Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Flightblogger: ANA Taking Most Of The First 787...  
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 20597 times:

I am very surprised to find no thread about this article from Jon Ostrower...

He says that ANA will take most of the first 787 made, but that the 6 test flight items are not taken up yet, and that Chinese airlines have all decided not to take their first planes.

Is it worthy of discussion?

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...exclusive-ana-to-take-most-of.html

101 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12598 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 20353 times:

At first reading, I thought it meant that NH was taking most of the first aircraft itself and I couldn't help wondering what parts of the plane it didn't want (hey, who needs a rudder?)

Basically,due to weight issues, the range of the first aircraft will be very considerably less than advertised (about 6,800nm, vs. 8,000+), but since NH is only going to be flying the aircraft on regional flights, it's going to take them. Chinese airlines are going to be deferring theirs and NH will take some of these.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 20328 times:

There have been so many reports about how poorly many of the Chinese airlines are doing...not that there are a ton of airlines anywhere doing superbly. It's not much of a surprise that they are looking to defer some deliveries.

That ANA wants those early spots is encouraging, I think.

Some lucky airline will probably get a great deal on the flight test units.



What the...?
User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2754 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20129 times:

I think this is the news that many on here have expected for a few months, myself included. I believe it was Stitch who was openly speculating that this would happen. NH really wants this aircraft, as soon as they can get it. Other airlines are no longer so exuberiant about spend $$$ on new aircraft, when they are losing that same $$$ every day. So a mutual agreement has been worked out, seemingly to benefit all parties involved.

Actually, more than anything it is the fact that the first 6 test frames are no longer allocated to airlines that surprises me the most. Based on Jon's report, neither ANA nor RAM appear too concerned with the early frames being overweight. Why they are choosing not to commit to these frames (after being refurbished, of course) right now is interesting.

A question to the group: Can anyone remember a flight test program where so many frames were painted in the manufactuer's livery? If this report is accurate, which I have no reason to question, it would mean we could see a total of 6 787's flying in the 'Dreamliner' scheme. . .

Regards,

Hamlet69  profile 



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1912 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 20088 times:

If ANA really, REALLY wants this aircraft, then I'm sure Boeing will make them an offer they cannot refuse to take the first six frames once the flight test programme is complete and the frames are refurbished. After all, they can use them for their domestic and regional runs, where no 7,800nm range is needed.

In a worst case scenario, the LN001 may stay with Boeing and end up in the company of the Dash 80 and the first 747 at the Museum of Flight, but I'm sure with the right in place, offer, LN002 - 006 will find their buyers in no time.



Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2980 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 19968 times:

NH needs these planes.
An overweight 787 is better than a 20+ year old 763s.
The first few were going to be utilized on domestic and regional routes only and by the time NH is ready to fly its 787 on longer missions, more mature airframes will be delivered to NH.


User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1308 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 19894 times:



Quoting Carpethead (Reply 6):
An overweight 787 is better than a 20+ year old 763s.

For sure, but there is also the A330.... Nice economical aircraft, proven, available. Jee, I wonder why ANA didn't think of this in the first place if they fly with airplanes that old.



There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 19764 times:



Quoting Glareskin (Reply 7):
Jee, I wonder why ANA didn't think of this in the first place if they fly with airplanes that old.

That's why they ordered the 787, a long time ago already. They would already be flying a couple of the 787's right now, if not for the delay.

The deferral is apparantly great news for ANA, as the delay in deliveries can be wiped out in 3 months!



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 19724 times:

I think Jon's article in soft words tells a dramatic story. The writing was on the wall after public comments from Shanghai, the Mexicans and Delta.

Obviously the airlines rejected almost all of the first 20 aircraft and Boeing had to re-negotiate a new deal with ANA to get # 7 and further placed. Delta, RAM and ANA rejected the first 6 787's altogether.

Based on this assessment, from Tokyo's Narita Airport, ANA could theoretically reach the Southern United States, Western Europe or even east Africa with its early 787s.

However not if you take any cargo, headwind, ETOPS and/or diversions margins into account I guess.

The new schedule has 11 aircraft being handed over to the Japanese carrier during the same three-month production period beginning in February 2010.

First flight end June, very fast completion / flight of the next 5 proto's. Completion of the record attempt, round the clock 7 months flight test programs and quick delivery of new ones, an aircraft a week, for 3 months after that.

 bomb 

Man, I really, really hoped we had left this non-sense behind us. I hoped for (finally) realistic scheduling & communication about this program. IMO Boeing needs to make some changes is this area. They are fooling around with a great brand..


