• 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
 
StTim
Posts: 3348
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:21 pm

airlinebuilder wrote:

p.s. wandering why it is not selling well



I suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8 in my opinion (I do accept both of these were flawed in other ways).

The same seems to be happening for the A350-1000 where speculation it is too large.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20606
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:36 pm

StTim wrote:
airlinebuilder wrote:

p.s. wandering why it is not selling well


I suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8 in my opinion (I do accept both of these were flawed in other ways).

The same seems to be happening for the A350-1000 where speculation it is too large.

LOL, 344 orders before first flight means not selling well?

But this is not the place to discuss this.

Please start a new thread for such a discussion.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
waly777
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:11 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:42 pm

StTim wrote:
airlinebuilder wrote:

p.s. wandering why it is not selling well



I suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8 in my opinion (I do accept both of these were flawed in other ways).

The same seems to be happening for the A350-1000 where speculation it is too large.



Orrr......the aircraft which they are poised to replace has just started it's replacement cycle.....
The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2873
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:23 pm

StTim wrote:
suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8


Or those two aircrafts suffer from having 4 engines. Many here propose that if the A380 can operate with 2 engines, it would not have died.

A successful 777X program would reinforce that belief.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26237
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:42 pm

airlinebuilder wrote:
p.s. wandering why it is not selling well

StTim wrote:
I suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8 in my opinion (I do accept both of these were flawed in other ways). The same seems to be happening for the A350-1000 where speculation it is too large.


The 777-9 is not much larger than the 777-300ER. You can put in one more row each of Business and Premium Economy or two to three rows more of Economy.

As others have noted, the world 777-300ER fleet itself is pretty young and fuel is cheap again (and the 777-300ER is a relatively fuel-efficient frame) so the need to replace them is not urgent at the moment.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:01 pm

About exit limits. I agree this looks like: AAAA for 440pax.
Airbus is trying to get a A+ door pair allowed for 120pax.
The A330-900 with 460pax would use AA+AA+
If Boeing also gets an A+ exit certified it could use A+A+A+A+ for 480pax.
What I totally don't get is the fact that single or double overwing exits aren't used on large widebodies. A single C-type overwing exit permits 35 pax. A pair of C-type exits permit 65pax.
There is a posibility for oversized C-type exits, possibly permiting more pax.
A high density 777X could also use AACCAA exit arrangement for 505pax.
With A+ exits this could permit 545pax.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 266
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:05 pm

qf789 wrote:
Some more photos of N779XW first taxi test

Image


AFAIK thiz looks like the AABA exit configuration. The third doorpair looks narrower indicating an B instead of an A type edit.
 
User avatar
mfranjic
Posts: 234
Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:54 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:14 pm


To begin with, just a brief reminder …

Image.According to the reports confirmed by the several sources, the Image.777X’s engines have finished their flight tests, being tested in the Mojave desert aboard a modified Image.747-446 Propulsion Test Platform (PTP); MSN.26355 / LN 1024, reg. N747GF, replacing one of its four Image.CF6-80C2B1F, twin-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.362,0 mm / 93,0 in; BPR: (4,97-5,31):1; engine architecture: 1F+4LPC–14HPC2HPT–5LPT), OPR: (27,1-31,8):1, rated at 254,26 kN / 25.927 kgf / 57.160 lbf, with the new Image.GE9X-105B1A, twin-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engine (fan diameter: 3.403,6 mm / 134,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; engine architecture: 1F+3LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–6LPT), OPR: 61,0:1, rated at approximately 467,06 kN / 47.627 kgf / 105.000 lbf. The General Electric company acquired its Boeing 747-446 flying testbed from Japan Airlines (reg. JA8910), modified it (winglets have been removed), strengthened the aircraft’s wing and strut to accommodate test engines.

…………Image

In 2016 the first Image.GE9X test engine completed its test runs. In 375 cycles it completed 335 hours of testing that were including evaluation of performance during water ingestion, overheating, crosswinds, blade out, hailstorm testing, icing tests, bird ingestion, block or endurance testing and testing in extremely cold temperatures. The company's first round of Image.GE9X airborne testing was delayed more than two months in 2018, after engineers discovered unexpected wear on "lever arms" that alter the pitch of vanes inside the engine’s compressor. The engine finally got airborne in March 2018 when General Electric began an initial round of airborne tests that lasted until early May. That round involved 18 flights and 105 hours of flight time, allowing GE to study high-altitude performance and to compare performance during cruise to ground-test data.

