Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The Point Of B787-300 And B787-800?  
User currently offline8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1127 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6952 times:

I was looking at some of the specifications/dimensions etc of the B787 products and realised that the 787-300 series is practically the same as the 787-800, apart from the fact that the latter has a longer range.

Is there any reason for this? Why don't they just have the 787-800 instead of having both designs?

They both seat the same amount of passengers.
They're both the same in length, width etc.
Both have the same wingspan.


So can anyone think why Boeing designed to very similar products, which hyperthetically could have been designed as one?

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6946 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Thread starter):
Both have the same wingspan.

No, they don't. The 787-3's wing is a truncated version of the 787-8's wing. It has winglets while the -8 has raked wing tips. The reason for the shorter wing was to allow the aircraft to fit in gates designed for the DC-10.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6934 times:

The 787-3 is optimized for shorter haul operations.....why fly an airplane with a range of 8000 miles on flights that average 500-1000 miles in length? The 787-3 will be lighter, more effecient, less costly to operate and cheaper to purchase than the more capable 787-8. Clearly, the 787-3 was designed with the shorthaul intra-Japan market in mind.....both ANA and JAL will use the 783 on the short Japanese domestic flights and some regional Asian services, the question is whether the 783 will attract interest from other airlines. Rumors suggest that the 783 will land some interesting orders as its can replace the A300 and 763A on most missions operated by those types....time will tell.

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6871 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 2):
Rumors suggest that the 783 will land some interesting orders as its can replace the A300 and 763A on most missions operated by those types

...though recent precedence strongly suggests that airlines would rather "abuse" the -8/9 on shorter routes in return for the greater flexibility and resale value they offer.

Campaigns at the likes of SQ, DL, AA, BA, LH, etc will be very telling as to the fate of the -3.


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6852 times:

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 3):
...though recent precedence strongly suggests that airlines would rather "abuse" the -8/9 on shorter routes in return for the greater flexibility and resale value

That has always been my point of view.....my personal opinion was always that the 783 would not be very popular outside of Japan, but very recently there is a lot of talk about certain airlines (including US legacy) carriers showing a great deal of interest in the 783 for shorter haul operations.

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 3):
Campaigns at the likes of SQ, DL, AA, BA, LH, etc will be very telling as to the fate of the -3.

The rumor mill suggests that two or more of these carriers are prepared to commit to the 783.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32177 posts, RR: 72
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6828 times:

The 787-3 is the perfect plain for dense, short-haul routes, such as intra-Japan and Miami-Caribbean.


a.
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6821 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 4):
That has always been my point of view

Actually, the 772A should be a glaring example of that...
...SQ opped for derated 772ERs for the mission profile that the 772A was built for. Heck, that airline even goes as far as to identify its non 9V-SV* series 772ERs as A-market models, even though they're not-- an action which, though I have no idea why, I find obnoxious as all hell! lol


User currently offlineTheoden From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 61 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 6785 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Thread starter):
They both seat the same amount of passengers.

No, the -3 seats 290 to 330 and the -8 seats 210 to 250



Fear no darkness!
User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2453 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 6646 times:

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 3):
greater flexibility and resale value they offer

Unless you buy B783s to fly the same 1000Nm routes till they die. I simply do not see JAL and ANA selling on the aircraft, other than as very low value cargo conversion candidates or as recycling materials.

JAL's DC10s were still flying in 2005. One of their B741s was still flying domestic late 2006 (before going to orient thai in december)! And they still have heaps of B742s and B743s. ANA's B74Rs were flying until last year.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineVHXLR8 From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 500 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6581 times:

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 5):
The 787-3 is the perfect plain for dense, short-haul routes, such as intra-Japan and Miami-Caribbean.

Not to mention one of the world's busiest routes, MEL-SYD-SYD; for which QF will not doubt be deploying a proportion of their 787s.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6456 times:

Quoting Theoden (Reply 7):
No, the -3 seats 290 to 330 and the -8 seats 210 to 250

...pay attention to configuration


User currently offlineSCAT15F From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6395 times:

What's even stranger is that the 787-9 which is longer and seats more passengers than the 787-8 has greater range, it has traditionally been the other way around with fuselage stretches.
If Boeing gave the 787-8 the same MTOW as the 787-9, it could probably fly 9000+ nm.


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...
What Is The Point Of LCC Out Of SIN? posted Mon Feb 6 2006 16:11:18 by Zarniwoop
What Is The Point Of "check-in?" posted Thu Aug 26 2004 21:31:34 by Mats
What Is The Point Of Placing Options On Aircraft? posted Sat Jun 12 2004 21:44:18 by FrontierCPT
What Is The Point Of Going To MLE posted Sun Jan 4 2004 07:22:44 by KLM11
What Is The Point Of The 737-900 posted Sun Dec 1 2002 16:57:04 by BR715-A1-30
What Is The Point Of Chopping Up Planes posted Fri Oct 13 2000 08:19:14 by USAir_757
What Is The Point Of A 727? posted Thu Jun 8 2000 23:36:41 by Oozabooza
What Is The History Of Miami Air? posted Sun Dec 31 2006 15:21:09 by UPSMD11
What Is The Status Of Varig MD-11 PP-VQG? posted Wed Dec 27 2006 18:05:42 by Duke
What Is The Status Of The A380 Wiring Rework? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 14:48:08 by Nitrohelper