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

Composites
By GoatMonkey on 3/10/2006 3:58:21 PM , Rating: 2
Is anyone else bothered by the use of composites in airplanes? I know they're stronger and lighter, but they just get to a point an break. There is no bending. When you fly on most planes, when you look out the window you see the wings flexing all the time. It seems like a composite wing is just going to snap at some point. Are they reinforced with aluminum or something? Could someone who knows more about airplane construction enlighten me on this?





RE: Composites
By Filibuster on 3/10/2006 10:52:37 PM , Rating: 2
From what I've read the composite body has lots* of sensors to keep tabs on the condition of the body, so at least they'll know that the wing is about to snap off. :)

I don't know much about airplane construction or composites really, so thats all I can say.

*(it was surprisingly high but I don't recall the exact amount)


RE: Composites
By rushnrockt on 3/13/2006 12:16:31 AM , Rating: 1
I am sorry, do you even understand what a composite is? You seem to be workign with a rudimentary concept of composite = plastic spatula.
If you like your steel/aluminum so much, why don't you check out the safety stats on C-130 Hercules or MD-80s. Both of those planes are very much metal and both of them had problems with wing fractures or as was a frequent case with C-130, just falling off.
Using your arguments, I can probably say that carbon nano-tubes must break easily just because carbon is also part of coal that can crumble in your hand.


RE: Composites
By GoatMonkey on 3/13/2006 7:56:08 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not argueing anything. I was asking for more information.



RE: Composites
By wandergeist on 3/13/2006 2:55:02 PM , Rating: 2
Military aircraft have been using composites for a long time now, and they take far more abuse than commercial aircraft do. The AV-8B Harrier has an all-composite wing and has been in service for two decades now; various other miltary use composite structures as well. Neither the JSF nor the F-22 would be possible without extensive use of composite stuctural elements, and Boeing is the contractor responsible for the composite wing on the F-22.

The fact is that any material will fail when stressed beyond its design limits. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6589
Aircraft structures are built to meet their requirements plus a sizable safety margin -- exceed that, and the material will fail no matter what it is. There is nothing inherent to composite materials that would change that; afterall, aircraft used to be made mostly out of wood, which is a natural composite.

The primary concern with composites is inspection. Metal fatigue displays certain telltale signs (sometimes visible to the naked eye) and the industry has long experience with detecting them. Composites require different techniques (typically involving ultrasound) and there is less to see with the naked eye (though no one would rely on visual inspection exclusively with metal either). Airlines adopting aircraft using composite materials have to adopt the necessary inspection practices. But that has already been going on for some time: significant portions of the tail and structural elements in the 777 and several recent Airbus designs (320,330,340) use composite materials.


RE: Composites
By GoatMonkey on 3/14/2006 8:42:20 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks for making a useful post. It seems to be a rare thing on the internet. Everyone's just looking to start a flame war over the smallest things.

Someday we won't have problems with pilot error like that article mentions. They just need to get Skynet online.

But seriously, you would think that there could be a computer sensor measuring the stress on the rudder in that case and prevent to co-pilot from being a dumbass. I know those things are risky though. Computer programs try to be too smart and end up screwing things up.



"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs











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