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 7007 posts, RR: 63
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 19617 times:



Quoting Carpethead (Reply 6):
The first few were going to be utilized on domestic and regional routes only

Looks like you and I will be among the first to fly on one!  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineLHRlocal From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 282 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19393 times:



Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 3):
Based on Jon's report, neither ANA nor RAM appear too concerned with the early frames being overweight.

Does this not defeat the point of why these airlines have ordered the B787? A brand new light, fuel efficient plane for the future? If it is over weight, then surely any fuel savings forecast etc are going to be considerably reduced? More weight = more fuel used = less profit.


User currently offlineRonaldo747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19357 times:

It is possible that the Dreamliner One and Two, maybe Three stay a while with Boeing as technology test beds for the 737-successor?

User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1912 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 19132 times:

Quoting LHRlocal (Reply 10):
If it is over weight, then surely any fuel savings forecast etc are going to be considerably reduced? More weight = more fuel used = less profit.

The weight problem will not apply to the later built 787s. Once the manufacturing process is mature, all suppliers will make parts according to their specified weights. Furthermore, the performance gains implemented into the -9 will also be applied to the -8. Eventually, this aircraft will perform as it was designed to. The 787-8 delivered in 2015 will be a very different aircraft as far as efficiency gains go from the initial examples that will be delivered next year. The 787-8 delivered in 2025 will be even better. Just compare the specifications of the initial examples of 777-200ERs to the ones delivered lately: better range, lower empty weight, engine improvements, lighter materials, etc.

Keep in mind that even with the excess weight, the early built examples will still have some quite noticeable efficiency advantage over the current generation aircraft, namely the 767s and early A330s. Simply put, instead of 20% savings, the percentage number will decrease to somewhere around 12 - 15%, which is still not bad, though not exactly where Boeing wants it to be at the moment.

[Edited 2009-04-03 05:56:39]


Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 18710 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The only airlines that appear to have outright rejected early 787 deliveries are the Chinese carriers and DL. NH and AT still are onboard, with the report saying NH is taking the first 10 production frames (ZA007-ZA016), AT taking the 11th (ZA017) and NH the 12th (ZA018).

As rumored, it looks like DL has decided not to take their 787's on NW's original delivery schedule, so those planes now appear to be going to QF and AI - allowing them to get their first birds earlier. This at least appears to put to bed the rumor that QF was going to defer early deliveries, much less cancel their order outright.  thumbsup 

I am guessing all 12 production frames will be in service before Boeing can refurbish ZA001-ZA006 so it may be a case of NH and AT getting their desired planes out of the production cycle before the test frames could be delivered, negating the immediate need of the test frames.

Is it possible Boeing wants to keep the six test frames around to put more hours on them? The A380 benefited in no small way from the extra cycles flown on the test birds while the production birds were underway. I still think at worse NH or JL is going to want those birds for domestic operations, so it's possible if they don't need them immediately, Boeing can use them in the interim to gain data to improve the production fleet.


User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 18507 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
As rumored, it looks like DL has decided not to take their 787's on NW's original delivery schedule, so those planes now appear to be going to QF and AI - allowing them to get their first birds earlier. This at least appears to put to bed the rumor that QF was going to defer early deliveries, much less cancel their order outright.

Have I missed something? Where has DL stated that they've actually rejected the first deliveries?



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 18231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Mayor (Reply 14):
Have I missed something? Where has DL stated that they've actually rejected the first deliveries?

With ZA003 and ZA004 now "unallocated", that means they will not be delivered to DL. The FlightBlogger article also notes that their other early delivery slots now appear to have been reassigned to QF and AI.

So looks like DL is going to wait a few years before they add the 787. Frankly, it makes sense with the additions NW's fleet has given them. They now have A330-200s and 777-200ERs available to handle the cities NW was planning to use those initial 787-8s on so the need to add them right now is not as great and DL can use the monies to secure more 777-200LRs, which is the plane they appear to need/want more of right now.


User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 18161 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):

Ok, thanks Stitch. I guess I missed that.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 17733 times:

So, this reassignment of deliveries covers the "heavy few" first 787s: the heaviest (and more heavily worked-upon during assembly, as well) first 6 are not taken up, the "mildly" heavier than planned, from LN7 to 20, are dispatched as announced, mostly to ANA, excluding many former "launch customers".

User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 677 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 17679 times:



Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 11):
It is possible that the Dreamliner One and Two, maybe Three stay a while with Boeing as technology test beds for the 737-successor?

Or for development of 787-9 features?


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 17607 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):

I am guessing all 12 production frames will be in service before Boeing can refurbish ZA001-ZA006 so it may be a case of NH and AT getting their desired planes out of the production cycle before the test frames could be delivered, negating the immediate need of the test frames.

