Re: A300/A310

From: (Terrell D. Drinkard)
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group
Date:         29 Nov 93 22:21:36 PST
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <>,
Karl Swartz <kls@ohare.Chicago.COM> wrote:
>>> Airbus A300/A310 (nearing 700)
>>I have a lot of trouble who lump these two aircraft together as one!
>You'd better take it up with Airbus Industrie, because they lump them
>together in one series.  Same thing with the A330 and A340.
>>If you look at the A300B4 and its "derivative" the A310, there really
>>is not that much in common.  New wing, new engine choices, new glass
>>cockpit, new rear fuselage, new tailplane, many new systems, etc.
>Pretty much the same will be true of the new 737X as compared to the
>original 737-100, too, yet I fully expect Boeing to consider them the
>same type.  Where do you draw the line?  The manufacturer seems to be
>the best authority available, and Airbus lumps the A300 and A310

The key is the Type Certificate.  All 737s have the same type certificate
(not the same as a rating - all 747s use the same type certificate, but the
747-400 has a different rating requirement).  The DC-9/MD-80s have the same
Type Certificate, as do DC-10s and MD-11s.  Presumably the same is true for
A300/A310 airplanes.

In the last year or two, things have gotten a bit mushier.  I'm clueless
about the A330/A340 Type Certificates.  I'd guess it is much like the
Boeing 757/767 Type Certificate, but I don't have any data.  The A321
shares the same TC with the A320, and with the A319 if/when it is built.
Another interesting question is the Russian aircraft.  Tu-204, Il-96,
An-124, etc.

For those into the really complex, there is still the BAC 1-11, with a UK
Type Certificate, and what used to be a Romanian Production Certificate,
but without BAC participation, one wonders if the TC will continue to be
recognized by Western regulatory agencies.

"Anyone who thinks they can hold the company responsible for what I say has
more lawyers than sense."