Pembo330
May 21, 2003 at 8:06 pm

Airbus Numbering

I’m sure this has been asked before, but does anyone know why Airbus chose to name the shorter version of the A320-200 as the A319 (and A318) and the reverse for the A321, when, the newer widebodies have gone for variants rather than A329 or A331 etc..

??

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

781

Send private message

By: GZYL - 22nd May 2003 at 19:40

There was an Airbus A340-400, only one prototype was built though. The project got cancelled. And that’s about all the info I’ve got on that!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

520

Send private message

By: robc - 22nd May 2003 at 19:29

Also why have the just skipped, the 400 in the A340 series, perhaps to avoid similarities to the 744…

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,052

Send private message

By: Bhoy - 22nd May 2003 at 02:29

right, please excuse me talking through a cloud of Stout (talking of which, is a there a stage at which the body has had enough pints of Guinness for one night?)…

er… yeah, Airbusses.

nah, I don’t really know why they chose to go that particular way, although there are A321-100/-200’s, as well as A320-100/200’s (although, as far as I’m aware, only A319-100’s).

So I’d assume it was just easier to go for the terms 319/321 rather than coming up with 320-300 or whatever. it also allows room to expand the 320 at a later date.

with the 330/340, isn’t that just a continutaion of the 300/310 numbering programme, where there were various different models.

er, tell you what.. the short answer is, I haven’t got a clue. Maybe it’s just pure Genious.