.Image

GE Aviation’s GE9X, twin-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engine, aimed for the propulsion of the future Image.777X aircraft (MTOW: 775.000 lb / 351.534 kg), returned to the skies on 10. Dec 2018 for a second round of airborne testing during which the engine maker evaluated the powerplant’s software and performance in hot-and-high conditions. Testing concluded following 18 flights and 320 flight test hours.

The test Image.777X aircraft; MSN 64240 / LN 1567, reg. N779XW, powered by two Image.GE9X-105B1A, twin-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 3.403,6 mm / 134,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; engine architecture: 1F+3LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–6LPT), OPR: 61,0:1, each rated at approximately 467,06 kN / 47.627 kgf / 105.000 lbf, was just in the process of preparing for a series of ground and aerial testing, expected to take its first flight by the end of June 2019, when the second flying prototype appeared on the flightline: MSN 64241 / LN 1574, reg. N779XX.

………[color]Image
[color=#1D364C]…

Following the completing of the flightline by the second flying prototype, the next what we saw was 777-9’s initial engine’s run on the first flying prototype, reg. N779XW

………..……Image

… then we could saw the folding wingtips on the 777-9 WH001 extended

……..……...Image

… the first 777-9 WH001’s engine’s run

.Image

… and then we’ve first heard on the Image.GE9X engine’s issues …

………....Image


… the first clear indications of already delayed first flight of the Image.777-9 aircraft, currently targeted for the end of June, looks set to be pushed back again after an ‘anomaly’ was detected in the front of the Image.GE9X engine’s 11-stage high-pressure compressor, where the excessive compressor stator wear / errosion was detected on the engine undergoing pre-delivery factory tests …

….Image

Taking into account the latest reports on on the GE9X engine’s findings, to someone's surprise came the news " 777-9 WH001 was scheduled for gauntlet testing…

……………Image

…and will be doing a high power engine run for seven hours …"

……………Image

The fact is the GE Aviation has found unexpected wear in a part of its new engine for the new Boeing 777X wide-body airliner, forcing a delay of several months while it redesigns and tests the part(s). The Boeing Company, which had been expected to stage the maiden flight of the world’s largest twin-engined jetliner in June, is now waiting for the GE9X engine while General Electric tests the redesigned parts wearing prematurely. GE expects the first flight of 777X to take place this year …

Such things happen, especially if the product involves so many inovative technology, and that’s why all those testings exist. Personally I find somewhat confusing the order in which the information related to the GE9X engine’s were passed on … but I don’t want to talk about it now. There’s one thing for sure: we can expect Image.747-446 Propulsion Test Platform (PTP), reg. N747GF, to give a lift under its wing to Image.GE9X engine once again …

What now?

During the engine’s testing, a malfunctioning part of the engine was identified, I assume, with already clear indication of the root of the problem. The engine’s disassembly and inspection has determined a excessive wear of the engine parts in front of the engine’s 11-stage high-pressure compressor, requiring its reconstruction, individual testing of the newly-designed parts, integration of a new parts into the test engines, simultaneous ground and aerial testings, repeated disassembly and inspection of the engine and determination of the state of the reconstructed engine parts. Once the inspection and the testings prove the reliability of the redesigned parts and the engine in the entirety, production of the engine brought to the finalized, certifiable configuration standard can begin, followed by its certification …

The other modifications have been also made as a result of the fan blade out certification test which was conducted at the end of January. Although the fan case, which itself was given additional strengthening prior to the test, successfully contained the released blade, the case and strut by the turbine rear frame sustained damage. Changes included improvements to the turbine rear frame, revised under-cowl components and upgrades to the mounting system for the FADEC which, after the fan blade out test, had become loose.

A handful of tests still have to be performed to certify the engine. A key test is a full durability block test which replaces the conventional ‘triple redline’ test in which the engine runs at simultaneously very high temperatures, pressures and speeds for 150 hours to represent worst case conditions…
One thing is to drive the aircraft in the circle on the runway or have it airborne knowing its potential malfunction will not endanger the safety of your Propulsion Test Platform aircraft, but the other thing is to have such a two engines under the wings of the new aircraft, trying to perform a test flight with them.