The same thing had eventually occurred to me. In theory, they should have a significant backlog of production planes assembled by the time the testing is done so it would probably be quicker to deliver 7+ than reset 1-6.



What the...?
User currently onlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8298 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 17556 times:



Quoting Glareskin (Reply 6):
For sure, but there is also the A330.... Nice economical aircraft, proven, available. Jee, I wonder why ANA didn't think of this in the first place if they fly with airplanes that old.

Quite simply, there are no 767s anywhere in the world cared for better than ANA's. It was never in their planning scenarios to introduce an interim fleet type while waiting for the 787 - to do so would be plain dumb.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 17263 times:



Quoting Glareskin (Reply 6):
For sure, but there is also the A330.... Nice economical aircraft, proven, available. Jee, I wonder why ANA didn't think of this in the first place if they fly with airplanes that old.

Why would ANA even think of adding the A330 to their fleet? Think of the costs involved with introducing a new aircraft type into a fleet; training, spares, tools, etc. They are committed to the 787 and adding A330's would be a pure waste of capital.


User currently offlineAF022 From France, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 2175 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 16246 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
The only airlines that appear to have outright rejected early 787 deliveries are the Chinese carriers and DL. NH and AT still are onboard, with the report saying NH is taking the first 10 production frames (ZA007-ZA016), AT taking the 11th (ZA017) and NH the 12th (ZA018).

I thought ET was getting an early delivery as well. Where are they in the mix?


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10253 posts, RR: 97
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 16218 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Glareskin (Reply 6):
For sure, but there is also the A330.... Nice economical aircraft, proven, available. Jee, I wonder why ANA didn't think of this in the first place if they fly with airplanes that old.

When they made the decision, though, the 787-8 was going to be 2 years earlier, and be a LOT better than the A330.

Once that decision is made, and the delays come at the airlines incrementally, the next A330 slots move too.

And as these first 787-8's should still pretty much do what today's A330-200 will do, whilst burning less fuel, there's not really much incentive to change, as far as I can see.
Especially as compensations might make these early planes a net lower capital cost than a brand-new A330-200.

Rgds


User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 15239 times:

From what I can gather, DL hasn't exactly cancelled the order of 18, just gave up their earlier slots. Perhaps Boeing has assured them that the later 788's would be a better a/c than the first OR they've thought about changing the entire order to 789's.


