NoUFO
Topic Author
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

Report On Boeing's 7E7

Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:31 pm

Quite an interesting read, covering aerodynamics, materials, commonality and fly-by-wire controls:

http://flug-revue.rotor.com/FRHeft/FRHEFT04/FRH0408/FR0408c.htm

Really a nice aricraft, but I wonder if Mr Gilette's face turned red when he said Boeing had "always taken the lead" and had been "the first when it comes to innovation".  Big grin

I support the right to arm bears
 
Guest

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:56 pm

“MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE A380”

What a bold thing to say considering both of these planes have never flown and one isnt even off the drawing board.
 
Cessna172RG
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2000 8:31 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Mon Jul 12, 2004 10:30 pm

You know what they say, paper planes can't carry passengers or cross oceans.

I'm not siding with anyone, and even if I'm really not with Boeing, I'll give everything a shot once. I'll decide if I like it or not when she actually flies.

Efficiency or no efficiency...
Save the whales...for dinner!!!
 
7e72004
Posts: 3440
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:15 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Mon Jul 12, 2004 10:57 pm

Cessna...i agree completely. I am going to wait before i start bashing the A380 and/or the 7E7...i think it is possible for both planes to do well so i don't know what the bullsh*t is over. Granted i was guilty of bashing the A380 before but i decided that i am going to just remain fair on both planes until i see them fly and get a chance to fly on both.  Big thumbs up
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
 
Thrust
Posts: 2585
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:17 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:15 am

Good approach, Cessna...the Convair 880 was a lesson both companies can learn from...what a great airplane that was supposed to turn out to be  Big grin  Laugh out loud
Fly one thing; Fly it well
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 12:42 am

Interesting points-

- Boeing is making provisions for a fuel cell APU in the future
- The 7E7 will have a yoke
- The cockpit will not be identical to the 777, but can be configured to be so
- The FBW system will control the flight envelope, but the pilot will still be able to override these limits
- The 7E7 was originally planned as 7-abreast but reconfigured for 8-abreast at customer request very early on, most likely before Boeing announced the project in Jan 2003
- The 7E7-8/9 will share the same wing, the -3 will have a shorter wing with winglets
- The -3 will have a larger tail for more control at slower takeoff speeds and lighter landing gear
 
IanatSTN
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:27 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:04 am

The 7E7 will have a yoke

Thats very intersting, I would love to see the yoke progress into at least one of the new next generation aircraft, and I think its great that Boeing have carried this tradition on. I hope they do this for many more decades of aircraft to come...

Cheers  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Ian@STN
Ian@STN ::
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:12 am

Perhaps they should have a fly off..

Let 2 groups of passengers ride each plane in succession to see who is the best.. say.. ATL-SYD and back... the long way... That would be the best
Aiming High and going far..
 
hz747300
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:16 am

I like your idea ERJ170, it could be like the old barnstorming days from the 1920s. Each jet could be used to wow the crowds with aerobatic loops and wing-walkers!!!
Keep on truckin'...
 
AndersNilsson
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:09 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 5:06 am

I'm impressed by both aircraft. They will both push the limits forward in many aspects. Boeing will never sit and be bypassed by Airbus and vice verse.

Anders
Airliner photography is not a crime.
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 5:11 am

>What a bold thing to say considering both of these planes have never flown and one isnt even off the drawing board.

Not really. It's called using engineering knowledge to make an accurate prediction.
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5015
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 7:52 am

7E7 looks more and more like 767-400 IMO, especilly when in the windtunnel, exept the nosepart! Wingtip instead of raked.....hmmm, I dont kow.

Whats you´re thought?

Mike//SE  Big grin
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
MITaero
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:00 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:03 am

>Quite an interesting read, covering aerodynamics, materials, commonality and fly-by-wire controls

Why do these 7E7 threads inevitably deteriorate into discussions about appearance?

And what do you mean "wingtip instead of raked" anyway? A raked wingtip is a wingtip.
 
caetravlr
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 8:19 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:26 am

Although not supersonic, or overly huge, there are many major technological leaps being incorporated into this aircraft. It will be interesting to see the performance numbers, as well as how well she performs for the airlines over time. Thanks for posting the article, it was truly an interesting read. I am now looking forward to seeing how well the promotional efforts at Farnborough turn out for Boeing.
A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her. - W.C. Fields
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5015
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:40 am

Wingtip a lá 330/340/744, that kinda w-tip! The raked is like 777´s...

