Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5618958/

Topic: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: zhiao
Posted 2012-11-25 14:00:43 and read 23874 times.

Is it just me, or for us looking at the sky will it be very hard to distinguish the types? I feel like the look very similar, except that the 787 has a nicer nose, and obviously is smaller.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-11-25 14:11:02 and read 23815 times.

I guess the wings will bend like the 787s?

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: spiritair97
Posted 2012-11-25 14:13:14 and read 23794 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 1):

I thought the a350 is going to have winglets like the a330s and a340s?

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: N766UA
Posted 2012-11-25 14:14:24 and read 23765 times.

The nose section/cockpit windows on the A350 look very different. The nose is pointier and it has much smaller spaceshuttle-style windows.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-11-25 14:36:34 and read 23600 times.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 4):
The nose section/cockpit windows on the A350 look very different. The nose is pointier and it has much smaller spaceshuttle-style windows.

Correct. Additionally the B-787 wing has a very different shape, esspecially inboard of the engines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bo...g_787-8_Dreamliner_N787FT_KBFI.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dreamliner_render_787-9.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A350XWB-941_ETIHAD_AIRWAYS.png

As you can see, the B-787-8 has a very different nose and tail (beyond the vertical fin) than the B-767-300ER, but are about the same size.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_787_size_comparison.svg

The A-350 has the A-380 style nose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A350xwb_nose_2009B.png

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-11-25 14:40:59 and read 23559 times.

At cruising altitude they'll probably look similar, but on departure / approach or on the tarmac they should easily be differentiated.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tonytifao
Posted 2012-11-25 14:51:45 and read 23449 times.

787 to me seems way sexier  

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: EPA001
Posted 2012-11-25 14:56:01 and read 23417 times.

Quoting tonytifao (Reply 8):
787 to me seems way sexier

I saw the B787-8 yesterday from very close by when the bus at FRA luckily drove very slowly passed the B787 from Ethiopian Airlines. And I must say she looked very beautiful and impressive. More then I expected from seeing her in so many pictures and videos.

Hopefully I get the same opportunity with an A350 as well soon.  . Her wings are even more promising to me.  .

[Edited 2012-11-25 14:56:47]

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-11-25 15:21:38 and read 23227 times.

The engines and nacells are very different between the two. For those that cannot tell one engine from another, just look for the chevrons. Only the B-787 (of the two) will have them. The chevrons seem to becoming one of the features to identify a Boeing airplane in the future. The B-787, B-747-8, and B-737MAX all have them. My guess is the B-777X will have them, too.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: aviateur
Posted 2012-11-25 17:49:56 and read 22631 times.

It's not like the 787 and A350 are the ONLY similar-looking models out there. ALL planes nowadays, pretty much, look the same. Sad but true.

When I was a kid, even from ten miles out you could pick out a DC-9 from a 727, an L-1011 from a DC-10, a 707 from a DC-8... Planes had very distinctive profiles. I feel bad for today's plane spotters. Airports are SO bloody boring compared to how they used to be.

PS

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Antoniemey
Posted 2012-11-25 18:29:42 and read 22446 times.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 9):
ALL planes nowadays, pretty much, look the same. Sad but true.

Not quite. 737s and A320s still look quite different.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: sonic67
Posted 2012-11-25 20:54:52 and read 22078 times.

"As you can see, the B-787-8 has a very different nose and tail (beyond the vertical fin) than the B-767-300ER, but are about the same size."

You can see realy see how much different the nose in the link below. Also the 787 fusalage is slightly larger.


http://www.google.com/search?q=787+a...t=safari#biv=i|4;d|lLV0sBxTn7Vi4M:

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: N62NA
Posted 2012-11-25 21:21:25 and read 21987 times.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 9):
When I was a kid, even from ten miles out you could pick out a DC-9 from a 727, an L-1011 from a DC-10, a 707 from a DC-8... Planes had very distinctive profiles. I feel bad for today's plane spotters. Airports are SO bloody boring compared to how they used to be.

Agree 100%

Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 10):

Not quite. 737s and A320s still look quite different.

