Sponsor Message:
Travel Polls & Prefs Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 Ugly?  
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4659 posts, RR: 19
Posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4853 times:

At the risk of being flamed or moderated I am putting this out there.



The first artists impressions of the 787 showed a great looking Aircraft, with a very sleek nose shape.




Since the redesign, which I understand was necessary for visibility purposes imho the nose is way too 'blunt'




It spoils the look of an otherwise great looking Aircraft.



Thoughts, opinions ?


The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4837 times:

Yeah, it's not a looker. It's not the nose that kills it for me, though, it's the way the fuselage just looks stubby. I'm thinking the -9 version will look better.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4401 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4837 times:

I would call its appearance. from the side, average. JAT - just another twin. From below, the rather long and bended wings might make it looking good waiting to judge real life.. So maybe it can reach the same level of beauty the 764 and 77W have.

User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2770 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4744 times:

Like the A380, it has some great angles.. some not so flattering.

I saw this picture on the front page a few days ago and thought the 787 looked stunning.  
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Akira Uekawa




View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4659 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4666 times:

If the nose / radome, was 'pulled out' another 10 feet or so it would look so much better.


The nose just looks 'cut off' to me.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2770 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4669 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 4):

If the nose / radome, was 'pulled out' another 10 feet or so it would look so much better.

Maybe I am imagining what you are saying wrong.. but to me that would just make it look more like a 767.  

I think it's quite beautiful and reminds me of the Caravelle, which was a stunner.



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4659 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4610 times:

Quoting KPDX (Reply 5):

Maybe I am imagining what you are saying wrong.. but to me that would just make it look more like a 767.

I think it's quite beautiful and reminds me of the Caravelle, which was a stunner.

Thing is, the Caravelle was much 'slimmer'



the 787's significantly wider body needs gentle tapering at both ends to prevent if from looking 'stubby' which it certainly is.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlinewilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9077 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4552 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Maybe it is not the best looking airplane out there due to its nose, but good looking is always very different from person to person. The different nose makes it somewhat special and easy to spot.

Here some great angles where she just looks gorgeous:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kok Chwee SIM
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Baldur Sveinsson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wilco737



wilco737
  



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlinevheca From Australia, joined May 2007, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4354 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 7):
Maybe it is not the best looking airplane out there due to its nose, but good looking is always very different from person to person. The different nose makes it somewhat special and easy to spot.

Here some great angles where she just looks gorgeous:



I CONCUR!

Vheca



Types Flown on - 312,320,722,732,733,73H,73W,742,743,74C,752,762,AB4,D1C,D28,DHT,F27,L11
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4317 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 6):
Thing is, the Caravelle was much 'slimmer'

The -9 and potential -10 models will both look 'slimmer' so should be prettier... IMO it's pretty stunning as it is - doesn't have an ugly frown like the A330 nor the dopey eyes of the 767 or the long forehead of the 777...


User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 854 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4302 times:

I think the landing gears are too short (a la 737) otherwise, as stated, the 787 looks like every other WB twinjet

//Mike   



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2113 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4300 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 7):

Here some great angles where she just looks gorgeous:

The wings are certainly a killer, but the same can be said of the A380.

Other than that, yeah... just like the A380, the 787 sure doesn't fit my definition of beauty. For a while I thought they just need some time to grow on you, but I'm starting to doubt that. Thankfully, there's still the 747-8i to make a visually appealing "new" aircraft...



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently onlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1896 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4212 times:

What?? 787 is ugly??? Hell NO!!! It's one of the most beautiful aircraft out there. It may appear a little stubby, but in no way it is ugly.

If you want ugly, take a look at the 747 or A380. Now those are ugly planes.



STOP TERRORRUSSIA!!!
User currently offlinewilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9077 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4199 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 12):
If you want ugly, take a look at the 747

What? Oh my god, I couldn't disagree more here. The 747 is for me so beautiful.

But let's stick to the topic. The lovely 787...

wilco737
  



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3953 times:

Apart from the wings a boring design.

It's a fat 767 with a new nose.   



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlinesofianec From Germany, joined Aug 2007, 240 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3910 times:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me 747 is beautiful, the A380 is beautiful, the 787 is beautiful, hell TU154 is very beautiful. I mean to call 787 ugly is like calling your wife ugly 'cause she gained a few extra pounds.

---



A350WARP
User currently offlineUpperDeck From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2010, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3890 times:

Brave thread!

There's rarely such a thing as an ugly aircraft. The aerodynamic requirements generally prompt something beautiful, however I am disappointed with the final look of the 787-8 as it appears more like an overweight 767 with a weird nose and some stunning wings - but it's always going to be function over form. Fingers crossed that the stretched variants look a little more graceful.

