Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Will The 787-10 Be Launched  
User currently offlineT773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11632 times:

Its almost certain that the 787-10 will be built, because both Mike Bair and Randy Baseler have eluded to its production. I think the real question is not if, but when it will be launched formally.

How long will they wait to annouce it, and will that effect upcoming orders from lets say EK?


"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
180 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2682 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11618 times:

I think it will be launched later this year.Be patient!


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5762 posts, RR: 47
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11610 times:

EK might be the one that will launch it. My opinion is that EK will launch the 787-10 with an order for 100. I think soon after that many other carriers will come on line for this plane including BA, SQ, CX, QF among them.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11610 times:

I expect the 787-10 to be launched not later than Le Bourget.

User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12475 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11595 times:

Like LY777, I think it will be this year. Indeed, I would be extremely surprised if it weren't. I think that there are a number of critically important order battles to take place this year, most notably EK for the 787-10 versus the A350-900/1000. I expect EK to be a launch customer for this and one of the early launchies for the 747-8 pax model (most likely, in EK's case, a shortened version). BA, Cathay and a number of other airlines can be expected to follow suit.

User currently offlineT773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11543 times:

Quoting LY777 (Reply 1):
Be patient!

But I can't wait!  gasp 

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 2):
My opinion is that EK will launch the 787-10 with an order for 100

Seems like a lot, but you never know with EK.



"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5762 posts, RR: 47
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11522 times:

Quoting T773ER (Reply 5):
Seems like a lot, but you never know with EK.

True but I'm going with what they have publically stated. Also it is rumored that the A380 compensation talks are not going well between Airbus and EK. This might have some possible positive ramifications for Boeing and their order book.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineT773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11501 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6):
Also it is rumored that the A380 compensation talks are not going well between Airbus and EK

Do you happen to have a link or anything else about this. I would love to know what is going on. I was under the assumption that the talks were over, silly me.



"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5762 posts, RR: 47
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11485 times:

Quoting T773ER (Reply 7):
Do you happen to have a link or anything else about this. I would love to know what is going on. I was under the assumption that the talks were over, silly me.

I'll try to find a link and send it to you.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11448 times:

Don't know about launch, but -10 EIS was quoted as being scheduled for late 2012 by a recent BCA airline presentation.

User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 11253 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6):
Also it is rumored that the A380 compensation talks are not going well between Airbus and EK. This might have some possible positive ramifications for Boeing and their order book.

You never know. This could have a major impact on both the 787 or A-350 programs, and each manufacturer knows it. They are no doubt fighting it out behind the scenes, fully cognicent of the ramifications.

With potentially a 100 frame order hanging on the outcome, Airbus will fight hard to satisfy EK if for no other reason than to keep the 787 out of the EK fleet.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21532 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 11213 times:

Considering how damaged EK has been by Airbus recently due to the A380 delays, and their commitment to 100 planes, I think the two outcomes are:

50x A350-1000 + 50x 787-10
or
100x 787-10

I don't think Airbus has a chance to win the whole order. It's too risky for EK. But EK may not want to depend on B for 100 jets either, so there could be a lot going on behind the scenes of EK trying to extort a good deal from A...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31001 posts, RR: 86
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11142 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think EK will be a launch customer, but perhaps, just perhaps, LH will surprise us and be the first one to announce. No inside info, mind you, but I think they can find a home for her and the 787-9 now, while still finding a home for the A350X-900 and A350X-1000 later so a 787 order will not be a "winner take all" for LH going forward.

User currently offlineT773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11025 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Considering how damaged EK has been by Airbus recently due to the A380 delays, and their commitment to 100 planes, I think the two outcomes are:

50x A350-1000 + 50x 787-10
or
100x 787-10

With the A380 delays, Airbus has damaged their reputation with EK and other airlines who had ordered the A380. EK placed an order for an all new airplane the A380 from Airbus, and it is now two years late and causing many headaches. I think they will hesitate to order another all new untested program from Airbus, the A350.