Not really, especially when you compare (as aviateur did above) to what used to be in the skies in the 1970s.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: davs5032
Posted 2012-11-25 21:57:11 and read 21811 times.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 12):
Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 10):

Not quite. 737s and A320s still look quite different.

Not really, especially when you compare (as aviateur did above) to what used to be in the skies in the 1970s.

I agree with Antoniemey. If you get past the fact that they both have one engine hanging under each wing, the two appear very different considering their similar sizes and the fact that they are used inter-changeably on/compete for the same routes. The planes' nose profiles, tail shape, engine shape, height off the ground, wing-tips, and even the shapes of the two fuselages are distinctly different, and allow them to be identified as one or the other from a very far distance in much the same way that you could distinguish past planes.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: N243NW
Posted 2012-11-25 22:21:02 and read 21480 times.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 9):
I feel bad for today's plane spotters. Airports are SO bloody boring compared to how they used to be.

This is what I tell to the MD-80 haters I meet every so often in the industry. Just wait 5-10 years when everything out there looks the same, and the Mad Dog will be sorely missed.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: astuteman
Posted 2012-11-25 23:19:06 and read 20824 times.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 9):
When I was a kid, even from ten miles out you could pick out a DC-9 from a 727, an L-1011 from a DC-10, a 707 from a DC-8... Planes had very distinctive profiles. I feel bad for today's plane spotters. Airports are SO bloody boring compared to how they used to be.

If you can't spot an A380 from all the rest.....  

Rgds

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: AirPacific747
Posted 2012-11-26 06:09:15 and read 16178 times.

I guess we'll have to wait and see it in real life, but based on the drawings, the A350 looks really ugly.

The 787 is much better looking, but even on that plane, i am not too fond of the nose section.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-11-26 06:31:00 and read 15752 times.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 16):
I guess we'll have to wait and see it in real life, but based on the drawings, the A350 looks really ugly.

I wouldn't call it ugly, but I do think the 787 is a better-looking plane. Then again, I find most of Boeing's line-up better-looking than Airbus' (though I would say my least-favorite on an aesthetic basis is the 757-300 and the best is the A340-500).

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: AirPacific747
Posted 2012-11-26 06:43:32 and read 15546 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):
I wouldn't call it ugly, but I do think the 787 is a better-looking plane. Then again, I find most of Boeing's line-up better-looking than Airbus' (though I would say my least-favorite on an aesthetic basis is the 757-300 and the best is the A340-500

I agree. The A340-500 and -600 are good looking.. But almost all Boeing models are good looking as well.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-26 07:07:52 and read 15096 times.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 16):
I guess we'll have to wait and see it in real life, but based on the drawings, the A350 looks really ugly.

I like it, although I think it looked a lot nicer when it had its own nose as opposed to the grafted A380 nose. I certainly understand why they went the latter route though.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: EPA001
Posted 2012-11-26 07:21:23 and read 14842 times.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 18):
The A340-500 and -600 are good looking

For me, when beauty is the only factor to be considered, the A340-500 easily beats all others out there. Even the ones which are not in service yet. But looks alone are not enough to be successful.  .

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: JAAlbert
Posted 2012-11-26 07:22:28 and read 14808 times.

The 350's windows will also be a bit shorter and a tad wider if I recall - I'm not sure if you'll be able to tell from a distance.

What struck me about the 787 is how smooth it's fuselage is - very few rivets and such. It will be interesting to see how the 350 compares.

I do like the 350 cockpit windows. Very mod!

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: frmrCapCadet
Posted 2012-11-26 09:03:10 and read 13100 times.

Is this a fair comparison, friends describe the various birds on our feeders as 'little brown birds'? If you really know what you are looking for the differences are obvious. But I would not say 'very' obvious. Likewise two engine planes are not 'very' different. On the ground you can compare the size, close up you can see the engine chevrons, a little further away the various kinds of wing tips. The other things are pretty subtle to the uninitiated.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: LostSound
Posted 2012-11-26 09:39:21 and read 12449 times.

Both the A350 and 787 look sexy to me. But for me most of Airbus's line up looks a bit better style wise.
All subjective though. Both companies make brilliant products.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: jollo
Posted 2012-11-26 09:52:42 and read 12191 times.

Alas, no trouble telling them apart at first glance.