Cheers

Mike  Big thumbs up
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:48 am

Surely, Boeing was first with FBW, not. Interesting read that the got technology from the French TGV train, surely need all in-put possible to improve future planes....
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 8:59 am

I always wince a bit when engineers make such fuel efficiency comparisons which can't be verified until BOTH aircraft in question are in service. Nevertheless, it's quite possible, given the program's entire rationale is founded on efficiency, lightweight largely composite constuction and new-gen engine design focussed on fuel economy. The A380 was designed to be more economical than the 747-400 but it's economy is due largely to its increased size, the economy of scale. I agree that Boeing hasn't always taken the lead in recent years but this is Gillette's last position, prior to his retirement, so expect him to tow the company line to the last. If his statement about using 7E7 engines on the A330 vs. using them on a new version of the 747 sounds inconsistent, it's only because the 747 wouldn't be directly competing with anything, except perhaps, an A380 shrink, while the reengined A330 would be. You don't really expect Gillette to be trumpeting the A380's merits, now do you?
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:06 am

I don´t think increased size is the whole story, many new technologies used in
the A380 see this link http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRweek1.htm#EC
about the doors.
I think it´s impossible to compare two different planes with this difference in size and give a fair view...
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:47 am

Alessandro, I said LARGELY, not entirely. I'm aware of the A380's 25% composites, 5000 psi hydraulics, more efficient wing with simpler flaps, quiet engines, etc. You're right about it being impossible to directly compare these two airplanes; I was merely reacting to Walt Gillette's posture on their relative fuel efficiency. One concern I do have about the A380 is discussed elsewhere in here; its relatively high weight due to robust structure designed to be stretched. This naturally has some impact on fuel efficiency; how much can't be determined until A380 entry into service.
 
sandiaman
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:53 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:54 am

Technology aside, what you can compare is efficiency. And even predictions can be pretty good.

When you design a larger plane, you expect to get economies of scale (at least until the square-cube law gets you). Airbus is particularly challenged because it is building a plane, not only for the 550 seat market, but also for the 650 seat market. Hopefully it will achieve its efficiency target in light of its weight issues.

But to design a smaller plane with comparable fuel consumption per passenger versus a larger aircraft. ..that is a revolution. If Boeing can achieve this, it will have reversed the economies of scale that typify larger aircraft (although Airbus points out that crewing costs are lower when spread out over more passengers)

If the 7E7 delivers comparable fuel consumption per passenger compared to the A380, remember that it is also delivers better fuel consumption per passenger than the A330, A340, and 777, all larger aircraft.

To noUFO: thanks for the link to the article
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:23 am

Interesting read that the got technology from the French TGV train, surely need all in-put possible to improve future planes....

I didn't understand your comment or the analogy the article draws to the TGV. The technology they mention is the voltage regulator for the electric systems... basically the circut box. Boeing is using a system very simmilar to that of the MD-90, but hopefully Boeing will iorn out the problems that plauged it. I think it was called Variable Frequency Constant Voltage regulation. The TGV does use this (I think, correct if untrue) but why make an out-of-industry link?

And can you clarify your comment, I'm a little lost.

But to design a smaller plane with comparable fuel consumption per passenger versus a larger aircraft. ..that is a revolution. If Boeing can achieve this, it will have reversed the economies of scale that typify larger aircraft

Bingo !!!  Big thumbs up
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:29 am

The 7E7 is not the only aircraft using the VSCF electrical system. Airbus is using it on the A380 as well. Having some experience on the MD-90 hopefully both manufacturers will look at the 90 and learn from it. Main trick will be to make the system not as sensitive and more fault tolerant.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:08 pm

Boeing wasn't any bolder than Airbus when Airbus was pushing the economics of their 380, and pulling in over 100 orders before the first plane was built. Nothing different there.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 9:51 pm

Except that Airbus seems to be stalled for orders on the thing at 129, with 45 of them from a single buyer. The risk actually seems greater for AIrbus, with the projected need for airliners shaping up the way it is.

