PHL: January 27, 2007 - N251RY.jpg

[Digital Voices]

Here's a Ryan International 734

More Photos Link:

http://phlairline.com/spotter/012707.html

[Jim Morris]

"Digital Voices" > wrote in message
...
> Here's a Ryan International 734
>
> More Photos Link:
>
> http://phlairline.com/spotter/012707.html
>
>
>
>
Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
Thanks,

Jim Morris

[Jim Morris]

"Digital Voices" > wrote in message
...
> Here's a Ryan International 734
>
> More Photos Link:
>
> http://phlairline.com/spotter/012707.html
>
>
>
>
Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
Thanks,

Jim Morris

[Ron]

"Jim Morris" > wrote in message
...
>
> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?

It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.

Ron
--
Non urinat in ventum

[Ron]

"Jim Morris" > wrote in message
...
>
> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?

It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.

Ron
--
Non urinat in ventum

[Scenic[_1_]]

Ron wrote:

>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
I think you meant to say a 737-200 would be written as 732.
> Ron

[Scenic[_1_]]

Ron wrote:

>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
I think you meant to say a 737-200 would be written as 732.
> Ron

[Harriet and John]

Check the back of your ATP - that's FAA code...

[Harriet and John]

Check the back of your ATP - that's FAA code...

[Jim Morris]

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>
> Ron
> --
> Non urinat in ventum
Thanks. Now I know more than I did this morning, Ron.
Knew there had to be logic behind it.

Jim Morris

[Jim Morris]

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>
> Ron
> --
> Non urinat in ventum
Thanks. Now I know more than I did this morning, Ron.
Knew there had to be logic behind it.

Jim Morris

[Allan9]

ATC computers could not handle B737-400. Too many characters
Al

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>
> Ron
> --
> Non urinat in ventum
>

[Allan9]

ATC computers could not handle B737-400. Too many characters
Al

"Ron" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>
> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would be
> written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>
> Ron
> --
> Non urinat in ventum
>

[Ron]

"Scenic" > wrote in message
...
> I think you meant to say a 737-200 would be written as 732.

That's correct, my bad.
And like Allan9 stated: it's because some ATC computers cannot handle the
larger format.

Ron
--
Non urinat in ventum

[Ron]

"Scenic" > wrote in message
...
> I think you meant to say a 737-200 would be written as 732.

That's correct, my bad.
And like Allan9 stated: it's because some ATC computers cannot handle the
larger format.

Ron
--
Non urinat in ventum

[Bob Harrington]

"Jim Morris" > wrote in
:

>
> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>>
>> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would
>> be written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>>
>> Ron
>> --
>> Non urinat in ventum
>
> Thanks. Now I know more than I did this morning, Ron.
> Knew there had to be logic behind it.

Now that I have to forget two old things in order to make room for one new
thing, I'm trying to give up learning new stuff.

Just this morning, I needed to learn a new phone number - cost me
arithmetic and hou two tipe gooed...

Obb ^^,,

[Bob Harrington]

"Jim Morris" > wrote in
:

>
> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Jim Morris" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> Why is it called a 734 and not 737-200?
>>
>> It is a 737-400, in ATC abbreviations written as 734. A 737-200 would
>> be written as 742, a 747-400 as 744, etc.
>>
>> Ron
>> --
>> Non urinat in ventum
>
> Thanks. Now I know more than I did this morning, Ron.
> Knew there had to be logic behind it.

Now that I have to forget two old things in order to make room for one new
thing, I'm trying to give up learning new stuff.

Just this morning, I needed to learn a new phone number - cost me
arithmetic and hou two tipe gooed...

Obb ^^,,