Despite Airbus being "home team" for me, I'm afraid there's no doubt the 350 turned out much less sexy that the 787. On paper and before final design freeze it looked like there might have been some competition, but alas, "in the flesh" the 350 will have to compete on realiability and performance alone: the beauty contest is lost by a good margin.

I have to say, the chances for the 350 were not good to start with: the 787 turned out to be amazingly good looking, a solid contender to the crown of best looking airliner ever (still held by the A340-500 IMO).

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: N766UA
Posted 2012-11-26 13:08:11 and read 9450 times.

Quoting jollo (Reply 24):
I have to say, the chances for the 350 were not good to start with: the 787 turned out to be amazingly good looking, a solid contender to the crown of best looking airliner ever (still held by the A340-500 IMO).

I don't know why airbus insists on such tiny cockpit windows, it doesn't help the proportions of their jets. I spent a winter working at UPS a few years back and the A300 cockpit windows looked like little portholes compared to the 767 and especially the MD-11.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: 3MilesToWRO
Posted 2012-11-26 13:09:37 and read 9459 times.

Well, we've had SP-LRA 787 doing touch-and-gos at Wrocław airport this weekend and, how to say it... Nothing special. Looks like any other Boeing, actually. Nice view, I won't deny, but just this. And those thin, pointy, bending wings don't help when you see the planform.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: dfambro
Posted 2012-11-26 14:22:58 and read 8716 times.

Quoting 3MilesToWRO (Reply 26):
And those thin, pointy, bending wings don't help when you see the planform.

Ah, taste is such a fickle thing. What I love about the 787 is those "thin, pointy, bending wings", except I'd call them those "long, slender, graceful and elegant wings"! To me they make pretty much every other previous commercial aircraft wing look plain and stubby.

From the look of images I've seen, the A350 wings have potential for similar grace. But, my appreciation for the 787 wing really grew after I saw them in flight from the inside, so it'll be a little while before I can do real comparison.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-11-26 16:09:39 and read 8460 times.

Quoting tonytifao (Reply 6):
787 to me seems way sexier  
Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 10):
787 to me seems way sexier  

And real. While I know the A350 will eventually be built, it has not become real yet and I will not concede that the design is finalized.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-11-26 16:20:53 and read 8432 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 28):
And real. While I know the A350 will eventually be built, it has not become real yet and I will not concede that the design is finalized.

It had better be for the A350-900, at least, considering they're starting assembly of test frames.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2012-11-26 16:24:18 and read 8398 times.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 21):
I do like the 350 cockpit windows. Very mod!

Aren't they the same as the A380? From all the renderings from Airbus, the windows have been framed in black to create the illusion of one continuous cockpit window frame. It looks much better like this but whether airlines follow suit is another matter. I guess it's almost an acknowledgment from Airbus that the cockpit windows are a little, ahem, less than attractive.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: rcair1
Posted 2012-11-26 16:54:49 and read 8303 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 28):
And real. While I know the A350 will eventually be built, it has not become real yet and I will not concede that the design is finalized.

For me - it is not that the design is finalized - it is that I've seen it in flight. That's what I need to see before I can judge one versus the other. Right now - the 787 hands down - but that is not fair yet cause it is not apples to apples.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-11-26 17:12:56 and read 8291 times.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 30):
Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 21):
I do like the 350 cockpit windows. Very mod!

Aren't they the same as the A380? From all the renderings from Airbus, the windows have been framed in black to create the illusion of one continuous cockpit window frame. It looks much better like this but whether airlines follow suit is another matter. I guess it's almost an acknowledgment from Airbus that the cockpit windows are a little, ahem, less than attractive.

Don't know why the A350 (and A380) need 6 cockpit window panels while the 787 only requires 4? Seems like a useful maintenance saving to reduce the number of parts needed.

A350



787

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-11-26 17:20:02 and read 8238 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 32):
on't know why the A350 (and A380) need 6 cockpit window panels while the 787 only requires 4? Seems like a useful maintenance saving to reduce the number of parts needed.

A350

Would the four windows that the 787 has be lighter in weight that the 6 on the A350? This was one of the reasons given the 737 now is being built without "eyebrows".