The A-380 is certainly not a 1-for-1 747 replacement, at actually seems that the most popular 74 replacement is the 777-300 followed by the A-340-600. The A-380 will certainly have some routes where it will be profitable, but the market for the 7E7 is definably larger just in the sheer numbers of aircraft for which it is a direct replacement. 1-fo-1 it will replace 767/753/A-300/A-330/A-342 a/c everywhere. If Airbus does not find a way to dedicate some real money to developing the competition for the 7E it will find itself left behind in the two most important marketplaces...twin aisle medium haul and single aisle (the almost certain follow up to the twin 7E).
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
PC12Driver
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 4:16 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 10:30 pm

Surely, Boeing was first with FBW, not.

Correct. And neither was Airbus, so the point is moot. If my memory serves me correctly, the prototype of the General Dynamics F-16 first flew with FBW control systems way back in 1974.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 13, 2004 11:54 pm

Actually, the first was a modified NASA F-8C Crusader, first flight in 1972.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5015
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:25 am

Wasn´t the A320-100 the 1st FBW jetliner in 1987?

Mike//SE  Big thumbs up
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:30 am

Or rather, the NASA Dryden F-8C was the first digital fly-by-wire aircraft. The Avro Vulcan was the first analog fly-by-wire aircraft, in the 1940s!
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
PC12Driver
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 4:16 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Wed Jul 14, 2004 2:32 am

N328KF:

You are correct. The NASA F-8 was the actual FBW testbed from which data was collected and used in the design of the F-16 flight control systems. I was actually thinking more along the lines of production aircraft, but the F-8 was, indeed, the first.

Mike//SE:
Yes, I believe the A320 was the first jetliner to incorporate digital FBW controls. I only made that statement because so many people toss around the "FBW" thing here in this forum as though Airbus invented it. They obviously didn't.

 
mikester540
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:48 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:02 pm

Yeah and didn't it crash into a line of trees after the computer froze up? and wasn't there a big coverup? hmmm




Mike/CT  Big thumbs up

[Edited 2004-07-15 05:11:49]
We need men who can dream of things that never were. -John F. Kennedy
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:12 pm

Yes, I believe the A320 was the first jetliner to incorporate digital FBW controls. I only made that statement because so many people toss around the "FBW" thing here in this forum as though Airbus invented it. They obviously didn't.

To kick a dead horse, the A320 was first with full digital FBW. I believe the airleons of the 767 are electronically signaled... can anyone confirm?
 
NoUFO
Topic Author
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:22 pm

Yeah and didn't it crash into a line of trees after the computer froze up? and wasn't there a big coverup?

For the 10.677th time: no.

What do you mean with the computer, anyway? The fly-by-wire system incorporates many safety features including a high level of redundancy, use of dissimilar redundancy with different computers, division and separation of each computer, different vendors, different microprocessors, the segregation of power supplies and the segregation in signaling lines.

Planes are flown by pilots, the computers only control their actions to keep maneuvers within the flight-envelope.
I support the right to arm bears
 
PC12Driver
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 4:16 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:27 am

Planes are flown by pilots, the computers only control their actions to keep maneuvers within the flight-envelope.

Your statement reminded me of something one of my old flight instructors told me. He was a retired AA pilot and had flown nearly every Boeing from the 707 to the 767 with stints on the DC-10 and MD-11 in between. He said:

"In the 707, when you move the yoke, it's a command...
in the 767, when you move the yoke, it's a request...
in an A320, when you move the stick, it's a suggestion."


I had to chuckle at that one  Smile
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:41 am

Concorde is FBW, and flew before the F-16, A300 and F-6.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
mikester540
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:48 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:49 am



"Dryden engineers pioneered this system in 1972, with the F-8 Digital Fly-By-Wire aircraft research project. The DFCS concept incorporated an electronic flight-control system coupled with a digital computer to replace conventional flight controls. Dryden's work paved the way for the DFCS now used in the Space Shuttle and today's military and civilian aircraft, making them safer, more maneuverable, and more efficient."
We need men who can dream of things that never were. -John F. Kennedy
 
Tasha
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 5:13 am

N328KF:

"The Avro Vulcan was the first analog fly-by-wire aircraft, in the 1940s!"

The Vulcan? The Vulcan is from the mid-late 1950's I think, but still if it had FBW I would be greatly surprised. I thought that FBW - REQUIRES - a digital computer to process the information as anything analog is far to slow and cumbersome in operation. Further, as the Vulcan started out as a long range bomber, I would have thought the RAF would have wanted the thing to be as reliable as they could possibly make it.