I believe Boeing will get the initial order compromised of mostly 787-10's. After the A350-1000 has been built, EK will then consider buying the 1000 to replace their 777-200's, and maybe some A340's. But this intial order will most likely fall in Boeings court.



"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5582 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11012 times:

I guess I don't see a slamdunk for Boeing on the EK order. Despite all of the problems with the A380, I think most will agree that they are getting their house back in order and that the A350XWB will be a fine aircraft.

I agree with Ikramerica that a split is more likely than an all-A350 order, but I don't think EK is so wounded by Airbus that they wouldn't take on this new plane. The question, as always, would seem to be price and delivery, and not so much bad sentiment over the 380, IMHO.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12562 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10877 times:

Quoting T773ER (Reply 13):
I believe Boeing will get the initial order compromised of mostly 787-10's. After the A350-1000 has been built, EK will then consider buying the 1000 to replace their 777-200's, and maybe some A340's. But this intial order will most likely fall in Boeings court.

So, what's EK's big hurry? Why not wait till after the 787's first flight in August, and a few more weeks to get some hard data? Also they can see where the A350 is at that point i.e. have the Power8 impacts been taken, and have the decisions about who gets to build the A350 been made? EK seems to be masterful about keeping their options open as long as possible.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10859 times:

Jeeze, a fourth variant before the first of the model flies.... pressure pressure.

They'll launch it when 2 things happen:

A) They get a large, prestigious order, so like 50 or 60 or more from EK or someone of the like.

B) a big airshow to kick it off in a media frenzy.

If they can get things together with Emirates, the Paris Airshow would be a most poetic place to launch this aircraft.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10835 times:

Been out of the loop lately, I'm presuming the 787-10 is a larger 787-9, say 300+ pax?

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10812 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 16):
They'll launch it when 2 things happen:

A) They get a large, prestigious order, so like 50 or 60 or more from EK or someone of the like.

B) a big airshow to kick it off in a media frenzy.

20 to 30 frames would be fine for a launch order, whether at or before the airshow.

Quoting Cba (Reply 17):
I'm presuming the 787-10 is a larger 787-9, say 300+ pax?

It's expected to be a 20 foot (6 meter) stretch of the 787-9. The cabin floor area would be 4-5% larger than that of the 777-200ER (291 vs 279 sq meters). Payload would be the same or slightly higher. Range would be slightly better. It would carry the same number of LD3s as the 777-300ER (44). Fuel consumption would be roughly 20% lower than for the 777-200ER, despite better performance.

[Edited 2007-01-10 06:51:39]

User currently offlineHZ747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1677 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10796 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cba (Reply 17):
Been out of the loop lately, I'm presuming the 787-10 is a larger 787-9, say 300+ pax?

I believe it has been listed as a 772ER killer.



Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10768 times:

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 19):
I believe it has been listed as a 772ER killer.

Yes, it will kill the 777-200ER and the A340-600. It will be sized between the two and will offer better performance and dramatically better economics than either. Because CASM is generally much more important than capacity, some airlines will choose the 787-10 which otherwise would have chosen the 777-300ER.

Cabin floor areas:
777-200ER: 279.0 sq meters
787-10: 291.0 (4.3% larger than the 777-200ER)
A340-600: 314.2 (7.9% larger than the 787-10)
777-300ER: 330.4 (5.2% larger than the A340-600)


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12170 posts, RR: 17
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10720 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Cba (Reply 17):
Been out of the loop lately, I'm presuming the 787-10 is a larger 787-9, say 300+ pax?

Its being built as a B772 replacement.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 20):
Yes, it will kill the 777-200ER and the A340-600.

I seriously doubt the B787-10 will kill the A346, as thats what the B773ER is doing, and is doing an excellent job also. Could a B787-11 replace the B773ER/A346? The B787-10 will be an A342/A343 killer thou


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10638 times:

Quoting 777ER (Reply 21):
Its being built as a B772 replacement.

Sort of. In many ways, the 787-9 and 777-200ER are nearer to each other than the 777-200ER and the 787-10. Examples are seating capacity ((assuming the standard 9 abreast in both cases) as the cabin lengths are 48.7, 49.4, and 54.8 meters for the 787-9, 777-200ER, and 787-10 respectively) and LD3 capacity 32, 36, and 44 for the 777-200ER, 787-9, and 787-10 respectively).

Quoting 777ER (Reply 21):
I seriously doubt the B787-10 will kill the A346, as thats what the B773ER is doing, and is doing an excellent job also.

The 777-300ER is very effectively competing with the A340-600 from the top, but is not killing it. The 787-10 will compete even more effectively from the bottom and, together, that will be the death of the A340-600. Until the 787-10 is available, the A340-600 will continue to win orders, as it did last month with LH.


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7063 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10626 times:

It will be launched when either BA, EK or LH have decided on whether they take the -10 or not and honestly I see a high possibility that all three of them are choosing Airbus instead !
2007 will be an interesting year !!



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10590 times:

Quoting 777ER (Reply 21):
Could a B787-11 replace the B773ER/A346?

I think that the -11 would start to suffer the same "very long thin tube" structural issues that the A346 does and it would also need extensive modifications of the the wings ans undercarriage.