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-26 18:34:37 and read 8099 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 32):
Don't know why the A350 (and A380) need 6 cockpit window panels while the 787 only requires 4? Seems like a useful maintenance saving to reduce the number of parts needed.

It's not a matter of need, it's a matter of trades. The A350 will have comparable viewing area to the 787. The A350 is using considerably smaller #2 and #3 windows...the #2 window on the 787 is *enourmous*...the nose-on shots don't do it justice. The upside is that it's got fantastic side visiblity and no post at the pilot's shoulder...the downside is that the #2 window is incredibly heavy and requires two extremely strong people or a crane to change.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 33):
Would the four windows that the 787 has be lighter in weight that the 6 on the A350?

Given that CFRP/metal is generally stronger than glass in a structural application, the 6 windows are probably lighter. Window thickness goes up quickly with increasing area due to the pressure load.

Tom.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2012-11-27 11:48:15 and read 7381 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 34):

Given that CFRP/metal is generally stronger than glass in a structural application, the 6 windows are probably lighter. Window thickness goes up quickly with increasing area due to the pressure load.

  

From a cost stand point however, 4 windows may be less complex to design and cheaper to install . . . while you have a more expensive windows, you have fewer stringers, doublers and installation drawings to release and parts to assemble and install.

bt

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: CM
Posted 2012-11-27 12:54:29 and read 7283 times.

The real problem with 4 larger windows versus 6 smaller ones (particlularly 6 smaller ones from a cab that is already certified) is the difference in development and certification costs. Certifying new windows is very difficult and adds a great deal of cost and risk to a program. Airbus made a conservative strategic and a business decision to go with the A380 cab design, even if it cost them a bit in terms of "beauty", which is very difficult to quantify and attach a value to.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Ruscoe
Posted 2012-11-27 13:20:24 and read 7202 times.

In the air I think it will be the 787 wing will be easy to spot.

I am yet to see a completed 350 wing, but from what I have seen, the shape of the 350 wing does seem rather unremarkable.


Ruscoe

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: astuteman
Posted 2012-11-27 13:52:46 and read 7150 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 28):
While I know the A350 will eventually be built, it has not become real yet and I will not concede that the design is finalized.

????

Most of the first flying A350 has been constructed and it is in assembly. There have been a plethora of images posted on this forum

Quoting dfambro (Reply 27):
What I love about the 787 is those "thin, pointy, bending wings", except I'd call them those "long, slender, graceful and elegant wings"! To me they make pretty much every other previous commercial aircraft wing look plain and stubby.

What's puzzling about that is that they are almost exactly the same span, surface area and aspect ratio as the A330's wings......

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 30):
I guess it's almost an acknowledgment from Airbus that the cockpit windows are a little, ahem, less than attractive.

Dunno why. The A380 is absolutely gorgeous IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygfIN11QUHE

I know it's now convention to deride this beautiful plane for its looks, but I remain mystified as to why people still insist that this spectacular aircraft is ugly.
Each to their own I guess.

Rgds

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-11-27 14:05:19 and read 7098 times.

I don't find the A380-800 to be an attractive plane except when viewed head-on, and then only because of those magnificent wings.

Then again, I only find the 747 attractive in three-quarters view from the aft when rotating off the runway. *shrug*

As to the A330s and 787s wing - the A330's wings don't have that upward curve which, IMO, adds a large amount of grace to them.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: dfambro
Posted 2012-11-27 14:19:01 and read 7051 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
Quoting dfambro (Reply 27):
What I love about the 787 is those "thin, pointy, bending wings", except I'd call them those "long, slender, graceful and elegant wings"! To me they make pretty much every other previous commercial aircraft wing look plain and stubby.

What's puzzling about that is that they are almost exactly the same span, surface area and aspect ratio as the A330's wings......

Sure, the 787 and 330 wings would probably look really similar ... if you cut off the last 20 feet with a chainsaw. But taking the comparison out to the tip, the impression is completely different to me.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-27 18:04:18 and read 6836 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
I know it's now convention to deride this beautiful plane for its looks, but I remain mystified as to why people still insist that this spectacular aircraft is ugly.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, obviously, but for me it's a proportion problem. For the same reason that the 787-8 fuselage looks kind of stubby/fat (it's short relative to its diameter) the A380 is even worse. The nose, most of all, because what are actually fairly big windows are dwarfed by the *massive* forehead...it just doesn't look right. As an engineer, it's fine...as an aircraft aficionado, it just doesn't look graceful. It looks freaking big.

