Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Shows First 777-9X Rendering  
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 50099 times:

Live from #PNAA: Randy Tinseth (vice president marketing at Boeing) quietly shows first public rendering of 777-9X with folding wing.


(picture uploaded by http://twitter.com/jonostrower)

Note: this is only a rendering, no final decision on the 777X design has been made.

[Edited 2013-02-13 13:02:07]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
77 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineprost From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 1001 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 49900 times:

Any idea how much additional weight the folding wingtip would have vs. the benefit a longer wing provides the aircraft?

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5771 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 49740 times:

I love how they've parked the plane next to the 787-10...
Hopefully, both planes will come into existence, and will both have adequately different mission strengths, so that they can both become viable products in a competitive product portfolio!


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 49448 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting prost (Reply 1):
Any idea how much additional weight the folding wingtip would have vs. the benefit a longer wing provides the aircraft?

Since the tips do not contain any control surfaces and will be CFRP, I expect they should be relatively light. Whatever it is, the weight penalty will be less than the aerodynamic gain (otherwise Boeing wouldn't bother).


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 49257 times:

The folding wingtip should also let the 777X fit into the existing 777 airport gates.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2699 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 49227 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
Live from #PNAA: Randy Tinseth (vice president marketing at Boeing) quietly shows first public rendering of 777-9X

Thanks very much. Great rendering.

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
with folding wing.

Boeing offered the folding wingtips for the current T7 as well but not a single T7-operator implemented this option. Now that the wing span will be even higher, I am very curious if we will see the folding wingtips in reality.

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
Live from #PNAA: Randy Tinseth (vice president marketing at Boeing) quietly shows first public rendering of 777-9X with folding wing.
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 2):
I love how they've parked the plane next to the 787-10

At first, I thought it's a VN 787 but then I realized it's a "10" on the tail fin.


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4105 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 48945 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 5):
Boeing offered the folding wingtips for the current T7 as well but not a single T7-operator implemented this option. Now that the wing span will be even higher, I am very curious if we will see the folding wingtips in reality.

IIRC, the original folding wingtip was a much larger section that included all or part of the aileron. This would have been much heavier than the proposed folding tip for the 777-X, and was intended to allow the 777 to fit into the same gate as a DC-10 or 767.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 48757 times:

Quoting prost (Reply 1):
Any idea how much additional weight the folding wingtip would have vs. the benefit a longer wing provides the aircraft?

Not much since it will be composite, but that's not the point of a folding tip.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 4):
The folding wingtip should also let the 777X fit into the existing 777 airport gates.

Exactly. For every airliner, the 'footprint' it takes up on the ramp slots it into a particular aircraft class, with corresponding fees. Higher the class, the more it costs. Which is one reason you see smaller aircraft use winglets to effectively increase span and efficiency, while larger ones like the 777 use raked wingtips, which are more efficient, and don't have a class impact. For the 777-9X I must conclude that the increased span puts it into the same class as a 380. I believe current projections for the -9X wingspan is 71m or about 247ft. The 380 is a shade under 80m or about 267ft. For the raked wingtips on existing -200LRs and -300ERs, the raked wingtip adds about 3m or 10ft, to 64.8m or about 212.5ft.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinejustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1050 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 48753 times:

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 6):
IIRC, the original folding wingtip was a much larger section that included all or part of the aileron. This would have been much heavier than the proposed folding tip for the 777-X, and was intended to allow the 777 to fit into the same gate as a DC-10 or 767.

What mechanics to move this?

perhaps they can use some of the control surface acutators via a clutch to move the wingtips and save weight?

or maybe just a hydraulic line to both sides of a control piston, one to move up and the other down?

Maybe just a small light electric motor with very high gear ratio?


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12457 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 48525 times:

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 8):
Maybe just a small light electric motor with very high gear ratio?

Yep, with a lightweight Li-Ion battery to power it! 



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2450 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 48399 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Whatever it is, the weight penalty will be less than the aerodynamic gain

How would you get aerodynamic gain from a folding wingtip, that a fixed wingtip can not produce? That would be an interesting set-up, wonder what angle it will have in-flight . . .  

Off course just having a little fun here. I'm sure you mean that the extra wingspan the folding technique allows, will bring aerodynamic advantages that outweigh the extra weight of the folding mechanism.

The again, one could also argue that the customers just have to live with the extra wingspan, have the airports adapt their gates, and let the airlines enjoy the extra benefit of the wingspan, without the weight penalty of the folding mechanism.