25 Post contains images Danny : Why not 200?
26 Zvezda : No, while the 787-11 would be about the same length as the A340-600, it's fuselage height is 235 inches versus 222 for the latter. That makes quite a
27 Post contains images NYC777 : Because EK has stated publically that they intend to order 100 mid size aircrzft. Don't you read the news?
28 Stitch : EK has a very aggressive growth schedule and they are already feeling the pinch of not having their A388s. The longer they wait, the more airlines ge
29 Danny : Very doubtful it will be 100 of exactly the same type.
30 Zvezda : I would not be surprised to see EK order 100 787-10s. If that happens on the expected schedule, Boeing will have sold 600+ before first flight! (No,
31 NYC777 : Well EK has indicated themselves that they will not split the order. Whether that remains to be true will be known when they announce the order.
32 Post contains images Danny : How I understand that is that they don't intend to get both A350 and B787. Does not mean that they will get 100 identical aircraft. 50 A350-900 and 5
33 NYC777 : Ok when I said split meaning they won't split the order between manufacturers. That is what is coming from EK. They could order a mix of the type lik
34 Nijltje : NYC do you already have a link?
35 Zvezda : Perhaps, if they were available for delivery in 2011.
36 Danny : They will likely still be earlier that 787-10 (if it is launched).
37 NYC777 : Well it is going to be launched (it's a matter of when not if) and Boeing has said that they can deliver it as early as 2012 which is still earlier t
38 Danny : Theoretically they might be able to construct it by 2012. The problem is availability of production slots with 788 and 789 selling like hot cakes.
39 Post contains images Zvezda : You think EK haven't put down deposits on 787 slots?
40 Danny : You and few others seem to think that there is infinite number of 787 slots between 2009-2011. BA, LH, UA, AA, EK - they all have some secret slots r
41 NYC777 : Exactly. EK would have been seriously screwed in the head not to reserve slots for such a hot selling plane. They're trying to wring as much money as
42 Post contains images Danny : Le Bourget in the end was always Boeing show wasn't it?
43 Zvezda : Boeing have the advantage of less schedule risk, but the deal offered will still determine who wins the order. I'd give Boeing only about a 60-70% ch
44 A520 : What makes you think that? And what are the consequences for this market? More even split between 787/350 due to availability (a la 737/320)?
45 Zvezda : The final assembly line now being built has four assembly stations. That means, in theory, four 787s can be built simultaneously. The goal is to get
46 FlyDreamliner : Whatever makes you think BA is going to up and buy Airbus for long haul all of a sudden in the face of a superior Boeing product confuses me. LH very
47 Zvezda : It's really not fair to call it a conventional design. The panels are about 100 times larger than aluminium panels and contribute a lot more to fusel
48 Post contains images Rheinbote : At 12-20m, A350 CFRP skin panels would be 2-3 times longer than aluminum panels - at best. Aluminum panel length is a matter of material and manufact
49 NYC777 : Well Boeing has said publically that there is no intention of building a further strecth of hte 787 beyond the -10. That means any followon to the 777
50 Zvezda : I guess that means aluminium panels have been getting longer. Anyway, I doubt they are quarter circle in circumference. No, it doesn't imply that at
51 NYC777 : If a -11 is built then what seat segment will they be aiming for. That airplane would be one really long sucker!
52 ClassicLover : Boeing will launch the 787-10 as soon as the A350 has its final design freeze. If they launch it now, you can bet on it that Airbus will try to change
53 Post contains images Rheinbote : Why do you talk about a 787-11 then if the -10 is 320 PAX in three-class already?
54 Beech19 : yeah... unless the airlines that want -10's have spots already purchased you won't see a -10 coming out of our factory till 2014... all else is gone.
55 DfwRevolution : The hypothetical 787-11 would serve as a 350-370 seat replacement for the 773ER. It's entirely plausable that Boeing could stretch the 787 to the len
56 AA777223 : How is this possible? I believe you, I just don't understand how that works physically. I mean the triple seven has a significantly wider fuselage, a
57 Post contains images Zvezda : The hypothetical 787-11 would be 27 centimeters shorter than the A340-600 if the stretch from the 787-10 is the same as that between the 787-8 and 78
58 Zvezda : Fuselage width makes no difference here. In either case, the LD3s are side-by-side in pairs. Only the length of the cargo hold matters. The 787 doesn
59 Rheinbote : Again: You can build a stiff structure from CFRP, you can build a flexible structure from the same CFRP material. Anyway you like it unless you run i