The A340-500/600 wins for me every time.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 40
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3842 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting qf002 (Reply 9):
The -9 and potential -10 models will both look 'slimmer' so should be prettier

No doubt they will.  .

Quoting Rara (Reply 11):
The wings are certainly a killer, but the same can be said of the A380.

So true, the wings on both these new airliners have a high flex rate which you can see very good if the planes touch-down and the wings "sink into the rest position".  .

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 13):
But let's stick to the topic. The lovely 787...

I personally think she is quite a looker. Not as elegant yet as the A330 maybe, but the longer versions could very well be just as nice looking imho, and might even be better looking.

[Edited 2011-07-26 01:37:19]

User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4659 posts, RR: 19
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3804 times:

Quoting solnabo (Reply 10):


I think the landing gears are too short (a la 737) otherwise, as stated, the 787 looks like every other WB twinjet

Agree, the landing gear does look too short.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 12):




What?? 787 is ugly??? Hell NO!!! It's one of the most beautiful aircraft out there. It may appear a little stubby, but in no way it is ugly.

If you want ugly, take a look at the 747 or A380. Now those are ugly planes.

Well , to each his own, i think the 747, particularly the classic is, perhaps the best looking subsonic Airliner ever made.



The A380 has to be the ugliest.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineDM From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 336 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 3749 times:

Man I remember when the 787 had the original 7E7 images going and I was just like man that's gonna be awesome!



Oh well, I still like the 787 as it is now but if it looked like that ^ whoa!


User currently offlinesteffenbn From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 3614 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 9):
or the long forehead of the 777...

That's one of the many pretty things of the Triple 7!

Quoting DM (Reply 19):
Man I remember when the 787 had the original 7E7 images going and I was just like man that's gonna be awesome!




Oh well, I still like the 787 as it is now but if it looked like that ^ whoa!

Hell that nose is even uglier than now! But the rest is stunningly B-E-A-utiful!

-Steffen Nielsen, Denmark

[Edited 2011-07-26 02:12:14]


A330, A319, 737,738,752,763,763ER,764ER,777-200LR
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3508 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 3485 times:

Mods: How has this not been moved to polls/prefs? Pretty cut and dry candidate as far as I'm concerned.

The 787-8 won't be going down in history as the "looker" of the family, but it's definitely got it's angles and insofar as I'm concerned (I live in Seattle with a nice view of westbound approaches to BFI), needs to be seen in flight to be fully appreciated. The 787-9 and (godwilling) 787-10 are going to be absolute stunners.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlinetropical From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 3458 times:

I wish the sharkfin tail would have been kept... but of course, a/c designers don't have looks as their overriding concern.

My favourite 2-holers looks-wise are probably the 767 and & A330. 777 is pleasing to the eye too. My overall favourite has to be the A345 though... proportionally she is pretty close to perfect.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2644 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 7 hours ago) and read 3416 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

The 787-8 hasn't really grown on me yet. Sure, the interior looks fantastic, but I'm just not so sure about its exterior. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "ugly", but perhaps the 787-9 will look better. To me, it's not the nose that spoils it, but the proportions - it just appears too short, and the large windows disguises the size of the aircraft quite well.

Best lookers? To my eyes, the 747-400 rules in terms of aesthetics, followed by the 747-8, 777-300ER, and A340-500. Maybe the 787-9 will make that list too.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2833 posts, RR: 45
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 1 hour ago) and read 3359 times:

Quoting Max Q (Thread starter):
The first artists impressions of the 787 showed a great looking Aircraft, with a very sleek nose shape.




Since the redesign, which I understand was necessary for visibility purposes imho the nose is way too 'blunt'




It spoils the look of an otherwise great looking Aircraft.

Kudos, Max Q for venturing into such risky terrain! I rarely get into these aesthetics threads as it really is a matter of personal preference, but I actually agree with you wholeheartedly on this one.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 6):
Quoting KPDX (Reply 5):

Maybe I am imagining what you are saying wrong.. but to me that would just make it look more like a 767.

I think it's quite beautiful and reminds me of the Caravelle, which was a stunner.

Thing is, the Caravelle was much 'slimmer'

The Caravelle had nicer (and slimmer) proportions to be sure. It's no Caravelle, but at least it's no 767 either.

Quoting KPDX (Reply 5):
I am imagining what you are saying wrong.. but to me that would just make it look more like a 767.

I don't know if that would be right; the 767 is somewhat blunt too, though not as squashed looking as the 787.

Quoting Rara (Reply 11):
Other than that, yeah... just like the A380, the 787 sure doesn't fit my definition of beauty. For a while I thought they just need some time to grow on you, but I'm starting to doubt that.

I thought the same thing, especially after seeing the original PR impressions of the aircraft; now I'm convinced it's aesthetically just another dumpy Boeing like the 762 or pretty much any 737.

