User avatar
AA777223
Topic Author
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:54 am

In comparison to the 777, what kind of range does the 787 have in relation to the number of passengers? In many forums I hear people comparing 787 to handling 777LR routes. There is also alot of talk about the 787-10 which would "surely canabalize" the 777-200. If this happened would the 787-10 really have the range of the different variants of the 777? Without the benefit of the same thrust range in the 787 engines that the RR800/GE90/PW40000 are capable of producing, I don't see how it could happen or perform nearly as well. It seems to me if they stretched the 787 to a -10 length it would hamper performance so much it wouldn't be able to make the same flights the 777 does. Any information would be helpful.

P.s. I did a search and couldn't find this topic previously discussed. Sorry if it is redundant.
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8538
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:06 am

Quoting AA777223 (Thread starter):
There is also alot of talk about the 787-10 which would "surely canabalize" the 777-200. If this happened would the 787-10 really have the range of the different variants of the 777?

The 787-8 and 787-9 will have more range than the 772A, 772ER, 773A, and 773ER. Only the 772LR will have more range than the 788/789.

The 787-10 if built today would have around 7,400 nm in range (with 772 capacity) assuming a complete payload for range swap, a la 772ER to 773A. This is a bit low for the 777 replacement, roughly on par with the A343.

Boeing is waiting for the more powerful engines necessary to enable a MTOW growth of the 789. Boeing wants to launch the 787-10 as the -10X with about 8,000-8,300 nm to meet the requirements of EK and reach the "base" level for current generation long haul aircraft. Engines are the key, the current Trent 1000 and GEnx can't put out the 80,000 lbf necessary for this variant.

Just last week Rolls Royce ran the Trent 1000 prototype and are confident enough to offer a 75,000 lbf variant. Step in the right direction, enough to enable the 787-9HGW with 8,600 nm of range. The 787 will likely grow just like any other aircraft.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:10 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
The 787-8 and 787-9 will have more range than the 772A, 772ER, 773A, and 773ER. Only the 772LR will have more range than the 788/789.

Though the 772LR requires auxillary tanks to increase range. The 789's range without auxillary tanks would be greater.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
User avatar
AA777223
Topic Author
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:47 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
Engines are the key, the current Trent 1000 and GEnx can't put out the 80,000 lbf necessary for this variant.

You say engines are the key and there are 80,000 Lbs of thrust neccesary. This brings me to my point. Why would the 787 only need 80,000 lbs of thrust to haul the same load as the 777-200er, which needs 90,000-95,000 produced by the current GE90-94B, RR892, etc? I can't imagine they would be able to see a true 777-200er replacement in the 787-8/9/10 untill we see a 90-100,000 lbs of thrust from the GE GENx, and RR Trent 1000. What is the missing component here that allows these aircraft to fly as far as the ER variants of the triple 7, carrying the same payload, but with such a diminished thrust rating?
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
aerohottie
Posts: 702
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:24 am

The 787 family carries less aircraft weight, and thus needs less thrust to haul the same payload.
What?
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:13 am

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 3):
Why would the 787 only need 80,000 lbs of thrust to haul the same load as the 777-200er, which needs 90,000-95,000 produced by the current GE90-94B, RR892, etc?

The 787 aircraft are lighter than 777 aircraft (by about 100 tons). While it would be kind of trippy to replace a larger plane with a smaller plane, technology and economics can make it possible. Besides, when aircraft derivative are stretched, they get heavier for their size, they will need more thrust to do anything beyond the original specification.

The simplified Berguet equations for range of a jet plane are not dependent on thrust, they do require the TSFC among other numbers. This si a link to my proffessors pdf lecture on the range and endurance of aircraft, just skip to the end: http://mercury/gallyt/ae302/Performance-Part5.pdf
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
aa1818
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:03 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:16 am

The 787 is composite vs 777 metal a/c. Supposed significant weight savings. Do we know for sure if GE/ RR are working on an increased thrust version of the engines for Boeing?