60 Zvezda : Did I write that I expect Y3 to be built? There is no doubt that the A340-600 is a stretch too far. However, the 787 has a significantly different fu
61 Beech19 : I didn't say anything about the the skins... Those aren't the ENTIRE wing are they? They don't even cover the entire skin of the top and bottom of th
62 Glom : It seems that the road block to the 787-10 is the engines. And yet everyone is talking about an A350-1000 as though it is already sorted. How can the
63 Post contains images Beech19 : This is the question we have ALL been asking ourselves... but i guess Airbus is wagering they will sort it out in the next 10 years... we MIGHT see t
64 DfwRevolution : Developing a new wing would be far more economical than developing an entirely new clean-sheet product like Y3. The inherent properties of the 787 wo
65 Post contains images Rheinbote : Err...now that you ask, no So I get you expect the 787-11 because you don't expect Y3 to happen? Moot point. Being part of a project doesn't mean you
66 BoomBoom : So in theory, Boeing's entire product line may one day consist of two families: the 787 and the 797 (a 737 replacement).
67 Post contains images TeamAmerica : I think this is entirely possible, but Boeing will skip 797 in favor of 808. It'll sell better in Asia.
68 Ikramerica : No, there's still the ol queen o the skies. 747F will be around for a long, long time. It's just about perfect, and nobody is going to build somethin
69 Post contains images Beech19 : Are you? Doubtful... Using your own words... Moot point... but at least I could ask them. I could say the same thing about you... being in the aerosp
70 EBJ1248650 : That's a lot of airplanes. 40 to 50 sounds more likely and that may be a high figure. 100 is more the kind of order you might see from one of the US
71 Post contains images Beech19 : Actually 80-100 is about dead on for what they have said their needs are... Hmm... a US airline that needs 100+ 787 sized aircraft... i wonder if we
72 NYC777 : I think we will within the next 6 months.
73 T773ER : What makes you think and EK will order the A350, EK was the driving force behind the 787-10.
74 Zvezda : I don't think I can answer your question any better than DfwRevolution did. I'll just add that when the time comes, Boeing will estimate the developm
75 Post contains images Beech19 : yeah... my guess will be a crazy order from an US airline at Paris... wouldn't that be the whipcream on the pie. They won't... not unless Boeing publ
76 Post contains images Stitch : Coming in late, so I need to make broad comments instead of targeted ones. The reason Boeing may wish to pursue the 787-11 over Y3 is cost and time to
77 NYC777 : Are you sure you're not talking about the -10?
78 Rheinbote : Yes, sure - Agreed. Take it like this: being a design engineer, the prospects of seeing a 787-11 stretched to A346 proportions just causes kind of 'p
79 Zvezda : According to Widebodyphotog and others, a suitably strengthened 787 wing is good for 640,000 lbs MTOW. Yes, but with the 787-9 wings it would require
80 Beech19 : I actually agree with you here... I personally would rather see the true Yellowstone Project come to fruition. 787, 797, and 808 (or a update to the
81 Zvezda : It would be very cool if Boeing were to develop Y3. Whether or not the business case is there remains to be seen. I trust Boeing will learn from the
82 T773ER : I couldn't agree with you more. Just looking at the A346 makes you wonder how it doesn't snap in half. It even has 4 engines, I can't imagine what a
83 Areopagus : Besides that, it looks to my eye that the 787 has been designed to maximize the constant barrel section's fraction of the overall length. The conical
84 Ikramerica : You beat me to it there. Compare the profile of the 777 and 787 and you'll see a very strong bias toward the longest straight chord length along the
85 Zvezda : The relevant (i.e. height) cross-sectional dimensions are: A340: 222" 787: 235" 777: 244" So, one can see that the 787 is nearer to the 777 than to t
86 T773ER : That proves my point, a 22 inch difference between the A340 and 777. Maybe the 787 wouldn't look so bad then, being only 9 inches smaller in height t
87 ER757 : While some of you make a pretty good case of why a 787-11 should or could be built, has Boeing ever once mentioned it, or is it an a.net creation? I
88 Zvezda : I don't believe Boeing have ever publicly discussed a 787-11, but they would be daft to this far from a possible EIS. The only short-term effect woul
89 ER757 : Thanks for the quick reply Zvezda, What's your prediction about if it will ever come to pass? I am thinking no, that they'll evenually launch an entir
90 AA777223 : Is this cabin width or fuselage width. If it is cabin width, the difference between 787 and 777 is not as significant as I thought. If it is fuselage
91 Post contains images Stitch : I shall update my notes forthwith. So, say, around 85K just to be safe to lift 600,000+ into the air in a "normal" distance? Depends on how the 777-3
