Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
1st 787 Model To Be B/C-market. Unlike Boeing?  
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4287 times:

I was just wondering if there was any striking reason why Boeing are developing the first model of the 787 - the 788 - as a long hauler immediately and not adopting their usual, 'A', 'ER', and more recently 'LR' approach.

The last time they did this was with the 741, which although had a impressive range for the time, is quite a modest 9,800km in todays market. So the 788 will actually have a range 5,900km's greater than any other debuting airliner model Boeing has ever produced.

Quite a step you might say.  Smile

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4243 times:

I can see your point... though would probably be less anecdotal of a conclusion if you'd chosen to go for size other than range; as only Boeing's widebodies are capable of B-market utility int he first place, whereas there've been several examples of them debuting longer/larger models before shrinking them.

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4201 times:

Quoting RJ111 (Thread starter):
I was just wondering if there was any striking reason why Boeing are developing the first model of the 787 - the 788 - as a long hauler immediately and not adopting their usual, 'A', 'ER', and more recently 'LR' approach.

I suggest that it is technology's progression. Boeing should be capable of making an even longer range 788 right away but they aren't. Simply speaking it is easier to make a long range twin aircraft right off the bat rather today than it ever has been before, and making it right away means they cover most of the market in terms of range requirements, including those of airlines who might also abuse the aircraft on shorter routes.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineBirdbrainz From United States of America, joined May 2005, 478 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4069 times:

My guess is that the big first customers are asking for that model first.

Remember than UA was the launch customer for the 777, and they wanted the "A" market plane first, so they got it.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3908 times:

You're probably right Atmx and i also suspected that myself. No big deal in the end i just thought it was, "out of character" perhaps.

Personally, i can see great benefits in producing am 'A' market aircraft first. It means you can analyse the performance of the airframe and make suitable modifications for the HGW versions. I'll also speculate this is why Boeing often met performance, as they had an example already flying and only needed to factor in modifications when predicting new ranges. Whearas McDD and Airbus tend(ed) to go for the 'B' market immediately, and understandably the furthur the range, the harder it is to predict range. Also with design in a more developed stage, it may be harder to modify and 'perfect' the finished article.

However, I assume to really knock Airbus for 6, they felt it was necessary to offer the longer range earlier.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3797 times:

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 4):
Personally, i can see great benefits in producing am 'A' market aircraft first. It means you can analyse the performance of the airframe and make suitable modifications for the HGW versions.

The problem with A versions is that they don't sell well when the market knows you are going to put a B version and tend to lose value when the B market version comes out. And if A market version manufacturing costs aren't low enough to offset this value loss, you can't discount the A version enough to get enough customers to bite without taking a hit yourself.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
The problem with A versions is that they don't sell well when the market knows you are going to put a B version and tend to lose value when the B market version comes out.

Given the rapid growth steps Boeing are taking toward the 787-9HGW and -10X, I'd say the -8 may very well be an "A model."

A very high-performance "A model" that many airline's will order, but an "A model" none-the-less. It doesn't appear that Boeing built any less capability into the 788 than they did the 772A.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3697 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):
Given the rapid growth steps Boeing are taking toward the 787-9HGW and -10X, I'd say the -8 may very well be an "A model."

You're starting to stray from the subject concept of the post...

the 788 will not be an A-market product, which is a quantitative measure; it will however, be something of a protoype model.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3634 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):
Given the rapid growth steps Boeing are taking toward the 787-9HGW and -10X, I'd say the -8 may very well be an "A model."

A very high-performance "A model" that many airline's will order, but an "A model" none-the-less. It doesn't appear that Boeing built any less capability into the 788 than they did the 772A.

Well, we are talking about aircraft of a given size that comes in different ranged variants. OEW differences are substantially less for A/ER/LR models than for different sized models, which translates into much greater price and operating cost differentials, putting less pressure on the price and residual value of family members of lower capacity and similar range. And while the built in capability of the 788 is partly responsible for the Boeing's ability to move in the direction of the similar range class 789HGW and -10X, I think a lot of it is due to the manufacturing technology involved, which is allowing Boeing to easily increase MTOW by winding extra layers of tape to increase composite fuselage wall thickness and strength.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
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...
Ilfc 787 Order To Be Announced At DXB Airshow posted Tue Oct 25 2005 00:18:24 by Dalecary
787 Is To Be Assembled .. Where? posted Tue Feb 8 2005 21:28:13 by IAHcsr
1st 787-10 Shows Up In Boeing Presentation posted Fri Sep 29 2006 16:16:37 by Boeing7E7
A350 Needs To Be Competitive With 787 posted Sat Apr 29 2006 01:23:18 by AeroPiggot
Boeing 797 To Be Blended Wing posted Tue Apr 25 2006 06:18:02 by Phuebner
AF To Introd. Inflite Cellphone Tech. To Be 1st! posted Thu Apr 6 2006 23:34:01 by Advancedkid
Embraer To Be 1st With Bleedless 150 Seater? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 23:08:38 by Okie
787/A350 To Open SAN Market? posted Mon Oct 10 2005 22:11:13 by JakeOrion
When Is The 787's First Flight Likely To Be? posted Wed Apr 6 2005 13:42:09 by Art
Who Will Be The 1st US Airline To Order The 7e7 posted Mon Jul 12 2004 20:31:31 by Njdevilsin03