Tom.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: aviateur
Posted 2012-11-27 18:44:22 and read 6792 times.

Quoting jollo (Reply 24):
I have to say, the chances for the 350 were not good to start with: the 787 turned out to be amazingly good looking, a solid contender to the crown of best looking airliner ever (still held by the A340-500 IMO).

Best looking airliner EVER? The A350-500? No offense, but are you out of your bird?

(How old are you?)

The A340 (any variant) is a good-looking plane. The 787 also is a decent-looking plane (despite its too-small, fish-like tail). But neither hava quarter of the character or sexiness of SO MANY classic jetliners, from the VC-10 to the 727 to the 747 to -- do I even need to say it? -- the Concorde.

The 747 is a far more elegant piece of engineering than the 787. It's not even close.

Dude, not to sound like a snob, but you're out of your league on this one, I'm sorry.


- Patrick Smith

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-27 20:18:02 and read 6720 times.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 42):
The 747 is a far more elegant piece of engineering than the 787. It's not even close.

Err, no. The 747 may be a far more elegant piece of *design* (beauty is in the eye of the beholder though) but it's *far* from being a more elegant piece of engineering. To repeat:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 42):
Dude, not to sound like a snob, but you're out of your league on this one, I'm sorry.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: astuteman
Posted 2012-11-27 21:29:47 and read 6650 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
As an engineer, it's fine...as an aircraft aficionado, it just doesn't look graceful. It looks freaking big.

I'm sorry, Tom. For me watching that video of the Malaysian A380 doing its stuff at farnborough, "graceful" is the only adjective I can find that fits. I can't see how it is anything other than that.

As I say. Each to their own

Rgds

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: flipdewaf
Posted 2012-11-28 02:11:25 and read 6389 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
I know it's now convention to deride this beautiful plane for its looks, but I remain mystified as to why people still insist that this spectacular aircraft is ugly.
Each to their own I guess.

I think it does look ugly close to the ground but when its flying it looks like it belongs in the air.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
What's puzzling about that is that they are almost exactly the same span, surface area and aspect ratio as the A330's wings......

I think the A330 looks even more graceful because of the slightly thinner fuselage. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lowrM-780tg

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, obviously, but for me it's a proportion problem. For the same reason that the 787-8 fuselage looks kind of stubby/fat (it's short relative to its diameter) the A380 is even worse.

I think the A380 and 787 both suffer from stumpy landing gear aswell, not nearly as athletic looking as the 757.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
The nose, most of all, because what are actually fairly big windows are dwarfed by the *massive* forehead...it just doesn't look right

All modern airliners seem to be coming out very "foreheady" though. I dont like it.

Fred

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: na
Posted 2012-11-28 03:04:14 and read 6294 times.

Both are of the most generic configuration imaginable, twinjets with underwing engines. Of cause that makes them very similar and boring at first.

The 787 though has a very beautiful nose section, while the A350 imho is downright ugly at the front. Its predecessors A340/330 have a much prettier cockpit area. Airbus made a big mistake here. The 787 has the most graceful wings aside the 747. Here the A350 will be pretty close though, but its winglets will make it distinctive. The A350 possesses the nicer, sleeker and more elegant tail section, although the falling roofline on both doesnt look good.

That said, in my eyes the 787 is the nicest looking twinjet so far, dont really know if the A350 will change that, as its nose is so ugly.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-11-28 05:15:09 and read 6125 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
????

Most of the first flying A350 has been constructed and it is in assembly. There have been a plethora of images posted on this forum

Until I see it in its final build, and I am not alone here, the A350 is just be a model until it actually is in the air, a really big model but a model just the same.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, obviously, but for me it's a proportion problem. For the same reason that the 787-8 fuselage looks kind of stubby/fat (it's short relative to its diameter) the A380 is even worse. The nose, most of all, because what are actually fairly big windows are dwarfed by the *massive* forehead...it just doesn't look right. As an engineer, it's fine...as an aircraft aficionado, it just doesn't look graceful. It looks freaking big.