Quoting UpperDeck (Reply 16):
Brave thread!

REALLY brave!

Quoting UpperDeck (Reply 16):
There's rarely such a thing as an ugly aircraft. The aerodynamic requirements generally prompt something beautiful, however I am disappointed with the final look of the 787-8 as it appears more like an overweight 767 with a weird nose and some stunning wings - but it's always going to be function over form.

You are absolutely right: there is no doubt the 787 will do its mission well, but it's mission is functional, it's not a piece of art, it's a people-mover.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 17):
Quoting wilco737 (Reply 13):
But let's stick to the topic. The lovely 787...

I personally think she is quite a looker. Not as elegant yet as the A330 maybe, but the longer versions could very well be just as nice looking imho, and might even be better looking.

I agree and disagree with you EPA. I agree the 787 will never be as elegant as an A-330 (or a long-bodied Tristar!) and I do think the longer versions will be more aesthetically proportional. I don't agree that in the present form that the 787 is a "looker." Just personal preference.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 18):
Well , to each his own, i think the 747, particularly the classic is, perhaps the best looking subsonic Airliner ever made.

Sorry, L-1011 has to win for me. I've never found the 747 attractive, even when I was young and in awe of the size of the thing.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 18):
The A380 has to be the ugliest.

I actually think the 737 is the ugliest (the shorter the fuselage, the uglier,) but I do agree with you that the A-380 is not the belle of the ball, and is certainly the ugliest Airbus.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 23):
The 787-8 hasn't really grown on me yet. Sure, the interior looks fantastic, but I'm just not so sure about its exterior. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "ugly", but perhaps the 787-9 will look better. To me, it's not the nose that spoils it, but the proportions - it just appears too short, and the large windows disguises the size of the aircraft quite well.

That pretty well sums up the 787's offenses against the art world!  
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 23):
Best lookers?

L-1011 followed by A-330.


25 Post contains images solnabo : A333 - A340-500/600 & B773ER not in service: CV-990 Coronado hands down Sorry, got carried away.. the 788 will grow on me, cant wait for the 789
26 Delimit : 748i is about as good as it gets in my mind. The new wings, larger engines and longer upper deck all improve on what was already a stunner. I'd follo
27 Post contains images HorizonGirl : My opinion? I think it looks like a banana. Seriously, it is a stunning aircraft! But the shape of the fuselage always makes me think of a banana if i
28 Max Q : The L1011 is definitely a close second, the Tristar was and is a beautiful Aircraft. Yes the 737 is not a great looker, i actually like the look of t
29 Tigerguy : From a certain angle (as you're looking up at it while it's overhead, especially in a turn), I think the 73G kinda looks like a baby A330. At any rat
30 Max Q : The 748F with the shorter upper deck is particularly good looking.
31 Post contains links and images FRAIAD : I like the look of the 787. But I'm actually waiting for the 787-9 because, I thing, the longer fuselage will make it an even more beautiful plane. Ap
32 N126DL : The 737 from a front-facing view reminds me very much of the red bird from the "Angry Birds" game. It's the plane that most resembles a true bird to
33 Mir : Didn't see it before, but now I do. And the more I look at it, the more the nose just irks me. It's interesting that for all the complaining about ho
34 Babybus : It's not exactly pretty as a picture. As mentioned before it just looks like any other twin jet. There is something about the front of it that reminds
35 carbon787 : pretty I would not say, it is certainly unique with that nose and those wings...wow, they are something! Ugly, heck no.....aerodynamics not withstandi
36 Max Q : It was, it was moved here.
37 Post contains images ACDC8 : I'm by no means a Boeing Fan Boy and I will admit that I do prefer Airbus over most Boeings in regards to looks and comfort, but I will admit that the
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
787 Question posted Fri Jul 23 2010 12:30:13 by Pegasus01
Speculation: Who Will Take 787 LN04-LN06? posted Sat Jun 12 2010 11:27:14 by mgmacius
787 First Delivery Date - Poll posted Sat Feb 20 2010 10:03:22 by azhobo
Your Preference: 787 Or 757 posted Wed Feb 3 2010 09:46:29 by September11
787 First Flight Bets Part 3 (and 748 Also) posted Tue Oct 6 2009 08:46:42 by WestWing
Which Will Fly First, The 787 Or The 747-8? posted Thu Jul 16 2009 21:32:03 by ArabAirX
787 First Flight Bets Part 2 posted Sun Jun 14 2009 07:50:41 by ZBBYLW
Airline Seats. Good Bad And Downright Ugly posted Sun May 31 2009 13:09:14 by 777Heaven
787 First Flight - Thread Revisited posted Thu Apr 30 2009 01:27:17 by Part147
World's Most Ugly Airplanes posted Sat Feb 7 2009 03:29:48 by ThirtyEcho