92 AA777223 : So this means that the difference in cabin widths is less than 9 inches? The height of the fuselage is greater, I assume, than the 777. I would be re
93 Post contains images Beech19 : No no no... the 777 is 244" in a perfect circle. 787 is NOT circular. It is oval. 226" wide by 235" tall. 11" taller than it is wide. Though when you
94 Ikramerica : Also, the location of the floor in relation to the wall curvature adds a little room at seat height across the 787. Still the 787 is over 1" narrower
95 HZ747300 : The launch customer will probably be EK or SV, or both in a pooling order from Gulf States to save on overall costs of acquisition. I would not think
96 Zvezda : It's far too early to try to call. It will depend on how much it would cost to develop Y3, how much it would cost to manufacture Y3, and how much Y3
97 Atmx2000 : The 777 is also at the optimal height due to the greater fuselage height, and the 777s walls slope in less due to the greater radius.
98 WingedMigrator : Unit alert: square meters. Point well taken though.
99 Zvezda : WingedMigrator, thanks for the correction, but I made a different mistake. Those are tens of sq feet. That's what I get for trying to do arithmetic 10
100 JayinKitsap : Beech19 / Rheinbote / Stitch / Zvezda - My structural work is all on the ground using steel, AL, Wood, and fiberglass. They typically have principal d
101 Post contains images Astuteman : My question would be, though, how efficient would that wing be with an extra 100k lb to lift. Just because it can be done might not make it the right
102 Zvezda : It's not an issue in cruise. The problem is takeoff performance. One needs either more takeoff thrust or more field length. Increasing takeoff thrust
103 Post contains images Astuteman : Individuals are free to interpret JW's account how they please. My own conversations with Senior Airbus managers from 2001 - 2006 indicate the contra
104 Post contains images Zvezda : We'll have a somewhat better idea when we see how many WhaleJets have been sold 5 years from now. If the number is over 500, then you're likely to ha
105 Post contains images Astuteman : Which doesn't follow in the slightest, IMO. That's purely a function of the accuracy of the forecast, and the impact of any "environmental" factors n
106 Post contains images Beech19 : Point taken... but from what we have seen so far the couple of airlines that we have seen seat configs from are sticking with the 8Y 18" seats. This
107 AA777223 : I did already know that the 777 was circular, and the 787 was oval. I did not however, realize the relationship between dimensionsally between the 77
108 Post contains images Beech19 : Becuase honestly a slightly stretched oval like the 787 is just better. it will have straighter walls for one thing. Plus the ovaling acts the same w
109 BoomBoom : What will the seat width be at 9 abreast on the A350XWB?
110 Stitch : B787-8: 223.3 sq meters B787-9: 256.6 sq meters B787-10: 291.0 sq meters B777-200: 279.0 sq meters B777-300: 330.4 sq meters A330-200: ~213.3 sq mete
111 Danny : Where did you get this from?
112 Stitch : Extrapolated from a 6m stretch of the 787-9's numbers (which themselves are generated from a 6m stretch of the 787-8). As Boeing is expected to stret
113 Post contains images Beech19 : I'll second that motion.
114 Danny : When you make your own guesses you should clearly state it is a guess not a factual data.
115 Zvezda : The advantage of a circular cross section is structural efficiency. Less material is need to cope with the hoop stresses of pressurization. That's a
116 Danny : Another guess.
117 Zvezda : Extrapolation is not a guess. It is an analytical tool. You don't know my source. You're the one guessing.
118 Beech19 : An educated assumption and a guess are two different things. By looking at the proposed width and aisle sizes and number of seats abreast you can fig
119 Danny : Extrapolation is a tool when you note that a number was extrapolated and how. When you put the number next to factual data without any comment that i
120 Post contains images Beech19 : Or a lack of trust by the reader in someone who is highly respected for their knowledge...
121 AA777223 : You said it! I know I sound like an oaf with all these questions, however I am just trying to justify in my mind how this aircraft is going to fill t
122 Beech19 : Don't forget that the 787 is actually ALMOST the cross section of the 777. Its is WAY wider than a 767.
123 Areopagus : Interesting point. I have been wondering if the 787's stubby rump costs it a parasitic drag penalty, which would be made up by lower structural weigh
124 Post contains images Beech19 : I would think that too be correct... Lets say there is a 2% drag penalty... onc would think that the extra couple LD3's full of valuable cargo would
125 Danny : Facts are (according to Boeing.com): Cross Section: 787 5,74m 777 6,20m