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
25 Stitch : Correct. DL Corporate have stated publicly that they still have 18 firm orders and 50 options for the Boeing 787.
26 F35 : or an aileron for that matter ....wait...who would want a wing?
27 SASDC8 : if it even flies that is... It might be a great aircraft, but come on Boeing get it up where it belong! It is about time! Cheers Stein
28 Tdscanuck : I can't tell for RAM or ANA, but it's patently untrue to imply that Delta rejected the first 6 787's altogether...Delta rejected *all* 787 deliveries
29 Ikramerica : I always thought it should have staid with Boeing anyway. If it truly is a landmark aircraft, it should be in a museum after Boeing is done with it,
30 Hawkercamm : This is not totally true but some sub assemblies may improve (wing box redesign). However the gross method used to fix the payload range issue will b
31 Ikramerica : Or additional efficiency gains in the engines, which has historically happened with every model aircraft ever produced in large numbers...
32 Danny : Strange then that they removed the commitment from their financial statements. They have firm order but no commitment?
33 Hawkercamm : yes of course this would help but a 1% improvement in SFC would only increase the maximum range by ~70nm (or payload by ~720kg). Similarly a 0.9% imp
34 Stitch : As has been done on pretty much every commercial airliner family in history - whether they were overweight to begin with or not. My understanding is
35 Mayor : After the a/c were removed from the table, there was footnote explaining why they were removed and also this statement that "Delta was in discussions
36 FVTu134 : Well as there are a few VIP-787's on order I wouldn't be surprised to see those first test articles taken up by private owners after a refurbishment.
37 Frigatebird : Well, if after 100 787's in commercial service global economy still is in crisis, we have some serious other things to worry about, white tailed 787'
38 Ikramerica : They did not do that at all. They recently went out of their way to explain that most people had not understood their financial statement, and that,
39 Dynamicsguy : Have you seen the first 747 in the Museum of Flight? It was abused and butchered by Boeing more than an airline would have abused an aircraft.
40 Mayor : Perhaps that was during the developement and flight test program and not after it went to the museum.
41 Tdscanuck : The major boost for SFC improvement is fuel burn, not range. A 1% improvement in range is rarely a big deal, because airliners rarely operate at max
42 777STL : The A380 program? I remember seeing a picture with six of them all in Airbus's corporate livery, though I suspect there were more than that in the co
43 Ikramerica : For the 787, range is important. It was designed to either be more efficient than the 767 by 20% on 767 routes, or to fly 777 routes but with fewer p
44 Rheinbote : There's an article in this weeks Aviation Leak that Rolls in the meantime managed to get the Trent 1000 to within 1% of spec (the article confirms tha
45 Ikramerica : And from what I understand, GE is already at spec and should exceed it before EIS of the GE birds. I would hope that RR can get to zero baseline by d
46 Dynamicsguy : I was more thinking of the modifications Boeing made to it over the time before it was donated to the museum. I understand it was used as a test bed
47 Nomadd22 : If RR was that far off, are they going to replace the test aircraft engines after testing is completed?
48 Ikramerica : Probably before performance testing is even commenced. And only if the changes can't simply be retrofitted to the current engines (and they probably
49 Rheinbote : Aviation Week says that the changes are not yet productionized. LN1-LN4 will initially fly with interim (i.e. old) standard engines, LN4 is going to
50 Tdscanuck : I'd assume that they'd replace them regardless...would you want engines that have been subjected to what flight test engines get subjected to? Tom.
51 Ikramerica : Well, that is consistent with what I said, is it not? This is the RR engine and performance certification aircraft, so one would expect that they wou
52 Astuteman : My only comment there would be that, once you get to the MTOW limited part of the payload/range curve (between max payload range, and fuel limited ra
53 DocLightning : However, they have not stated any plans. The implication is that they have no plans to cancel these orders, but there has been no such firm statement
54 Ikramerica : Hasn't there been? Pretty sure DL came out and confirmed that they have firm orders for the 18, but the new delivery dates are in negotiation due to
55 Tdscanuck : They're all "production aircraft" from a certification point of view, I think. In order to fall under the production certificate they don't have to a
56 Ikramerica : I'm no expert on this, but I believe the production certificate starts with #7. Some of the 787s have more bloggers info on this. That's a good point
57 DocLightning : Kinda OT, but if there ever was an airline that could use an A330NG, it's DL.
58 Ikramerica : Or a 785 (which is a 783 wing but with a useful range of ATL-HNL or SLC-CDG).
59 AF022 : Is there an updated delivery list, beyond ANA? When are CO and ET getting theirs?
60 Nomadd22 : So, since you normally don't burn off passengers during the flight I'd guess 1,000 pounds of fuel savings would only mean about 2 extra full seats?
61 Dkny : Et's ceo recently said that the first 787 will arrive in July of 2010, and I read somewhere that ET's first 787 will be line # 26
62 DocLightning : Touche.
63 AirNZ : What is a 785? Is this a Boeing designation, or an a.net one?
64 Astuteman : I guess I was coming from a view that the weight of fuel to do a fairly long haul sector would comfortably outstrip the weight of payload, hence 1% o
65 Tdscanuck : A 1% SFC change saves about 1500 lbs of fuel on a max range mission (7650 n.m.) with maximum payload. That's probably more like 3-4 full seats. That
