the 767-200 as it was more proportional than the 300.On the opposite end i thought the 727-200 increased length actually was the better looking machine compared to the 100 series.

Last edited by Skystar; 05-05-2016 at 09:46 AM.
Skystar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 09:57 AM   #10 (permalink)
Flagship Liberty
 
Yellow_Ribbon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: SFO
Posts: 173
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Yes, I prefer the 717-100 over the 717-200, wich are not related.

What's a 717-100? Company designation for the KC-135 Stratotanker.

__________________
Flagship Liberty, Freedom, and Independence.
In support of all who serve.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yellow_Ribbon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 02:12 PM   #11 (permalink)
Frogger
 
arctic9048's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: ATL
Age: 37
Posts: 2,609
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I've always liked the 747-100 over any other 747.
arctic9048 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 02:21 PM   #12 (permalink)
Retired the Hobby
 
Surinam Air 747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 3,707
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I love all Boeing 747 aircraft but my all time favorite is the 400 and in second place the 300, I just prefer the stretched upper deck more... Not really a big fan of the SP, to me it looks more like a midget 747...
__________________
I WANT TO BELIEVE...

...that one day I will see many more colorful JC Wings MD-11 models and the long-awaited Gemini 200 TWA twin stripes 727-200!

I always fly America's favorite airline: Southwest Airlines and the World's oldest KLM!

Paris was the greatest city on earth! Vive la France! Tokyo 2020!
Surinam Air 747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 02:35 PM   #13 (permalink)
Retired the Hobby
 
Surinam Air 747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 3,707
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skystar View Post
I liked the 767-200 as it was more proportional than the 300.
I find that the opposite is true of the 767-300, it was the correct size whereas the 200 was to short and the 400 to long...
__________________
I WANT TO BELIEVE...

...that one day I will see many more colorful JC Wings MD-11 models and the long-awaited Gemini 200 TWA twin stripes 727-200!

I always fly America's favorite airline: Southwest Airlines and the World's oldest KLM!

Paris was the greatest city on earth! Vive la France! Tokyo 2020!
Surinam Air 747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2016, 04:09 PM   #14 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 436
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Thanks for all the replies, and I really appreciate them.
Sub-Zero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 05:30 PM   #15 (permalink)
Collector
 
Scott A-320's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: San Diego
Posts: 99
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sub-Zero View Post
As everyone here knows, sometimes there is quite a big difference in terms of appearance and performance from the base model in an aircraft family to the newest model of aircraft in the same family.

For example, a Boeing 737-100:



And a newer Boeing 737-900:



While I know that some people tend to like the newer models of aircraft, such as a 737-900, some people also prefer the original 737-100. Are there any aircraft families where you like the base model more than the later models?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newCDN View Post
757

757-300 just looks weird
I definitely prefer the appearance of the 737-200 over all those that followed. The sleek JT8D nacelles perfectly compliment the stubby fuselage.

757-300 is far too long IMHO!

While the 727 is a beautiful airframe in any length, I prefer the -100.
Scott A-320 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 01:53 AM   #16 (permalink)
Threeve
 
dylan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: KSLC
Posts: 4,220
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

I prefer the 707-300 and the DC-8-60/70 over other, shorter variants. But 731/2, 721, 752, 762, 772, 788 look better to me. Strangely enough, I like the A-318 the best of the A-320 series, and the A-332/A-345 the best of the A-330/A-340 series.

Why do I only like the 707 and DC-8 long and the rest of my airliners short? Weird...
dylan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 05:04 AM   #17 (permalink)
Master Collector
 
LH B747-430's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: MUC
Posts: 741
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow_Ribbon View Post
Yes, I prefer the 717-100 over the 717-200, wich are not related.

What's a 717-100? Company designation for the KC-135 Stratotanker.

Although you state that they are not related, your statement is mixed up and not correct. The B717-100 that you mean is not the base model for the B717-200 that was formerly the MD-95 from MDD released in 1993 and meant to be launched in three lenths..

-> MD-95-20 became the B717-100, but wasn't built from Boeing and dropped in 2003 (6ft 3in or four frames shorter than the -200)
-> MD-95-30 became the B717-200, launched first and the only variant that was produced
-> MD-95-50 became the B717-300, but wasn't built either as Boeing didn't want an inhouse competitor for its B73G (nine frames longer than the -200/ five before and four after the wing)

Quote:
After McDonnell Douglas merged with Boeing in August 1997, most industry observers expected that Boeing would cancel development of the MD-95. However, Boeing decided to go forward with the design under a new name, Boeing 717. Some believed Boeing had skipped the 717 model designation when the 720 and the 727 followed the 707. The 717 name was the company's model number for the KC-135 Stratotanker. 717 had also been used to promote an early design of the 720 to airlines before it was modified to meet market demands. A Boeing historian notes that the Air Force tanker aircraft had the designation "717-100" and the commercial airliner had the designation "717-200". The lack of a widespread use of the 717 name left it available for rebranding the MD-95.
As the MD-95/712 has only one variant that went into production, the B717-200 is its own base model. E.g. the B757 also had a proposal for a -100 variant that didn't went into production as it didn't get any orders and Boeing went for the stretched B734 to close that gap instead. Those are undeveloped varaints and NOT base models..
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


B747-400 - 230ft in length
A380-800 - 240ft in length
B747-8I - 250ft in length
A380-900 - 260ft in length

Who bids more... ?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
LH B747-430 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 10:43 AM   #18 (permalink)
Flagship Liberty
 
Yellow_Ribbon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: SFO
Posts: 173
Unhappy Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LH B747-430 View Post
Although you state that they are not related, your statement is mixed up and not correct. The B717-100 that you mean is not the base model for the B717-200 that was formerly the MD-95 from MDD released in 1993 and meant to be launched in three lenths..