In this moment I would accept it embraced all the Image.GE9X engine’s testing performed succesfully and the Image.777X’s first flight completed by the end of 2019. I'm afraid it'll take a few months more. Following the testing, Boeing 777X is expected of receiving the certification and entering the service with Emirates as the launch cutomer. The first quarter of 2021 I find realistic for this to happen, but it’s nothing more but my humble opinion…

Mario
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile" - Albert Einstein
 
AC77X
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:12 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:16 pm

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
About exit limits. I agree this looks like: AAAA for 440pax.
Airbus is trying to get a A+ door pair allowed for 120pax.
The A330-900 with 460pax would use AA+AA+
If Boeing also gets an A+ exit certified it could use A+A+A+A+ for 480pax.
What I totally don't get is the fact that single or double overwing exits aren't used on large widebodies. A single C-type overwing exit permits 35 pax. A pair of C-type exits permit 65pax.
There is a posibility for oversized C-type exits, possibly permiting more pax.
A high density 777X could also use AACCAA exit arrangement for 505pax.
With A+ exits this could permit 545pax.

But who actually needs a 777 with 545 pax? The most populated 777s I've ever seen have 500 seats.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26237
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:34 pm

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
What I totally don't get is the fact that single or double overwing exits aren't used on large widebodies. A single C-type overwing exit permits 35 pax. A pair of C-type exits permit 65pax.


I imagine that a Type A is just more efficient since both are floor-level exits and the Type A allows 110 passengers whereas the Type C allows 55 (under FAA FARs).

Type III overwing exits (as seen on narrowbodies) were certified for the 767 family and many operators used them.

The Type A overwing exit was removed from the 777-9 to save around 450kg (not sure if this is per door or overall). It also allows that area to be used for revenue seats or galleys/lavatories.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:41 pm

AC77X wrote:
But who actually needs a 777 with 545 pax? The most populated 777s I've ever seen have 500 seats.


Cebu will order them according to popular a.net belief! Maybe upgrade to 600 seats?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
AC77X
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:12 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:09 pm

oschkosch wrote:
AC77X wrote:
But who actually needs a 777 with 545 pax? The most populated 777s I've ever seen have 500 seats.


Cebu will order them according to popular a.net belief! Maybe upgrade to 600 seats?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

Not gonna lie, I'd really like to see that happen :spin:
 
SteinarN
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 1:26 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:09 pm

mfranjic/Mario,
thanks for a very detailed post. It was a very interesting and pleasant read :smile:
 
tvarad
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:37 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:57 am

Great video of wingtips unfolding on the move:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cImfFHPQT7s
 
majano
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:47 am

mfranjic wrote:
Mario

Thank you. Always good to get some detail.
 
User avatar
zululima
Posts: 457
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:21 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:19 am

tvarad wrote:
Great video of wingtips unfolding on the move:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cImfFHPQT7s


Looks like it took 8-9 seconds to fold down. Very slick; can't wait to see one!
I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20606
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Wed Jun 26, 2019 12:01 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I wonder if that is a FAA-approved rubber band on the gold throttle lever? :biggrin:

Maybe I will start a thread on grandfathering of rubber bands. :white:

I think this is the same rubber band I saw being used during 737-200 flight testing in 1967.

As someone wrote in another thread, "Name checks out!" :biggrin:

OldAeroGuy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
These inlets are enabled by a clever aerodynamic analysis that enables the engines to be closer to the wing (vertical separation is reduced). There is a nacelle/wing interaction that can be good or really bad. Boeing/GE have figured out how to make it always good.

This "clever aerodynamic analysis", when applied to the 737 MAX, has lead to endless uninformed speculation that the design is "fatally flawed".

Interesting point, it makes me remember the good old days when the MAX discussion was centered around stuff like:

Image

The barbs being thrown back then were just as mean but not as serious.

Hopefully 77x testing continues to be relatively uneventful.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3632
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Wed Jun 26, 2019 3:38 pm

Revelation wrote:
Interesting point, it makes me remember the good old days when the MAX discussion was centered around stuff like:

Image

The barbs being thrown back then were just as mean but not as serious.

Hopefully 77x testing continues to be relatively uneventful.