Other than that... I love the way it looks. The huge delta and everything; it looks far more futuristic, than the ancient contraption it is!!  Big thumbs up



To the question of FBW:

How really important is that in an airliner? Think about it. These aircraft are NOT designed to do aerobatics and other violent maneuvers. Digital flight control, FBW, and more recently FBL are important in military aircraft, such as air superiority fighters as they are designed to destroy enemy aircraft which themselves are maneuvering violently to avoid destruction. Yes here, it is a great thing to have a computer to make sure that the aircraft doesn't go outside of the flight envelope. But in an airliner? Come on now...

If the pilots don't know, understand, appreciate - or what have you - where the flight envelope is, then there is an extremely serious problem in training and expertise. I'm not saying that computerized flight controls are a bad thing as they have an effect of efficiently of the aircraft, they are NOT critical in an airliner as they are designed.....

TO BE EXTREMELY STABLE AIRCRAFT (unlike fighters which are designed to be extremely unstable and in many case cannot be flown without a digital computer reliably)

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 5:22 am

The Concorde is analog, and thus 777236ER's point is invalid. Plus, I'm sure you meant the F-8C-DFBW, not the F-6.

Tasha:

Aircraft don't merely appear, completely certified. They have to be tested. OK, so the first flight was 1952. That means that design had to start at least a couple years before that. And who says you need a computer to do FBW? It's as simple as having a potentiometer that measures to what degree a dial is twisted, and using that level of voltage to distribute a given amount of hydraulic pressure.

[Edited 2004-07-15 22:23:24]

[Edited 2004-07-15 22:27:47]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
Tasha
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Fri Jul 16, 2004 10:58 am

N328KF:

"Aircraft don't merely appear, completely certified. They have to be tested. OK, so the first flight was 1952. That means that design had to start at least a couple years before that. And who says you need a computer to do FBW? It's as simple as having a potentiometer that measures to what degree a dial is twisted, and using that level of voltage to distribute a given amount of hydraulic pressure."

I assume your speaking of the Vulcan with the first flight in 1952. That is earlier than I had suspected. Also, I was under the impression that for FBW control you require a digital computer; perhaps that is only true in the case of FBL.

Thank you for the illuminating post  Smile

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
 
Klaus
Posts: 20594
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Report On Boeing's 7E7

Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:20 pm

LMP737: The 7E7 is not the only aircraft using the VSCF electrical system. Airbus is using it on the A380 as well. Having some experience on the MD-90 hopefully both manufacturers will look at the 90 and learn from it. Main trick will be to make the system not as sensitive and more fault tolerant.

I may be wrong there, but as far as I know, the MD-90 used an electronic rectifier/inverter combination to convert the original variable frequency power into constant frequency for the onboard systems. This electronic power converter is reported to have had major reliability problems.

At least the A380 and as far as I know the 7E7 as well don´t have a constant frequency bus - all onboard systems are supplied with variable frequency power and have to cope with that, which isn´t a big deal nowadays.

Both approaches are trying to do away with the constant speed drive generators to save weight and maintenance; But the prospects are somewhat more positive this time around.  Wink/being sarcastic


Tasha: To the question of FBW: How really important is that in an airliner? Think about it. These aircraft are NOT designed to do aerobatics and other violent maneuvers.

That´s not the point. First, it saves on complexity, weight and maintenance.

Only after that there is a potential for the introduction of additional capabilities: A more "intelligent" plane.

One side effect is the possible elimination of high speed ailerons, for instance: The computers can compensate airspeed automatically.

Airbus made the next step beyond that: They introduced an abstraction layer between pilot command and control surface movement. This abstraction layer eliminates some of the workload and enables the creation of a straightforward cross-model behaviour that simply wouldn´t be possible without FBW. Autotrim, for instance, is seamlessly integrated into the behaviour of the plane - no need to even think about it.

Hard protection (also impossible without FBW) primarily allows the pilot to fly extreme maneuvers that would be much too risky otherwise, in case of an impending collision or other problems where it really counts. The plane will give exactly the maximum possible, not more, but more importantly not less than that. No need to "leave room" in the envelope manually, especially in an already stressful situation.

In these respects, Boeing simply didn´t use the potential with the 777; But it seems they´re beginning to move a little more in the same direction with the 7E7 now...