66 Ikramerica : A.net "dream" dreamliner. Basically, if the 787-8 is the 8000nm bird, and the 787-3 is the 3000nm bird, then the 787-5 is the 5000nm bird. And by mos
67 PM : The only - tiny - problem being that it doesn't exist and Boeing have never, seemingly, thought of it.
68 Ikramerica : Oh, I'm sure they've thought of it. But since they want to sell 788s first, why would they offer it? The 783 was offered specifically to win a large
69 PM : Fingers crossed! Meanwhile, I hope to be one of the rare people who get to fly on a -3:
70 Astuteman : It's that long since I've seen a 787 R/P chart that I can't remember what they look like. They sound very similar to the A330-200's (much like the ai
71 Kappel : Indeed, it won't have a shorter wingspan like the 783 was supposed to have, which is a big selling point for some operators. And the a350SR not light
72 Ikramerica : It was supposed to be slightly lighter, but mostly a derated MTOW version with a narrower wingspan to satisfy the Japanese market, where the plane wo
73 Kappel : OK, I thought it would be the exact same aircraft, only with a derated MTOW...
74 Carpethead : Since some customers do not want some of the early builds, is it possible that Boeing offered NH many of these airframes. These airframes could be cer
75 PM : And you and I would probably have flown on one by now!
76 Rheinbote : That's roughly 10% above what one could reasonably expect.
77 Stitch : I've heard the simulations of 787 wing performance are returning numbers a good bit better then Boeing was expecting, so maybe they are just that goo
78 Ikramerica : I'm talking about the 783. Are you talking about the A350SR? If so, I don't know if the wingspan is exactly the same (I would bet it could take fence
79 Post contains links Jambrain : RR are quoting :- http://www.rolls-royce.com/Images/Trent%201000_tcm92-11344.pdf should keep PM happy And before you assert GE have lower as delivere
80 Ikramerica : Yes, but it helps puts back the range that was lost. Remember, the complaint is that the 787 is not meeting the 8000nm goal at the promised payload,
81 Astuteman : Couldn't agree more. And on the basis of those arguments above, I think it would be improper to do anything else Rgds
82 PM : I suppose there must have been a (paper) 757-100 at some point too. And we all remember the 747-500 and -600. But they were at least acknowledged pro
83 Ikramerica : Well, that's their brochure. But reports are they haven't gotten there yet, and the GE was doing better, but that doesn't mean that at maturity, RR w
84 Ikramerica : One benefit that can't be denied is the scalability of the Trent 1000 to fit the A350-1000 (as the Trent 1700 XWB or whatever), while the GEnx can't
85 Stitch : My money is on the "787-8D" - a 787-8 with the upturned winglets (so a 52m span), paper de-rate of the TOW and the 53Klb thrust engines.
86 Ikramerica : Well if it has 53K engines, it would be more than a paper derate of the MTOW, no? But basically you just described the 787-3 or 787-5, depending on h
87 Tdscanuck : As I said, it's back-calculated to match the Boeing range figures...given that they haven't updated the range or weights in months, I'm quite sure th
88 Stitch : Well the OEW of the 787-3 was only 10t less then the 787-8 so the thrust might be a bit more, but I don't think they'll need anywhere close to the fu
89 Ikramerica : My point was, you are basically defining the 787-3 as it was envisioned, more or less. So why would it be called the 788D?
90 Stitch : No real reason. Just playing off the 747-400D moniker. I would expect that it would use a standard 787-8 fuselage structure instead of the lighter on
91 Ikramerica : I believe that somewhere in the bowels of Boeing -3 was so named because it was the "3000nm" version, while the -8 on the 787 and 747 are the "8000nm
92 Stitch : The original range of the 787-9 was 8600-8800nm, so that's pretty close to 9000nm.
93 Ikramerica : Yeah, but -9 is bigger the -8. Well, negative 9 is smaller, but you know what I mean. But yeah, 8800 is close to 9000, and one assumes that by year 5
94 Post contains links Keesje : http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/3496727/
95 Dynamicsguy : Just a couple of days ago I learnt a bit more about what is/was supposed to change on the -3. The changes were more significant than I had realised.
96 Ikramerica : I don't think that was the first instance of 787-5 being used, but if it was, I never read that thread. Just figured it was another one of your self
97 PM : Then you really ought to find out who used your username on July 8 2007 to post this: "So why is your suggestion any newer than the same exact sugges
98 Ikramerica : Ah, I guess I did read it and asked him why he was copying other people's ideas and calling them his own. I remembered seeing the original post and t
99 Kappel : I was indeed talking about the A350SR... hence our confusion.. Which is amazing... even though hardly anybody will be using that range. I'm sure that
100 Mayor : I know this is slightly off topic, but what size containers is the 787 to use?
101 Stitch : The 787 can fit LD3 containers (side-by-side) as well as 88x125 / 96x125-inch pallets (front to back). Per the preliminary Airplane Characteristics c
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...
Any Pics Of The First AA Flight ORD-DME? posted Sat Jun 7 2008 08:39:21 by Pylon101
Conversion Of The First 767-300BCF Under Way posted Wed Nov 28 2007 14:56:50 by LTU932
First Photo Of The First Air Italy B737-300 posted Mon May 7 2007 04:27:50 by Tomascubero
Why Is ANA Taking Delivery Of New B763ER's? posted Mon Apr 23 2007 04:46:04 by EK413
Boeing Completed The First 787 Verticle Stab posted Tue Mar 13 2007 05:06:01 by Clickhappy
ANA Named Airline Of The Year - A T W posted Fri Jan 26 2007 15:56:36 by Lumberton
Project XM At AC... Status Of The First 763? posted Thu Aug 3 2006 05:00:09 by SafeFlyer
Boeing Starts Assembly Of The First 737-900ER posted Wed May 31 2006 23:11:11 by OyKIE
Are There Any Pictures Of The Current 787 Body? posted Sat Oct 29 2005 20:27:20 by Beaucaire
Identity Of The First Two A321s CSA posted Sun Jan 16 2005 14:42:40 by FCKC