DTW757 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1416 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10689 times:
The next months are going to be exciting as we look forward to seeing the 787 rollout and take it's first flight!
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5160 posts, RR: 49 Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10658 times:
When is it due to be rolled out of the paint hangar? Anyone know?
DTW757 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1416 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10614 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 3): Very good news! Is there a planned date for the rollout of the first frame? How about first flight? In 2007 both?
Yes both in 2007, the article states it should take flight in August.
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10443 times:
Exciting times at Boeing! The last few months to roll-out are going to go by in a blur. The biggest question remains: will Boeing meet their weight targets?
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26722 posts, RR: 83 Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10430 times:
Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 5): The biggest question remains: will Boeing meet their weight targets?
I think the bigger question will be how easy the final assembly process is, since Boeing is depending on being able to screw these babies together every three days or less to meet demand.
DTW757 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1416 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10279 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 6): I think the bigger question will be how easy the final assembly process is, since Boeing is depending on being able to screw these babies together every three days or less to meet demand.
Yes and when will we see more 747LCF's as these are to be an integral part of the assembly process. Is the first one completely finished yet and how many will be in the fleet?
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5160 posts, RR: 49 Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10226 times:
Quoting DTW757 (Reply 7): Is the first one completely finished yet and how many will be in the fleet?
1 is finished and flying around Seattle for test flights and certification purposes. #2 will be finished this months and flown to Seattle before the new year and #3 will start mods early next year. All told there will be 3 LCFs supporting 787 manufacture but if Boeing and the suppliers agree to increase the production rate then the LCF fleet can grow to as much as 5 or 6 airplanes.
Beech19 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 936 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10093 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 2): When is it due to be rolled out of the paint hangar? Anyone know?
Honestly... when its done. The first one is going to be exciting but crazy. Since no one has attempted this type of construction before we are going to be taking the first one very slow.
Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 5): The biggest question remains: will Boeing meet their weight targets?
The weight targets promised to the customers have been met. Lets not confuse that with Boeings internal "over promise" of a different weight. That is a little over at this point... it will come down.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 6): I think the bigger question will be how easy the final assembly process is, since Boeing is depending on being able to screw these babies together every three days or less to meet demand.
Eventually... yes. But by the time we are locking them together at 3 days a peice we will have built half a dozen for testing. Its not like from day one we will be building them at 3 days. We would have a hundred sitting on the line before EIS... don't forget that.
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 8): 1 is finished and flying around Seattle for test flights and certification purposes. #2 will be finished this months and flown to Seattle before the new year and #3 will start mods early next year. All told there will be 3 LCFs supporting 787 manufacture but if Boeing and the suppliers agree to increase the production rate then the LCF fleet can grow to as much as 5 or 6 airplanes.
The first one is supposed to be certified by the end of the year. We are supposed to see the first parts flying in in January is the word. #2 is almost done... doubt it will make it here before the end of the year according to a source close to the action.
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5160 posts, RR: 49 Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10048 times:
Quoting Beech19 (Reply 9): The first one is supposed to be certified by the end of the year. We are supposed to see the first parts flying in in January is the word. #2 is almost done... doubt it will make it here before the end of the year according to a source close to the action.
Any word on what paint scheme will be chosen for the LCFs?
Beech19 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 936 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 9953 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 10): Any word on what paint scheme will be chosen for the LCFs?
I'm actually all for the flying billboard. Lease space out... and fly it around at low altitude on slow days. Goodyear has its blimp... Boeing has "The Bulge." LOL
In all seriousness... The constant rumors are as follows:
1. White with small "Boeing" and "787 Dreamliner" markings.
2. Painted in the supporting airline (Evergreen International Airlines, Inc for pacific, Cargolux for Atlantic)
3. Full Dreamliner livery.
The most logical is White (lightest and cheapest). Next would be the airline operating it since they should get their props. I'm sure everyones preference would be full Dreamliner Livery as that is what its doing... but it will be the heaviest and create the most drag.
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 9701 times:
Quoting Beech19 (Reply 9): The weight targets promised to the customers have been met. Lets not confuse that with Boeings internal "over promise" of a different weight. That is a little over at this point... it will come down.