Off topic: when that 69" started hitting these presentations, that was when MCAS 0.0 was born . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
morrisond
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:48 pm

PW100 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Interesting point, it makes me remember the good old days when the MAX discussion was centered around stuff like:

Image

The barbs being thrown back then were just as mean but not as serious.

Hopefully 77x testing continues to be relatively uneventful.



Off topic: when that 69" started hitting these presentations, that was when MCAS 0.0 was born . . .


The engine on the NEO moved up a lot as well according to that picture - it would be blocking the wing at a lot lower AOA than before as well.
 
Vladex
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Wed Jun 26, 2019 6:47 pm

bikerthai wrote:
StTim wrote:
suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8


Or those two aircrafts suffer from having 4 engines. Many here propose that if the A380 can operate with 2 engines, it would not have died.

A successful 777X program would reinforce that belief.

bt


The other side of the argument is that the near future (5-10 years) is all about high bypass engines which will get ever larger diameters . 777X seems maxed out as is 787 and a330 while A350 may or may not have ground clearance for a better engine. A380 and even 747 have enough space to get 2 generations of ultra high bypass engines which will significantly improve efficiency at over 20% that 2 engines can't get. It will be a very great conundrum and dilemma in the next few years.
 
tvarad
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:37 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:56 am

Vladex wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
StTim wrote:
suspect that it is currently seen as too big for the market. This is what really did for the A380 and the 747-8


Or those two aircrafts suffer from having 4 engines. Many here propose that if the A380 can operate with 2 engines, it would not have died.

A successful 777X program would reinforce that belief.

bt


The other side of the argument is that the near future (5-10 years) is all about high bypass engines which will get ever larger diameters . 777X seems maxed out as is 787 and a330 while A350 may or may not have ground clearance for a better engine. A380 and even 747 have enough space to get 2 generations of ultra high bypass engines which will significantly improve efficiency at over 20% that 2 engines can't get. It will be a very great conundrum and dilemma in the next few years.


I remember reading somewhere about Joe Sutter himself saying that there was another iteration of the 747 left after the -8. I highly doubt that the economics will work for a passenger version but there is a faint possibility of a next gen 747 freighter because of it's uniqueness if there is a step change in engine tech.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jun 29, 2019 4:44 am

lightsaber wrote:
In my opinion, the current engine errosion issue is a risk for thrust loss. There is no real risk if the wheels stay on the ground. There is risk, until the compressor is fixed, on flying. Enough risk that I wouldn't authorize a flight.

Lightsaber


Risk of thrust loss is such a nice way of putting it, I assume that you mean risk of a compressor stall so what you really mean is risk of thrust loss, loud bangs, possible shedding of engine parts and an in-flight shut down.

lightsaber wrote:

These inlets are enabled by a clever aerodynamic analysis that enables the engines to be closer to the wing (vertical separation is reduced). There is a nacelle/wing interaction that can be good or really bad. Boeing/GE have figured out how to make it always good.

Lightsaber


The jury is well and truly still out on that.
BV
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2873
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:04 pm

Vladex wrote:
A380 and even 747 have enough space to get 2 generations of ultra high bypass engines which will significantly improve efficiency at over 20% that 2 engines can't get.


If you are worried about ground clearance, why not go to a BWB? The you can push the PTP and frequency models to the point where even the 777 would not be able to compete.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Blotto
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:00 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jun 29, 2019 1:13 pm

mfranjic wrote:
Following the testing, Boeing 777X is expected of receiving the certification and entering the service with Emirates as the launch cutomer. The first quarter of 2021 I find realistic for this to happen, but it’s nothing more but my humble opinion…


LH CEO is also on record estimating EIS in 2021. Seems realistic if no major problems arise
 
chiki
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:14 am

A total of 4 777x on the flight line, has anyone done this before a first flight, seems they will be able to build up test flight hours real quick https://twitter.com/JenSchuld/status/11 ... 11328?s=19

Sent from my SM-J415F using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8395
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:50 am

777-9's WH003 and WH004 on the flightline at PAE

Image

https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/11 ... 51232?s=20
Forum Moderator
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1446
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jul 02, 2019 11:06 am

chiki wrote:
A total of 4 777x on the flight line, has anyone done this before a first flight, seems they will be able to build up test flight hours real quick https://twitter.com/JenSchuld/status/11 ... 11328?s=19

Sent from my SM-J415F using Tapatalk

Never with a widebody. The Boeing bank account is quite record breaking which will allow then to take more risk and build more test aircraft.
 