AA1818
“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4946
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:20 am

Widebodyphotog produced the chart in the link below. It is very comprehensive and should answer most questions.

http://theaviationspecialist.com/787_family.gif

In another chart Widebodyphotog shows that the max payload of the -200ER is slightly higher ( 135500lb v 129200lb)and the range somewhat better (5800nm v 5400nm)with max payload than the hypothetical 787-10. The fuel burn would favour the -10 quite significantly.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:30 am

Boeing knows what they are doing. In 2011/2012, we'll see the first 787-10s, which will be powered by 80,000ish lb GEnx and RR Trent 1000s. I have no doubt these engines can be tweaked up. Just look how far GE90 was pushed. 787-10 will have passenger capacity roughly equal to 777-200, or 777-200ER, and equivalent range, but it's not likely to have as great of cargo capacity. Moreover, it's total payload will be smaller. I think Boeing is thinking by 2012, they'll be moving 772 into cargo sales anyhow. Then they'll have the 787-10 to take its place, except for 772LR, which will continue as a niche player. This will allow the new Y3 to be a larger aircraft, not having to shrink down to 772 size.

Composites are beautiful. Smaller plane, smaller engines, less gas.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:32 pm

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 8):
In 2011/2012, we'll see the first 787-10s, which will be powered by 80,000ish lb GEnx and RR Trent 1000s.

There is no chance of the B787-10 flying in 2011, but 2012 or 2013 is possible. Thrust is likely to be somewhere in the range of 75K to 80K if delivered in the above timeframe.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 8):
787-10 will have passenger capacity roughly equal to 777-200, or 777-200ER, and equivalent range, but it's not likely to have as great of cargo capacity. Moreover, it's total payload will be smaller.

The initial MTOW of the B787-10 has not yet been decided. The B787-10 will probably have a lower payload than the B777-200ER, but that is not certain.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:14 pm

I can't imagine the MTOW or payload being higher. The interior volume will be smaller for sure. It's not a round fuselage like 777.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8538
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:20 pm

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 6):
Do we know for sure if GE/ RR are working on an increased thrust version of the engines for Boeing?

They absolutely are.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 10):
The interior volume will be smaller for sure. It's not a round fuselage like 777.

Actually, the 787-10X would have more volume than the 772ER.

The 787-10X if built will likely have the highest fraction of cargo volume to passenger capacity of any commercial aircraft in the world.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Topic Author
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:23 pm

The 787 represents Y2 in the Boeing future aircraft plan, correct? Y1 will be next with the 737 replacement, and then Y3 will be a 748/ 773 replacement? What kind of aircraft do you think we might see for Y3? Do you think we will see essentially a more efficient, slightly larger 773 type aircraft, or something totally different. I can't imagine boeing having a 773 aircraft as their largest aircraft. It seems that leaves the VLA market uncontested to Airbus. I knew there were some fascinating designs in the past for aircraft like the A380, MD11, 747-500, etc. I heard of a "double wide" 3 aisled type aircraft, and some other crazy designs. What do you think we will see for Y3? I would love to see boeing come up with something really special to replace the 773, 748!
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:56 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
The 787 represents Y2 in the Boeing future aircraft plan, correct?

Correct.

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
Y1 will be next with the 737 replacement, and then Y3 will be a 748/ 773 replacement?

The launch of the B747-8 seems to ensure that Y1 will precede Y3.

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
What kind of aircraft do you think we might see for Y3? Do you think we will see essentially a more efficient, slightly larger 773 type aircraft, or something totally different.

I think there will be a greater difference in interior cross section between the B777 and Y3 than there will be between the B787 and the B777. The exterior fuselage width of Y3 seems likely to be in the range of 260 to 270 inches. That would allow for generous 10 abreast Y seating or cramped 11 abreast seating. I would be surprised if Y3 were to have a fuselage form other than an approximate cylinder.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: 787 And 777 Range

Wed Feb 22, 2006 5:55 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 11):
Quoting AA1818 (Reply 6):
Do we know for sure if GE/ RR are working on an increased thrust version of the engines for Boeing?

They absolutely are.

Does anyone know what the max power outlet for the Trent 1000 /GEnx will be in the future? Could it someday replace the GE-90-115B, or would that make a huge derivative?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anansaudiajet, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], CRJ900, directorguy, Flyingsottsman, lakeeffect, lightsaber, LLA001, petteri, rlwynn, rutankrd, VC10er, william and 221 guests