Rgds,
PW100


Edit: typo

[Edited 2013-02-13 14:14:19]


Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4105 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 47949 times:

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 8):
What mechanics to move this?

I would expect an actuator similar to those used for the spoilers. The wingtip is not that heavy.


User currently offlinewingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2242 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 47177 times:

Is that the new airport where Boeing parks its delayed delivery jets? If you zoom in on Google Earth you can see what appears to be the Qatar Airways Sheik ranting and raving at the customer service counter, top down view between the 777 and the 787.

Nice looking terminal at least.


User currently onlineSOBHI51 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3465 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 45989 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting wingman (Reply 12):
If you zoom in on Google Earth you can see what appears to be the Qatar Airways Sheik ranting and raving at the customer service counter, top down view between the 777 and the 787.

Me think that JAL, NH, UA and others must be ranting as much, after all they have few planes grounded.



I am against any terrorist acts committed under the name of Islam
User currently offlinebkircher From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 43500 times:

I still don't see the point in an upgraded 777.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 42997 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bkircher (Reply 15):
I still don't see the point in an upgraded 777.

Competition from the A350.


User currently offlinedivemaster08 From Cayman Islands, joined Jul 2008, 334 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40535 times:

While i can understand the benefits of the folding wingtip, may i play devils advocate here and ask an interesting question perhaps.....

So we understand the reason for the larger wing and raked wingtips, the folding mechanism to allow it to use smaller gate spaces (same as current T7 gates) but what about maintenance costs? It would surely require some strong locking mechanism to support it when inflight and (here is the devil), what effects could it bring forth if said mechanism was to fail in flight?

While there would be increased drag on one side, could it affect the aerodynamic flow enough to cause some serious troubles? Or at least divert the flight?

Ok enough bad thoughts, Go Boeing!



My dream, is to fly, over the rainbow, so high!
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 39297 times:

Quoting divemaster08 (Reply 17):
what effects could it bring forth if said mechanism was to fail in flight?

The plane is full of surfaces that are not allowed to fail in flight, this would just be another one. Further if the locking mechanism would fail the tip would fold up, as the ailerons are not affected the frame would still be OK, a bit of aileron trim and that is it. For landing you need to increase the approach speed a bit. Plane has landed without wingtips for decades where even the aileron is gone. Slats, flaps, ailerons, spoiler would all be intact, ask an experienced pilot and he would say there are greater worries.

The folding wingtip being the a dead piece of CFRP with the most active component being the (LED) positioning light is a smart idea solving a lot of problems and causing few.



Non French in France
User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 37184 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting divemaster08 (Reply 17):

Probably none what so ever, we have seen plenty of pictures with 747, and A330-340 missing a single winglet on one side due to ramp damage and still fly its mission till they can put on a replacement.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3396 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 36882 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 18):
The plane is full of surfaces that are not allowed to fail in flight, this would just be another one.

I suspect that if it is implemented Boeing will design it such that it is positively locked in flight, and the failure of it on the ground will be a cost issue, not a safety issue. If it fails to fold or unfold it will be safely on the ground where MX can deal with it.


User currently offlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 648 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 36419 times:

Quoting divemaster08 (Reply 17):

Remember that Boeing builds F-15's and F-18's, both of which have folding wings to fit beneath the flight deck of aircraft carriers. Equally I have never heard of an instance when a fighters wings being compromised during dog fighting exercises/missions so my guess is that it should be just fine.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 35263 times:

Aspire Aviation has an excellent analysis on the 777X.

- 800lbs weight penalty for 777X folding wingtip, compared to 3,200lbs for 777-200 study in 1995
- Folding wingtip contains no moveable parts, to be operated electrically
- 777X has same wing span as 777-300ER on the ground & stay as ‘Code E’ aircraft, ‘Code F’ on runway & in the air
- Folding wingtip to be certified in ‘folded up’ position
- 777X wing boasts ’4th-generation’ CFRP wing, 12% better L/D than -300ER
- No engine decision being made for 777X, originally due in December
- 21% lower block fuel burn per seat and a 16% lower cash operating cost (COC) per seat over today’s -300ER

Full article: http://www.aspireaviation.com/2013/0...87-10-unfazed-by-787-battery-woes/

[Edited 2013-02-14 00:34:12]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 35204 times:

Looks like variable-sweep wings...

...wait, this is the Boeing color scheme...


This picture doesn't show the folded wingtips, does it?


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineTP313 From Portugal, joined Nov 2001, 260 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 33857 times:

If/when launched, this would be the perfect 744 replacement.