-> MD-95-20 became the B717-100, but wasn't built from Boeing and dropped in 2003 (6ft 3in or four frames shorter than the -200)
-> MD-95-30 became the B717-200, launched first and the only variant that was produced
-> MD-95-50 became the B717-300, but wasn't built either as Boeing didn't want an inhouse competitor for its B73G (nine frames longer than the -200/ five before and four after the wing)

As the MD-95/712 has only one variant that went into production, the B717-200 is its own base model. E.g. the B757 also had a proposal for a -100 variant that didn't went into production as it didn't get any orders and Boeing went for the stretched B734 to close that gap instead. Those are undeveloped varaints and NOT base models..
I was waiting for something like this.

I was referring simply to the numbers, nothing else, as you should have noticed. The number 1 comes before 2 and I was referring to that the company designation for the KC-135 aka 717-100 numerically precedes 717-200.

The KC-135/ 717-100 can also be considered a 'base model' for it is derived from the 367-80, not 707-120 and therefore has a narrower fuselage and shorter than the 707-120.

Even then there are multiple variants of it, though many are conversions. The base model is the KC-135A aka 717-100A/ 146/ 148.

Correct, the 717-200 is the base model of the 717 Airliner. The -200 base also extends to the B762 and B772.

Therefore my corrected statement would be I prefer the 717-100A over 717-200.
__________________
Flagship Liberty, Freedom, and Independence.
In support of all who serve.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yellow_Ribbon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 12:50 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master Collector
 
LH B747-430's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: MUC
Posts: 741
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow_Ribbon View Post
I was waiting for something like this.

I was referring simply to the numbers, nothing else, as you should have noticed. The number 1 comes before 2 and I was referring to that the company designation for the KC-135 aka 717-100 numerically precedes 717-200.

The KC-135/ 717-100 can also be considered a 'base model' for it is derived from the 367-80, not 707-120 and therefore has a narrower fuselage and shorter than the 707-120.

Even then there are multiple variants of it, though many are conversions. The base model is the KC-135A aka 717-100A/ 146/ 148.

Correct, the 717-200 is the base model of the 717 Airliner. The -200 base also extends to the B762 and B772.

Therefore my corrected statement would be I prefer the 717-100A over 717-200.
Please read my post again as there have been two times a B717. Two times a B717-100 and two times a B717-200, which you seem to mix up again..

Another intersting fact is that there were originally three initial versions of the B767. A Boeing B767-100, a B767-200 and a B767MR - a trijet that was renamed internally the B777-100. That's why there are no -100s, becasue they didn't went into production.

Quote:
In January 1978, Boeing announced a major extension of its Everett factory—which was then dedicated to the manufacture of the 747—to accommodate its new wide-body family. In February 1978, the new jetliner received the 767 model designation and three variants were planned: a 767-100 with 190 seats, a 767-200 with 210 seats, and a trijet 767MR/LR version with 200 seats intended for intercontinental routes. The 767MR/LR was subsequently renamed 777 for differentiation purposes. The 767 was officially launched on July 14, 1978, when United Airlines ordered 30 of the 767-200 variant, followed by 50 more 767-200 orders from American Airlines and Delta Air Lines later that year. The 767-100 was ultimately not offered for sale, as its capacity was too close to the 757's seating, while the 777 trijet was eventually dropped in favor of standardizing around the twinjet configuration.
Here you can see a model of the B777 taken from the Boeing archives in Bellevue, WA:

http://airwaysnews.com/galleries/19115.jpg
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


B747-400 - 230ft in length
A380-800 - 240ft in length
B747-8I - 250ft in length
A380-900 - 260ft in length

Who bids more... ?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
LH B747-430 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 01:26 PM   #20 (permalink)
Flagship Liberty
 
Yellow_Ribbon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: SFO
Posts: 173
Default Re: Does anyone like the base model of certain aircraft more than later models?

Please read my post again. You seem to mix up the KC-135/717-100 with the planned Boeing 717-100 (MD-95), which was never produced. I repeat that the KC-135/717-100 is not related to the Boeing 717-200. I am referring to the numerical designation in which the Boeing Model 717-100 precedes the Boeing 717-200.

Where do you get two 717-200s? The 720 was once referred as the 717-020, which is not -200.

As stated before, the 717-100 (MD-95) was propsed but not produced. The real 717-100 (KC-135) was first introduced in 1957, and over 800 were built.
__________________
Flagship Liberty, Freedom, and Independence.
In support of all who serve.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yellow_Ribbon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:57 PM.

Latest Threads
- by Big Al
 

Models of the Week
 



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.