Spetsnaz55
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jul 02, 2019 11:41 am

Flight test 4 will go back inside soon to get finished up. It's out temporarily to make space
 
User avatar
hotelbravo
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:56 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:54 pm

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Some more photos of N779XW first taxi test

AFAIK thiz looks like the AABA exit configuration. The third doorpair looks narrower indicating an B instead of an A type edit.


Actually all four test frames have five doors on each side so it looks more like AAACA (or AAABA), with the narrower door being the fourth rather than third door. I would say this makes is unlikely the entire run will be AAAA and likely we will be seeing some 779s with 495 seats and perhaps more than that.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8395
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:32 pm

Emirates 777-9 LN1605 WH006 inside the factory at PAE (2 Jul)

Image

https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/11 ... 10432?s=20
Forum Moderator
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1039
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:33 pm

hotelbravo wrote:
CFRPwingALbody wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Some more photos of N779XW first taxi test

AFAIK thiz looks like the AABA exit configuration. The third doorpair looks narrower indicating an B instead of an A type edit.


Actually all four test frames have five doors on each side so it looks more like AAACA (or AAABA), with the narrower door being the fourth rather than third door. I would say this makes is unlikely the entire run will be AAAA and likely we will be seeing some 779s with 495 seats and perhaps more than that.

How easy is it to plug the doors? If you look at the A321 or 739 with reduced exit counts, the "door" is still there, the actual door just gets replaced with a plug to reduce weight and volume. I'd expect Boeing to build identical fuselages for ease of manufacturing.
This would also mean that an airline could create a 250-seat 4 class configuration today but convert to a 495-seat 2 class configuration sometime later.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26237
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:43 pm

mxaxai wrote:
How easy is it to plug the doors?


I would not be surprised if - honestly, I expect - all the planes to be delivered with the Type C door plugged.
 
Spetsnaz55
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:29 pm

qf789 wrote:
Emirates 777-9 LN1605 WH006 inside the factory at PAE (2 Jul)

Image

https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/11 ... 10432?s=20


I find it weird that this plane still has the test plane paint configuration going on while next one 1611 already has Emirates colors on wingtips and tail. Wonder why that is..
 
smartplane
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:01 pm

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Emirates 777-9 LN1605 WH006 inside the factory at PAE (2 Jul)

Image

https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/11 ... 10432?s=20


I find it weird that this plane still has the test plane paint configuration going on while next one 1611 already has Emirates colors on wingtips and tail. Wonder why that is..

Because it's an 8?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26237
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:29 pm

smartplane wrote:
Because it's an 8?


It's a 777-9 per the Tweet.
 
musman9853
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:55 am

smartplane wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Emirates 777-9 LN1605 WH006 inside the factory at PAE (2 Jul)

Image

https://twitter.com/mattcawby/status/11 ... 10432?s=20


I find it weird that this plane still has the test plane paint configuration going on while next one 1611 already has Emirates colors on wingtips and tail. Wonder why that is..

Because it's an 8?


I though -8 testing was starting next year?
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
Spetsnaz55
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:18 am

musman9853 wrote:
smartplane wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:

I find it weird that this plane still has the test plane paint configuration going on while next one 1611 already has Emirates colors on wingtips and tail. Wonder why that is..

Because it's an 8?


I though -8 testing was starting next year?


It's not an 8
 
musman9853
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:18 pm

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
smartplane wrote:
Because it's an 8?


I though -8 testing was starting next year?


It's not an 8

Thanks, makes more sense now haha
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
User avatar
RRUltrafan
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:52 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:39 am

GE9X has broken a world record, running up to 134,300 lb/f, surpassing he GE90-115b which ran up to 127,900 lb/f
https://samchui.com/2019/07/14/ge9x-set ... SwfVdMzYWo
"Everything has an end, but, only the sausage has two" - Albert Einstein
 
Dave05
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:08 am

RRUltrafan wrote:
GE9X has broken a world record, running up to 134,300 lb/f, surpassing he GE90-115b which ran up to 127,900 lb/f
https://samchui.com/2019/07/14/ge9x-set ... SwfVdMzYWo


Does this mean 777-9ER will be on the way as soon as delivery starts for the 777-8???
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1658
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:18 am

I thought the GE 9x needed to put out less thrust?
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1446
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:55 am

Enough thrust headroom for a 777-10
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:15 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Enough thrust headroom for a 777-10


How about engine wear? Does it also has enough headroom for a overall thrust increase?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5415
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:00 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Enough thrust headroom for a 777-10

The 777-10 would only need more thrust if it had a higher MTOW, which I don’t believe the landing gear can accommodate. I believe it is at the absolute limit now. Increasing it will require more tires, and that will not be easy.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1446
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:08 am

[*]
SEPilot wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
Enough thrust headroom for a 777-10

The 777-10 would only need more thrust if it had a higher MTOW, which I don’t believe the landing gear can accommodate. I believe it is at the absolute limit now. Increasing it will require more tires, and that will not be easy.

Incorrect.

The 787-10 has more thrust than the 787-9 with the same MTOW. You have extra drag from the longer fuselage and that requires extra thrust to meet the climb requirement.

So the 777-10 could keep the same MTOW and would just need more thrust.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20606
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:11 am

RickNRoll wrote:
I thought the GE 9x needed to put out less thrust?

77x does need a lot less thrust.

GE just wanted to have a go at setting a record for some bragging rights, and they did.

They're not saying you could run at that level with a production GE9x engine, nor how long it would last at that level if you tried.

IIRC GE does this at the end of a development cycle using a flight test engine that's never going to fly again because it's been modified so much during flight test.

If you've hung around with nerds or gear heads or both enough, you know this is how we operate.

We love to push things to their limit just to see what happens.

As above GE90-115B ran up to 127,900 lb/f yet was sold at 115k lb/f max so the 12.9k "headroom" was never commercialized and was in essence wear margin.

Yes, that's how over-engineered a lot of this stuff is.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 12:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
I thought the GE 9x needed to put out less thrust?

77x does need a lot less thrust.

GE just wanted to have a go at setting a record for some bragging rights, and they did.

They're not saying you could run at that level with a production GE9x engine, nor how long it would last at that level if you tried.

IIRC GE does this at the end of a development cycle using a flight test engine that's never going to fly again because it's been modified so much during flight test.

If you've hung around with nerds or gear heads or both enough, you know this is how we operate.

We love to push things to their limit just to see what happens.

As above GE90-115B ran up to 127,900 lb/f yet was sold at 115k lb/f max so the 12.9k "headroom" was never commercialized and was in essence wear margin.

Yes, that's how over-engineered a lot of this stuff is.

It probably also means if there is a need to upsize the 777 further or increase its carrying capacity eg. 550 on a 779, at least the engine part of the equation is ready for it.
 
User avatar
RRUltrafan
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:52 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:19 pm

AECM wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
Enough thrust headroom for a 777-10


How about engine wear? Does it also has enough headroom for a overall thrust increase?


The engine wear problem is a long term component issue that comes into effect when the engine is operated at long, cruise- to high thrust intervals. It affects engine life-time, which isn't exactly a problem for a test engine that is never going to fly, and carries a great deal of complex modifications anyway. GE just wanted to show off by running the GE9X to its absolute limit.
"Everything has an end, but, only the sausage has two" - Albert Einstein
 
Eyad89
Posts: 600
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Boeing 777X Testing Thread - 2019

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:22 pm

RJMAZ wrote:


Incorrect.

The 787-10 has more thrust than the 787-9 with the same MTOW. You have extra drag from the longer fuselage and that requires extra thrust to meet the climb requirement.

So the 777-10 could keep the same MTOW and would just need more thrust.


The 787-10 was initially offered with 70,000-72,000 lbf engines, just like the 787-9. That would have met all the airworthiness requirements at 254t.

Parasitic drag is pretty insignificant at lower speeds (take off speeds). A fuselage that is longer by a few meters would not add that much drag at low speeds, but that’s a different story at 0.85 mach.

The higher thrust was introduced recently with the Trent 1000-TEN and GNex-1B76. That boost helps the frame lift heavier loads during the summer in places like Dubai, and that’s something the 789 does not suffer as much since it has a bigger payload margin before hitting MTOW.

It was not like that thrust boost was necessary for the 787-10 to achieve a 254t MTOW.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos