Talk:List of Boeing customer codes

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 16 December 2022, see discussion.
Keep, 21 May 2014, see discussion.
Keep, 30 November 2013, see discussion.

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airline project.

Customer codes (Copied from Customer Codes)[edit]

This section is really messy. I think we should clean it up, move it to the end, or move it to a subpage. What does everyone think? —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 16:25, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Ive added a lot more of the customer codes to the list.

They need proparly formatting and linking out.

Will work my way through them

If you can help, please do

Reedy Boy 13:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers to N328KF for making a sub article (stub?) of customer codes

Reedy Boy 13:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Text Formatting[edit]

Can someone tell me why some are in italics, and others aren't and other similar ideas?

Cheers

13:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Presumably this comment is from Reedy Boy. Italics indicate a deceased airline. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 14:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry, i must haven't put enough tidles.

Ok, thanks for telling me that

Reedy Boy 12:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

order of codes and source?[edit]

As people have noted above this article does need tidying up which I'll try and get around to but before I do I thought I'd consult on what order you think it should be - or enlighten me if there's a precedent I should follow? It appears that there are numerical (01), alphabetical (AB), alpha-numeric (A1) and numeric-alpha (1A) and I'm just not sure what order these should go in. I'll break them up into sub-headers to make it simpler too I think. My first instinct is to do: 00, 01, 02... 98, 99, 0A, 0B, 0C, 0D.... 1A, 1B, 1C... A1, A2... AA, AB, AC...

Also, where is all this info coming from? Do Boeing have a list that sets a precedent?

Iancaddy 17:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first sequence used was 00 to 99 then 0A to 9Z, then the latest AA to ZZ I would agree with Iancaddy that they should be presented in that order. MilborneOne 19:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just want to know how the First/Second/Third Sequences workd. They seem out-of-the-place and I found two "Third Sequences" somewhere. Suggest making a table. --Starcity ai 20:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the order into the different sequences as used by Boeing (just to make it clear that they were not used in an alphabetic order) - didnt have time to change from the original format agree needs a table MilborneOne 21:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the "order" should be referred to at the beginning of the article and that the list of codes is returned to its previous state. Ie: alphabetical/numerical. There is much data that is out of place in the article. It's much harder to utilise then in the past. skyskraper 12:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re-organised into a table to make it easier to read and added a note about different sequences, still not strictly in alpha order yet need more time - or another willing helper ! MilborneOne 14:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant article?[edit]

There's list of Boeing customers that already has most of the information in this article.

Musashi1600 08:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that the other article is redundant as it is has older data than this page, if it is really a list of customers it should have an alpha list of customer names not a list of codes !! It was only created in July 06 perhaps by somebody who had not seen this article MilborneOne 11:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Successor Airlines[edit]

There have been edits to customer name on the list to include subsequent airline names - in a lot a cases the code has NOT been used by the successor airline (most of the time have their own codes) so I would suggest should not be included. MilborneOne 20:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added: 737 to CT:WestJet[edit]

Just a brief note to show that CT/WestJet purchased 737s. CreepyMan (talk) 20:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Boeing customer codes[edit]

The Boeing customer codes as we know it, were introduced for orders for the Boeing 707. Does anyone have info about the history of the codes, on any book or magazine? Some airlines were assigned codes which were reassigned to others. The first sequence was announced at an ICAO congress in 1956, two years before the first 707 was delivered to Pan Am. And some codes originally assigned to were reassigned to others, while others remained with the airline, e.g. BOAC's (now British Airways') Boeing customer code is 36, so a Boeing 747-400 delivered to BA was a 747-436. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.239.117.219 (talk) 18:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]