126 Areopagus : I suppose there are two ways of looking at it. (1) For a given LOA, the short tail section allows increased revenue. (2) For a given revenue-producin
127 Beech19 : Boing Fact: Convert those numbers to English and you get 244" vs 226" cross section. This has already been said MULTIPLE times on this thread. BUT th
128 Post contains links Danny : What for? To make impression of a smaller difference? http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/787sec2.pdf Page 10: 44 cm seat + 46 cm aisle.
129 Post contains images Beech19 : No... its the same thing either way. We use feet and inches. Get over it... not everyone enjoys metric... is that a problem? 44cm is the 17.3" seat o
130 Post contains images BoomBoom : Oh yes, at nine abreast, the Airbus, with 17.5 inch seats is "Extra Wide Body" while the 787 with 3/10th of one inch less (0.762 cm) is the "Cramplin
131 Atmx2000 : A circular fuselage wasn't revolutionary. The A300 was circular, and so were the A330/A340 and original A350 proposal. It has structural benefits, bu
132 Post contains links and images Rheinbote : There's an excellent paper on this: AIAA 2004-1785 titled "Evolution of Structures Design Philosophy and Criteria" by a Boeing Commercial Airplanes a
133 Ikramerica : I remember seeing this in a diagram from one of the airline mags. Doesn't matter if Danny wants to believe it or not, but the number isn't grabbed fr
134 Zvezda : The numbers I have are: 787-3/8: 223.8 sq meters 787-9: 257.4 sq meters 787-10: 291.0 sq meters
135 BoomBoom : I really think this was a disinformation campaign on the part of Boeing. They let Airbus think the 787 would be 8 abreast and that led Airbus to beli
136 Post contains images Stitch : Well I'm not going to quibble over 1m2. I checked Widebodyphotog's data for the original 540,000lb MTOW 787-10 and it to shows 291m2.
137 Ozair : I think the difference is the way the aircraft are being marketed. The 787 is being seen as an 8 abreast with 9 if you’re an airline that likes to
138 Post contains links JayinKitsap : I found the 23 page paper here: http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMSDM2004_820/PV2004_1785.pdf It is quite good. checkmark longitudinal joints may a
139 Rheinbote : I think barrel mating is done using butt-joints with splice 'plates' on the inside, yielding a smooth exterior (almost)
140 Astuteman : Is that not how the long seams on the XWB would be done as well? Regards
141 Zvezda : That would seem to be exceedingly challenging in terms of tolerances.
142 Rheinbote : Honestly, I don't know, but I'd go with Zvezda's assertion. On the other hand, lap joints aren't such a brilliant alternative either. Based on A's de
143 Post contains images EI321 : Once the A340 is dropped out of the equation (and it has been for BA), then the Boeing line is no longer superior   BA will be looking at: 763 repla
144 EI321 : Thats not really a true reflection of what the market is going for though. In reality, only a few airlines are putting 8 abreast in the 787. In reali
145 Post contains images Zvezda : Two points: If one were to need to replace 777-200s or 777-200ERs on a one-for-one basis six or more years in the future, then the obvious choice wou
146 Post contains images Astuteman : I fail to see the difference in terms of tolerances. Putting "floppy" cylindrical sections together with micronic accuracy will be no walk-in-the-par
147 Post contains images Zvezda : The existence of the longitudinal joints complicates the circumferential joints by making the circumferences more variable. It will be much easier fo
148 EI321 : There is no way to judge this yet, both manufacturerd have stated their reasons for the different types of consttruction. Each has its pros and cons.
149 Post contains images Zvezda : One could list purported advantages of building an airliner from wood and canvas, but that wouldn't stop someone with an understanding of engineering
150 Rheinbote : As I wrote elsewhere, the XWB's panels, at 12-18m in length, are 2-3 times longer than previous metal panels at Airbus at best. It could have been do
151 Post contains images Astuteman : They'll have to be extremely well made, because, at join-up, you'll have to maintain not only the joint configuration, but the circularity, AND the a
152 Post contains images Astuteman : Shoulda posted this earlier. Agree with this too Regards
153 Post contains images Poitin : Well, just in case some drunken ramper smashes the skyway into the side of the A 350, they can simply (?) remove the panel and repair the aircraft. A
154 Zvezda : Patching a 787 takes 1 to 2 hours. How much time would it take to remove two 6 meter long fuselage panels extending from the belly to the top of the
155 Post contains links and images TeamAmerica : I think it's actually a sandwich joint, with titanium plates on both the inside and outside. Here's a photo of two test barrels being joined...I thin