Has anyone here estimated how the CASM numbers of the 388 do against the 779X CASM?
Maybe it is time for Airbus to start seriously working on an A389...

I don't even talk about the 748i, because the minute the 779X is launched the 748i is dead.

OTOH it don't see much of a market for the 778X...


User currently offlineneutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 606 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 33366 times:

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 21):
Remember that Boeing builds F-15's and F-18's, both of which have folding wings to fit beneath the flight deck of aircraft carriers.

Nitpick:
1) F-15s are not naval fighters and do not need/have folding wings. A version for the navy was proposed but it got nowhere.
2) The reasons for the folding wings of carrier-borne aircraft are multifold; they save space in the tight confines of both the flight deck and the hanger bay, and to better fit in the elevators between the flight deck and hanger. The last is of utmost importance as the lifts' dimensions dictatate what it can physically accomodate.



Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
25 RubberJungle : No six-wheel bogie on the 787-10 main gear either.
26 Jack : How much of this is due to the increased size/number of passengers that can be carried and how does this compare to the A350-1000? If, and I guess a
27 Post contains images ferpe : I have modeled both, I prefer to compare their fuel burn per 1000nm and m2 to get by the hazzle of seating. In such a case the 350-1000 is at 41.3 kg
28 TP313 : Well, that addresses my doubt...
29 garpd : In this case, it doesn't matter why the wings fold. I think what rotating14 was trying to impress upon is us that Boeing has experience with folding
30 SASMD82 : Actually me neither. With the 77W still selling as hot cakes and with a backlog of so many frames, is it really feasible to go for a 777NG before 202
31 Post contains images travelavnut : Does this mean they will actually fly with them folded up? That must look really awesome
32 Post contains images something : Can someone with greater insight to the intricacies of engineering explain to me why those wingtips would fold up instead of down? I would imagine tha
33 CXB77L : The original proposal was a far heavier and far more complex version of the one proposed for the 777X. There are no control surfaces in the section t
34 3rdGen : Yup, maybe a new type of anti lift device! But on a serious note: I can see a lot of airlines that will be hesitant to take them with folding wingtip
35 CXB77L : The two concepts are different. No one opted for folding wingtips on the original 777 because of the weight and fuel capacity penalty. The 777X foldi
36 Post contains images KarelXWB : John Leahy already stated that there will be no further stretch beyond the -1000.
37 Revelation : Agree that A350 is giving the 777X the push it needs to be done sooner rather than later. A350 will have state of the art engines and the GE90s of th
38 777sigfan : Impressive looking lineup there, sadly as many other have noted the launch of the 9X will render the 8i dead. However do you think the launch of the 7
39 CXB77L : It's aimed at a different market. The 777-300ER will have roughly 1000nm more range than the 787-10, not to mention the fact that the 777-300ER is bi
40 3rdGen : OK Thanks for the clarification. But from my vantage point I still feel that there will be companies that are hesitant to take on this new technology
41 CXB77L : Why wouldn't it be? If Boeing produces a folding wingtip for the 777X so it can fit in Class E airports and gates, then the only penalty is a little
42 3rdGen : True. I think I simply thought that the difference in being able to operate the aircraft in as a class E aircraft within an airport would lower airpo
43 something : My understanding of physics is admittedly not in excess of the bare basics, but if such a wingtip were locked into ''flight'' position - wouldn't it
44 msp747 : Why do you assume that a stretched A350-1000 would be so much more efficient than a 777-9X? The A350-1000 is already testing the limits as a stretch,
45 Post contains links and images vzlet : I'm always surprised at how simple and small most wing folding/locking mechanisms are. (And, in most cases, they're responsible for much more than jus
46 Stitch : The reason for folding wingtips is to allow the 777X to fit into the same gates as the 777 family does without airlines or airports needing to adjust
47 JAAlbert : Will the 777-x sport the new gtf type engines? I've read that the gtf engines are believed to become more efficient as they increase in size - if so,
48 Stitch : Pratt has stated they will not develop a GTF for the 777X. Rolls appears ready to bid, but I expect Boeing will sole-source with GE using the GE9X (o
49 3rdGen : Absolutely, didn't think about that. Does anyone have any idea about the proposed lengths of the -8X and -9X? I have also read about a proposed Exten