This is exactly how I feel, well put.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2012-11-28 06:05:54 and read 6069 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 44):
For me watching that video of the Malaysian A380 doing its stuff at farnborough, "graceful" is the only adjective I can find that fits.

Who said a big gal can't be graceful? Those in the States have seen it before. Look up Dancing with the Stars Kirstie Alley. There is enough diversity in the aviation world so everyone can be right. 

bt

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: astuteman
Posted 2012-11-28 06:29:50 and read 6029 times.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 48):
Who said a big gal can't be graceful?

FWIW I admit it looks a bit frumpy on the ground.
But when she's "dancing" ...   

Admittedly I have a problem thinking any aircraft doesn't look good - that's just me  
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 48):
Look up Dancing with the Stars Kirstie Alley

Kirstie Alley ?      
Rgds

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: babybus
Posted 2012-11-28 06:44:46 and read 5966 times.

Ermmm....The 787 and the 777 look the same from below, if you hadn't noticed.

Like a lot of middle market cars, aircraft in the same category all now look the same.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: aircanada014
Posted 2012-11-28 07:41:55 and read 5869 times.

Quoting zhiao (Thread starter):
Is it just me, or for us looking at the sky will it be very hard to distinguish the types? I feel like the look very similar, except that the 787 has a nicer nose, and obviously is smaller.

this topic has been discussed before when Airbus decide to redesign their A350. originally Airbus was going to keep the A330 stylish look the same but customers wanted a whole new airplane, new technologies, new looks and new equipment so Airbus decided to draw a newer look that looks very identical to 787.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-11-28 10:52:32 and read 5692 times.

Quoting zhiao (Thread starter):
Is it just me, or for us looking at the sky will it be very hard to distinguish the types? I feel like the look very similar, except that the 787 has a nicer nose, and obviously is smaller.

How do I find out how big the A350 is? I have been asking about a side by side comparison and no one has given me the comparison.

[Edited 2012-11-28 10:58:10]

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-11-28 11:05:40 and read 5640 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 29):

It had better be for the A350-900, at least, considering they're starting assembly of test frames.

Just saying that I don't think anything of "building test frames" as being in production. What if the tests destroy the aircraft and it doesn't fly? I will believe it when it is in the air.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-11-28 11:19:35 and read 5578 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 52):
How do I find out how big the A350 is? I have been asking about a side by side comparison and no one has given me the comparison.

There is a side-by-side image of the various planes in the opening post of this thread - Thai Airways: A350 Preferred For Cargo Over 787 (by keesje Aug 20 2010 in Civil Aviation) - ginned up by some website that is now defunct.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 53):
What if the tests destroy the aircraft and it doesn't fly?

I give Airbus enough credit as engineers that the bird will fly.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2012-11-28 11:52:04 and read 5479 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 53):
I don't think anything of "building test frames" as being in production. What if the tests destroy the aircraft and it doesn't fly?

If these "test frames" are for certification purposes then they have to be per production standards on a certified production line.

Even if they destroy the frame (as some test frames are not meant to fly) and the destruction is lower strength value than expected (as in the A380 wing ultimate test), there are procedures they can do to satisfy the regulatory agency to get the "production" frame to fly.

bt

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: aviateur
Posted 2012-11-28 18:04:53 and read 5197 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 43):
Err, no. The 747 may be a far more elegant piece of *design* (beauty is in the eye of the beholder though) but it's *far* from being a more elegant piece of engineering. To repeat:

Okay, it's a bit semantic, but I see what you mean, design -v- engineering.

As for beauty and the eye of the beholder, we take this for granted. To a point. Certain aesthetic standards are beyond the subjective. Arguing that the A340-500 is the best-looking jetliner in history is a * BIT * like saying that an American strip mall is a more beautiful structure than the Chrysler Building. (That's not doing enough credit to the A340, which is a good-looking plane, but you see my point.)


PS

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Antoniemey
Posted 2012-11-29 00:36:19 and read 4984 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 38):
I know it's now convention to deride this beautiful plane for its looks, but I remain mystified as to why people still insist that this spectacular aircraft is ugly.
Each to their own I guess.

