PDA

View Full Version : Strange: Are they right that A320 is smaller than A310?


Happpy
10-30-2013, 10:48 AM
Hello, Guys!

Look at this one, is it right: http://www.aviatorjoe.net/go/compare/A310-300/A320-200/

A310 is bigger than A320. Length wise, passenger wise, wing wise etc....

Am I watching right? OR wrong?

As a new Model. I mean A320 has come after A310 and should be bigger than this. What do you guys say? Every aircraft which comes new after the previous ones, always seems a bigger one but here what I'm watching? Can anyone explain me this?

Regards,
moose135
10-30-2013, 10:52 AM
Every aircraft which comes new after the previous ones, always seems a bigger one but here what I'm watching? Can anyone explain me this?
Model number has more to do with when it is designed, not size. After all, the 747 is larger than any of the Boeing products that came after her.
gonzalu
10-30-2013, 11:12 AM
Well, Anthony Weiner came after Bill Clinton but billy is still "bigger". Go figure.
Happpy
10-30-2013, 11:32 AM
Well, Anthony Weiner came after Bill Clinton but billy is still "bigger". Go figure.

Ha ha ha h...They're not Aircrafts Man!
Happpy
10-30-2013, 11:33 AM
Model number has more to do with when it is designed, not size. After all, the 747 is larger than any of the Boeing products that came after her.

You're right. Its mean the information which I've seen is correct. Thanks man!
Ari707
10-30-2013, 01:31 PM
The model number is more the order the plane was designed and build in if anything the number after will effect the size 767-200 is smaller then a 767-300.
The A300 was Airbus's first model, the A310 was a smaller version, both twin engine wide bodies the A320 is narrow body with variants running from the smallest A318 to the stretched A321. Then Airbus built the A330 and 340 at the same time which are basically the same plane in 2 or 4 engines. then they skipped to the A380 and are now starting to produce the A350.

Boeing Went pretty much in order starting with the 707 and have not reached the 787, though they did skip the 717 but now use after Boeing took over McDonald Douglas and continued making the MD-95.
moose135
10-30-2013, 01:42 PM
...though they did skip the 717 but now use after Boeing took over McDonald Douglas and continued making the MD-95.
Actually, they did originally use the 717 designation in proper sequence - it was the Boeing designation for the KC-135.
NickPeterman
10-30-2013, 01:49 PM
Actually, they did originally use the 717 designation in proper sequence - it was the Boeing designation for the KC-135.

Exactly, hence why the MD-95 was redesignated the 717-200, there had already been a 717-100 (the KC-135)
Ari707
10-30-2013, 02:15 PM
717 had also been used to promote an early design of the 720 to airlines
stratoduck
11-03-2013, 05:15 PM
i was indeed going to mention that the MD-95 is smaller than the MD-90.

the 737 series (100-900) generally gets larger with increasing versions, with the exception of the -500, -600, and -700s.

cessna airplanes generally get larger as the designations increase in size. they also tend to get newer. the exception was the 208, which was newer and larger than the 210. there is also the current production 162 which is smaller (at least lighter) than the 152, 150, 140 and 120 that came before it.