50 Post contains links Revelation : Seems that GE9X is coming along just fine. AvWeek: General Electric Moves Forward With Technology Tests For GE9X Engine. By Guy Norris says in part:
51 Stitch : 777-8 Length - 69.5m 777-9 Length - 76.5m For comparison: 777-200LR Length – 63.7m 777-300ER Length – 73.9m
52 CXB77L : Higher thrust engines and higher MTOW. Incidentally, I don't think the base 777-8X will see the light of day considering that it is very closely alig
53 SCAT15F : I hope not, because at this stage, anyway, the RB-3025 concept is looking to have the edge in performance over a GE9X...
54 ckfred : IIRC, it was AA that inquired about the possibility of a folding wingtip. Boeing designed it. Then, AA went with the MD-11, because McDonnell Douglas
55 Post contains images Stitch : I believe DL was interested, as well: I do not believe it went beyond the concept stage. To my knowledge, they never built a physical model and the i
56 Post contains links and images PW100 : If I understand correctly, late 2017 timeframe is provisionally reserved for GE9X cold weather testing in their new Winnipeg icing test facility, whi
57 Aerowrench : They would be too heavy and negate the purpose for a longer wing.
58 N14AZ : I have just been told that Boeing actually did NOT offer the folding wing. It was something they analysed during the design phase but finally it was
59 Post contains images lightsaber : I'm incredibly curious on the engine. IMHO Boeing will go with a 787 deal with two engine vendors. The investment is too high for 3 vendors. There is
60 jet-lagged : Heaven forbid and of course Boeing will design against it, but what if one of these wing tips came off in midair - takeoff/landing or cruising - would
61 Stitch : Loss of the tip would not affect any of the control surfaces (as they both do not extend to the folding tip nor would any hydraulic or control system
62 Post contains links Devilfish : Well, they say Boeing is confident of launching the 777X...though non-committal on the folding wingtips..... http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-
63 CXB77L : No, it won't be. As has been mentioned before in this thread, the weight difference is minimal. That depends on how you define the word "offer". My u
64 Post contains links rotating14 : Hey folks, I came across this link that has some good info on the 777x. Opinions? http://www.aspireaviation.com/2013/0...87-10-unfazed-by-787-battery-
65 817Dreamliiner : That link was posted earlier in the thread:
66 rwessel : The 777-9 is the middle aircraft - what looks like winglets are the wingtips in the folded position. Wasn't one of the wingtips on the wing-load test
67 Stitch : Not to my knowledge. The concept was dropped before Boeing finished the wing design (which would have happened before static testing).
68 Post contains links rwessel : So I did a bit of searching, and there are a number of articles and threads out there that mention it. A couple of examples: http://archives.sensorsm
69 Max Q : It's not that intricate, if they folded down they would hit the ground.
70 flipdewaf : lol, one on each wing? Is max payload increased in the 779x or is it too early to know yet? Fred
71 CXB77L : FlightGlobal predicts that the 777-9X will have a 344t MTOW - 7t lower than the 777-300ER. It will have to tank less fuel for any given trip thanks t
72 Stitch : Looks like it did happen then.
73 Post contains images 777wt : I can see this coming... Pilots advance thrust levers to TO power and the aural warning going off saying "No takeoff wing tip!, no takeoff wing tip!"
74 rotating14 : Sorry to drift off topic, but if Boeing is drawing up mock 777-9x's, where does the -8x fall into the equation?
75 RickNRoll : That's what I was wondering.
76 AA737-823 : If it was an Airbus, it would first call them RETARD RETARD.
77 KarelXWB : With a length of 69.5m the 777-8X should be longer than the 787-10X (about 68m) and shorter than the 777-300ER (about 74m).
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...
Boeing Starts First Phase Of Moving 777 Assembly posted Sat Mar 4 2006 02:55:42 by Atmx2000
Boeing Eliptical Fuselage 777 Replacement? posted Fri Nov 2 2012 06:35:58 by morrisond
AA First 777-300ER Delivery Delayed Till 2013. posted Tue Oct 30 2012 13:21:47 by LAXintl
AA's First 777-300ER Takes Shape posted Sun Sep 9 2012 10:48:48 by qqflyboy
If Built, Could The 777-9X Be Considered A VLA? posted Fri Jul 27 2012 10:22:05 by 747400sp
Airbus And Boeing Deliveries First Half 2012 posted Fri Jul 6 2012 01:46:10 by someone83
Efficiency Of The 777-9X vs 747-8I? posted Mon Mar 5 2012 06:33:53 by SSPhoenix
Boeing Completes 1,000th 777, Will Go To Emirates posted Sat Mar 3 2012 11:31:04 by gothamspotter
Boeing To Increase 777 Production Rate posted Mon Dec 20 2010 05:34:16 by OyKIE
Turkmenistan's First 777-200LR posted Wed Aug 18 2010 16:16:55 by virginblue4