It's all in the angle you look at it from. If you're looking at a 3/4 view of the front of the A-380, she looks like a fat bald man. Most other angles look great, though.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
The nose, most of all, because what are actually fairly big windows are dwarfed by the *massive* forehead...it just doesn't look right. As an engineer, it's fine...as an aircraft aficionado, it just doesn't look graceful. It looks freaking big.

  

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-29 21:40:16 and read 4563 times.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 55):
If these "test frames" are for certification purposes then they have to be per production standards on a certified production line.

There is no requirement that test frames be built to production standard or on a certified production line...the production certificate is usually granted considerably after the initial test articles are built.

The only requirement is that articles used for certification be representative of what will be certified...the OEM's and regulators get to yell at each other all the time about what's "representative."

Tom.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: bikerthai
Posted 2012-11-30 06:04:30 and read 4305 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 58):
There is no requirement that test frames be built to production standard or on a certified production line..

My mistake on the certified production line. However, when I mean production standard, I meant that the same procedures and processes used on the production frame must be used on the test frames including QA, Non-conformity etc . . . otherwise you would introduce so many variables into the test frame that the argument about what is "representative" would be even worse.

bt

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-11-30 08:28:08 and read 4179 times.

How far from the 787 is the A350 in the electrical architecture? It is still bleed air but do they take a note out of the 787 somewhere else?

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: zeke
Posted 2012-11-30 08:42:57 and read 4135 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 60):

You should expect to see similar technology. The suppliers serve all manufactures, as technology advances, it ends up on new models. A lot of A380 technology ended up on the 787.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: Aquila3
Posted 2012-11-30 08:52:13 and read 4113 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 60):
How far from the 787 is the A350 in the electrical architecture

Yes, it goes on both sides when the innovations are really important. At the end the Dreamliner is a FBW bird basically like a (gosh!) 320 (most probably like a 380   ) on the electrical .

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: CM
Posted 2012-11-30 10:53:33 and read 3999 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 61):
You should expect to see similar technology. The suppliers serve all manufactures, as technology advances, it ends up on new models. A lot of A380 technology ended up on the 787.

This is only true to a degree. Many A380 technologies, particularly in the airframe, wing design and control laws (all developed internal to Airbus) are proprietary to Airbus and not available to other OEMs. The same is true for Boeing. Also, in many cases suppliers are building to the OEM spec/design, as opposed to the OEM buying something "off the shelf" from the supplier. Many Boeing and Airbus technologies are being supplied by 3rd party suppliers, but that does not make the technologies available to competitors.

Bottom line: if one company had a some degree of advantage over the other in design capability or intellectual property, they would be able to distinguish their products by a corresponding degree over the competitor. The fact there is significant parity in the industry is more because the companies have similar capability than it is because they use the same suppliers.

Topic: RE: 787 And A350 Look The Same?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-30 11:25:37 and read 3943 times.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 59):
However, when I mean production standard, I meant that the same procedures and processes used on the production frame must be used on the test frames including QA, Non-conformity etc . . .

Although that's generally true of the construction of the parts of the test frame common to the production frame, there's a lot of stuff on the test frame that doesn't run through the same procedures/processes as the production frames. Between the built-in instrumentation (e.g. wire bundles and sensors buried in the wing), modifications for test purposes (e.g. extra connectors into the systems), and test parts (e.g. instrumented load pins), there is a whole other set of processes going on. Those are typically *also* certified process, but not the same as the ones used in production.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 59):
otherwise you would introduce so many variables into the test frame that the argument about what is "representative" would be even worse.

That's why it still has to be done to certified processes...this is a big part of why the OEM's are also certified as repair stations.

Quoting sweair (Reply 60):
How far from the 787 is the A350 in the electrical architecture? It is still bleed air but do they take a note out of the 787 somewhere else?

In terms of architecture, most of it is very similar. However, the 787 has an HVDC system that the A350 simply doesn't need because the 787 needs to shunt what would be bleed air power on the A350 through the electrical system on the 787. There is no real equivalent to that system on any other airliner right now.

Tom.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/