156 Rheinbote : That's valid for quick repairs that allow to continue revenue operations until the next scheduled maintenance event. Permanent structural repairs wou
157 Zvezda : No. There are two procedures for patching a 787. One takes under one hour and is good until the next D check. The other procedure takes under two hou
158 Poitin : RIVETS! Absolutely not. They would cause stress points on the CFRP that would cause them to rip out. They may bond in doublers, but they would not be
159 Stitch : Which is why I believe Airbus went with them, since this lower-risk approach can also be brought forward more quickly into production.
160 BoomBoom : Haste makes waste. Remember when Airbus said there was no advantage to a composite fuselage and Al-Li was the better choice? How much time did they l
161 Rheinbote : Again, major structural repairs (penetrated panels and/or large area impact damage) will be done with riveted patches (shop repair). This would invol
162 Rheinbote : Zvezda, that's a gross oversimplification well beyond what Boeing is presenting to 787 customers. See above.[Edited 2007-01-13 20:03:41]
163 Zvezda : They apply to anything that a catering truck could do to a 787 other than a deliberate high-speed ramming. Any impact beyond what can be patched woul
164 Rheinbote : What I meant was that even in PR campaigns Boeing doesn't simplify matters as much as you do. The message is, in the worst case, the 787 will behave
165 Post contains images Zvezda : Yes, in the worst case, one has to write off the airframe -- whether metal or CFRP. CFIT would cause damage that can't be patched. Right. Many but no
166 Post contains images 787engineer : Doesn't the A330/A340 (same as a330) have a circular fuselage that is designed for 8Y, and also carries 2 LD3s side by side? Remember the 787 fuselag
167 EI321 : Maybe tiny -/+ differences for possible different number of lavs, galleys etc, but generally that sounds right.
168 Zvezda : All of these numbers are gross cabin floor areas including the space taken by monuments i.e. galleys, lavs, closets, etc.
169 Rheinbote : 787engineer, could you confirm that 787 fuselage repair procedures include patches being riveted to CFRP skin panels? I'd expect 787 repairs to be ve
170 Post contains images Stitch : Well Airbus had touted prior to announcing the actual production process that any panel damage could indeed be fixed by replacing the panel. Now that
171 Post contains links Beech19 : I can't really go into depth but basically the concept could allow for four "start to finish" spots on the line being built all at the same time. Bei
172 Ikramerica : Lower skill approach, actually. I think Airbus is gunshy about this because of the A380 and how the first barrel sections didn't fit together, as was
173 Rheinbote : You want me to believe that a skin penetration involving 'injury' to a stringer or a frame will just be glued?
174 Stitch : Why not? Industrial adhesives are amazingly capable nowadays. And, unlike the A350X's panels, a 787 repair panel will not need any capability to be r
175 Post contains images AvObserver : Ah, the exuberant impatience of youth. Keep stirring the pot if you wish but as Flydreamliner eloquently explained, Boeing has the inside track on an
176 Pygmalion : CFRP is both fabricated and repaired using prepreg, pressure and heat. Scarf the joint and layup a repair, vacuum bag it and cure it with a heat blank
177 Post contains links Zeke : Composite patches were developed in Australia many years ago, they have been used on military and civil aircraft for repairs to aluminum some time (b
178 Post contains images Astuteman : We're all-welded, so both the long seams and circ butts are just "butted" together and welded - no overlap, no splice plates. With up to 4" of wall t
179 Poitin : That's why I said "simply(?)". It would be a bitch without a jig to realign the parts, and a pain the the butt with it. " target=_blank>http://boeing
180 Atmx2000 : I was referring to the combined ability to position the main deck so that the seat row would have maximal width while carrying side by side LD3s. Thi
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...
When Will The JSF Winner Be Announced? posted Mon Mar 26 2001 20:02:49 by 777kicksass
When Will The US Planes Be Repainted? posted Sun Jun 18 2000 06:14:10 by ATA757
When Will The 747 Be Out Of Passenger Service? posted Sat Dec 2 2006 02:17:47 by Scalebuilder
UA 744s - When Will The Second Be Repainted? posted Wed Dec 7 2005 15:09:38 by NA
When Will The A380 Be In Australia? posted Sat Nov 12 2005 05:44:04 by Aviation
Will The 787 Be At Paris 2007? posted Tue Jun 28 2005 23:26:16 by NYC777
When Is The 787's First Flight Likely To Be? posted Wed Apr 6 2005 13:42:09 by Art
When Will The B737NG Be Replaced? posted Wed Mar 30 2005 16:23:18 by Zvezda
When Will The New Terminal At Madrid Be Open? posted Thu Nov 25 2004 15:45:17 by Imonti
When Will The Old ISP Terminal Be Re-done? posted Wed Oct 13 2004 03:14:17 by IslipWN