"Weight targets" or guarantees? I believe that the 787 is meeting guarantees, but I don't think that Boeing is spending hundreds of millions on weight reduction to meet an "over promise". I take them at their word when they say the 787 is overweight, and that means over the published specifications, not some secret internal number. The last number I recall seeing was 2.5 tons over, which is certainly more than "a little bit".
I think overcoming the weight problem is more pressing and will prove more difficult than meeting the planned production rates. Ramping production to a 3-day assembly will be a challenge, but I see few unknowns and nothing that would make the plan unviable. If the suppliers come through they'll be fine.
Getting weight out of a CFRP airframe is much more of a challenge. In past experience engineers could simply redesign a part using a lighter material; metal was replaced by composites, for example. Given that the 787 started with the premise of being as light as possible, substitution of materials is generally not an option. What is left other than to reduce tolerances and refine the parts (giving up strength to reduce weight)? Boeing's military experiences will be valuable in this effort...but can they get 2.5 tons doing this?
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 9706 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 15): I hope there are pictures over the next few months as part are produced and put together, especially the fuselage barrels!!!
There will be photos. One could bet a finger on it.
Osiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3182 posts, RR: 26 Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 9674 times:
Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 16): Getting weight out of a CFRP airframe is much more of a challenge. In past experience engineers could simply redesign a part using a lighter material; metal was replaced by composites, for example. Given that the 787 started with the premise of being as light as possible, substitution of materials is generally not an option. What is left other than to reduce tolerances and refine the parts (giving up strength to reduce weight)? Boeing's military experiences will be valuable in this effort...but can they get 2.5 tons doing this?
There's still metal there... as well as bit and bobs that have been intentionally over-engineered. I'm actually expecting to hear shortly they've taken off the weight in question. An unverifiable little bird mentioned that the weight issue will be a 'non-issue in short order' (take it for what it's worth from an unverifiable little bird)
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
Poitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 9676 times:
Quoting Beech19 (Reply 11): In all seriousness... The constant rumors are as follows:
1. White with small "Boeing" and "787 Dreamliner" markings.
2. Painted in the supporting airline (Evergreen International Airlines, Inc for pacific, Cargolux for Atlantic)
3. Full Dreamliner livery.
I think the Oscar Mayer hotdog and bun livery was the best. They could paint each plane with a different accoutrement -- mustard, sauerkraut, etc.
However, I doubt if Boeing has that good of a sence of humor.
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9604 times:
Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 19): There's still metal there... as well as bit and bobs that have been intentionally over-engineered
Exactly so, they need to un-over-engineer the thing.
Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 19): An unverifiable little bird mentioned that the weight issue will be a 'non-issue in short order'
Rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2854 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9552 times:
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 18): They should paint a full size 787 on the side to see how one would look on the inside.
Best idea ever! That would be fun. Less fun would be barrel sections or wings painted on the side, which would be the actual contents. No, it should be the whole plane painted on.
Quoting Beech19 (Reply 11): The most logical is White (lightest and cheapest).
White paint is lighter than blue or silver?? Do pigments cost more? All I know about paint is how to apply it to my bedroom walls.
Atnight From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 586 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9512 times:
I am certainly looking forward for the roll-out of the B787... is great to know that we'll have a brand-new type of commercial airplane flying around the world... Good luck to Boeing as they build their first B787!
Also, I have one question that I've not being able to find an answer yet.... why exactly did Boeing change the shark-fin tale for a traditional one? was it Aerodynamics or too complicated to actually built it?
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9475 times:
Quoting Atnight (Reply 23): why exactly did Boeing change the shark-fin tale for a traditional one? was it Aerodynamics or too complicated to actually built it?
25 Zvezda: Yes, the pigments cost more and add weight.
26 Beech19: Whether you beleive me or not... its Boeings way to do it as i explained. The promises made to customers have been met. Boeing as always is trying to
27 Futurecaptain: Yes. So, I guess we won't be seeing Peter Max v.2 on the LCF anytime soon.
28 Rampart: Thanks! Never knew that. Too bad about Peter Max II. Or, for that matter, Wunala Dreaming, Equatoriana, Flying Colors, and all the other groovy hyper
29 Shenzhen: I don't think Boeing will be too awfully worried about 100 pounds of paint on an airplane that makes a half dozen or so round trips per month. Maybe
30 Thebry: " target=_blank>http://www.boeing.com/randy/archives....html But if you look closely at the tail, it does retain some of the elements of the original
31 Poitin: White paint is pigmented, typically with titanium dioxide, which has a density of 4.23 g/cm3. The fairly standard black pigment is lampblack (carbon
32 Beech19: Um... your numbers are a little off. In a 737 the paint weighs 250lbs dry. So you are looking at a complex paint job on a aircraft 4 times the size a
33 TeamAmerica: I believe you...just not sure I agree that those are "internal goals" that they are striving to meet. So far as I know contract guarantees offered to
34 DfwRevolution: I superimposed a silhouette of the 787 and 777 tails using Adobe Illustrator a while ago, but the file is on my old PC 400 miles away. It wouldn't ta
35 Beech19: That is correct...The 788 will be the first. Unless one were to argue the 747-LCF being a variant?
36 Shenzhen: One could imagine that you would only need to account for any "extra" paint other then what the paint would weigh if the airplane was painted white.
37 Beech19: woops... yes. That would make sense. Possibly... but i'm not sure how much that really would matter. I have a relative that manages a hotel that has
38 NYC777: What about the 737-700ER (the one ANA ordered)? When is that supposed to roll out?
39 Futurecaptain: It's still extra weight on a plane that in the end, doesnt need it. Over years of flying that dead weight adds up in fuel. Also the layers of differe
40 Beech19: Two actually. I do not beleive its been rolled out yet... but since it will be EIS before 788 rollout it will be the next new variant. I stand correc
41 Osiris30: NO.. NO... NO... (again). Grey is a reference color. Boeing has specified a paint of thickness x in one color for the engines for max efficiency.. th
42 Beech19: That would be amazing... Yes... yes... YES. Look it up before you assume. "The design parameter for the nacelles is based on thickness of the paint f
43 Mptpa: Just paint it Ameri-white (metalic or light blue), put on Boeing stripes and plaster the sides with Dreamliner sticker (color graphics like they had
44 Wjcandee: Do they need to "Unpimp Ze Auto?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m9DOjot3ZE Helga: "It's definitely sucking." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wThExaW
45 Danny: " In coming months, the company will begin assembling the plane " So where is the news?
46 TeamAmerica: They did that when they dropped the shark fin.
47 Jfk777: Where are the Delta, AA and UA orders ? They must be the phantom ones not yet released. I would expect each of those airlines good for one hundred air
48 Warreng24: So they'll be an A.net photographer meet in WA around that time, right?
49 UA772IAD: Good read. I think the 787 will do very well, and I think Boeing has done a fabulous job marketing the plane as sleek, sophisticated, efficient and mo
50 Firennice: For those interested in progress.... The barrell of plane #1 was pulled from the mold/mandrel at Spirit a few weeks ago (befre thanksgiving). It just
51 Baron95: If you are selling 100 frames, you can spend a little bit of R&D on weight reduction. If you are selling 400+ frames prior to construction, you can s
52 TeamAmerica: I didn't say they were desperate, nor is the "overpromise" my thought. I'm saying what Boeing is saying: the 787 is currently overweight and they are
53 DAYflyer: I would give up 6 months pay to be on the first flight of this airplane.
54 Stitch: I agree that Boeing is not working on reducing the weight for the heck of it, even though it meets the contractual requirements (either that, or they
55 DfwRevolution: I'll see you're 6 months and raise you a nut
56 Baron95: I can guarantee you that if the 787 order booked stood at 50 frames that Boeing would not be spending an extra US$1B to get 2% of weight out. It is t
57 AvObserver: YIKES! A perfect way to make an already HIDEOUS looking airplane even more ghastly! In addition to Randy's logical 'blog. I'd read early on there was
58 BoomBoom: This was addressed in a previous thread: Quoting 787Engineer You seem convinced that decreasing the weight of a composite fuselage will actually be m
59 N328KF: While being on the first flight would confer certain bragging rights, I believe that it would be far more enjoyable to be on one of the testing fligh
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5160 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1934 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3182 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
