backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by Stele.. on Mar 21 at 8:56 AM


Is this 10 Forward or an airplane interior?
Boeing shows us a little more of their 787 Dreamliner

Boeing has posted some new images of its 787 Dreamliner including its interior and composite body. With the 787, Boeing hopes to block some of the blows thrown by Airbus in recent years

The Dreamliner will be available in three variants covering a wide gamut of passenger loads and route length:

The 787-8 Dreamliner will carry 210 - 250 passengers on routes of 8,000 to 8,500 nautical miles (14,800 to 15,700 kilometers), while the 787-9 Dreamliner will carry 250 - 290 passengers on routes of 8,600 to 8,800 nautical miles (15,900 to 16,300 km). A third 787 family member, the 787-3 Dreamliner, will accommodate 290 - 330 passengers and be optimized for routes of 3,000 to 3,500 nautical miles (5,550 to 6,500 km).


As much as 50% of the 787's primary structure including its wings and body will be composed of composite materials. The plane will be able to travel at Mach 0.85 and uses about 20% less fuel than planes of comparable size.

The 787 is scheduled to make its first flight in 2007 with first deliveries taking place in 2008.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I like it
By slash196 on 3/10/2006 12:44:57 PM , Rating: 2
Frankly, we need a more comfortable plane. The way they stuff passengers in nowdays makes the experience awful. As nice as these pictures are, I have a feeling they're the first-class section.

Also, the A380 can't even land at most American runways, it's too heavy. That will hurt acceptance.




RE: I like it
By defter on 3/10/2006 1:01:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, the A380 can't even land at most American runways, it's too heavy.


That's incorrect, since A380 puts smaller pressure on runway than B747.


RE: I like it
By masher2 (blog) on 3/10/2006 2:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
The A380 has more landing wheels, so it exerts less force per wheel...in theory, at least. It does, though, require a 200 ft wide runway, which is not something most US airports have.


RE: I like it
By defter on 3/10/2006 3:43:59 PM , Rating: 2
Original poster talked about weigth, not about wingspan.

However, I doubt that this 200ft limitation affects large airports in US (A380 definately won't be used on small airports).


RE: I like it
By Keeir on 3/10/2006 5:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I believe that there are very few airports in the world that can currently land a A380 (as in have the airplane land, taxi, and get to the terminal). This is due to many factors--> Space, Runway Length, Wieght (both tarmac and support stucture such as bridges), etc. I am unsure but I think its significantly less than 50. Of course, many more are planning improvements, so this number will only go up.

The 747-8 however will be able to land pretty much at every airport that currently can land any 747 aircraft. Again, I am unsure, but I remember this is well over 200.


RE: I like it
By timmiser on 3/10/2006 7:57:27 PM , Rating: 2
Plus, the A380 is turning out to be much heavier than expected, so it's value is decreasing. Needing more runway than originally predicted, carrying less weight (fuel/passengers/cargo) than originally promised.


RE: I like it
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/10/2006 8:09:53 PM , Rating: 2
I have a few friends who work for AWA (now US Air), and the company just bought a few a380s. The problem is that the airport gates are not physically big enough to cope with the 200ft wingspan without modifications. AWA/USA is changing the gates on a bunch of airports (PHX, LAS, ORD) in order to use the bigger configuration. But, bigger gates mean fewer gates, so for AWA's sake let's hope that the hub + spoke model is really going to continue.

Personally, however, I feel the Boeing method of cheaper, smaller, faster aircraft with more spoke to spoke flights is the way to go.


RE: I like it
By Googer on 3/16/2006 12:13:38 AM , Rating: 2
At Tampa International Airport, there are parking spots at the loading gates labled A380, A340, A330 727, 747, DC9, and others. But I know for a fact the A380 can fit.


RE: I like it
By Filibuster on 3/10/2006 10:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Frankly, we need a more comfortable plane. The way they stuff passengers in nowdays makes the experience awful. As nice as these pictures are, I have a feeling they're the first-class section.


If I recall from a Popular Science last year the 787 is supposed to allow for much more humid air and higher air pressure (closer to ground pressure) because of the composite body. They don't have to worry about corrosion due to the moisture and it can handle higher pressure.

I'd personally prefer more seats across if they gave me more room in front...I've got long legs.


RE: I like it
By masher2 (blog) on 3/11/2006 9:12:02 AM , Rating: 5
> "the 787 is supposed to allow for much more humid air and higher air pressure (closer to ground pressure) because of the composite body."

A recent study has linked deepvein thrombosis incidents to poor air quality on long flights. I can't help but think this will give a boost to 787 sales.


"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki