Boeing 787 – A New Era in Air Travel

Originally Posted by cwsqbm

How ever pretty is maybe on the outside and in the cockpit, back in steerage it will look just like any another tube crammed with seats. I've flown in all sorts of planes over the years and the type of plane has little impact on enjoyment of the flight. Its like arguing what type of bus is best.

Maybe the 747-400 really sucks in comparison to others... but the 777-ER200 seems to be better in terms of headroom and quietness.

Is it that hard to figure out more comfortable and effective seating for econ-class?

you guys have great points...it doesn't do anything particularly special for passengers.

all that engineering and hard work (and I have no doubt the engineering is top notch and absolutely amazing) only yields "up to" 20% fuel savings.

Wonder if that fuel savings will be passed along to the consumer....

The plane is so expensive any fuel savings is completely negated....

Originally Posted by cwsqbm

How ever pretty is maybe on the outside and in the cockpit, back in steerage it will look just like any another tube crammed with seats. I've flown in all sorts of planes over the years and the type of plane has little impact on enjoyment of the flight. Its like arguing what type of bus is best.

It sucks when airline carriers cram them with as many seats as they can fit in that plane. Planes still have not become any faster, just quieter and more economical for the carriers to profit from.

Originally Posted by Dave 330i

Yea, I speak like a guy who is a cheap SOB.

Fixed because we know better

Each passenger gets access to a power outlet, USB port, iPod connector and touchscreen entertainment. Plus, it’ll have fancy Japanese-style toilets that spray your butt.

Passenger windows will be bigger and electro-chromatic, so they’ll dim like adjustable sunglasses. No more being woken to lift your window shade for landing.

Speaking of sleeping, the engines have noise reducing material and tipped exhaust covers to reduce cabin noise, and the all-electronically controlled aircraft has a cabin pressure of 6000 feet instead of 8000 feet, to help you feel less drained after longer flights.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2011/07/bo...-with-hi-tech/

First 787 Delivery to ANA

http://www.newairplane.com/787/firstDelivery/#/en

Originally Posted by ___lk___

cmon, it's 2007. we should be flying in low-earth orbit by now. people are ooh'ing and aaahh-ing over a technological breakthroughs only a bean-counter could love. no wonder this is all we've got.

the last 2 really spectacular breakthroughs we've seen in commercial aviation were the concorde (1969), and the 747 (1970)... 37+ years is a long time to wait for the Next Big Thing.

787 is a nice jet, but really, nothing special in my opinion.

but let's get back to the ooh's and aahhh's

Oh should we? What, go the Concorde one better? That was a cool looking plane, and I hear it was quite the novel experience but do I want to spend an extra 5 or 8 $thousand so I can cross the Atlantic in 3.5 hours instead of 7 or 8? And oh yeah, I am like totally bummed and stuff that I can't get to Paris in 2 hours in low earth orbit. I don't want to hear about the dangers of re-entry. This is America dammit. I have $50 K for the first entrepreneur who can get me from SF to Japan in 2 hours - low earth orbit baby, WOO-HOO!!

Just get me where I want to go as quickly as possible. The rest I could care less. BTW, with all the high tech, did they resolved the issue whose arm rest it belong to?

Bigger window? don't care
Dimming windows? don't care
Personal iPod, video screen? don't care
Higher cabin atmospheric pressure? You wouldn't notice it. The difference between the pressure at 6000 and 8000 ft is NOT a linear function. The lowest currently flying is the Airbus A380 at 5,000 ft (1,500 m) when cruising at 43,000 feet (13,000 m) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabin_pressurization
Carbon fiber material? You won't see a lower fare because the competition will make all airlines demanding more fuel efficient airplanes.

In the end, the airlines won, not the traveler. How do I know? If you fly a 787 instead of a 747 across the Pacific will your fare be lower? You just answered your own question.

I'd rather fly an L1011.

Originally Posted by cwsqbm

I'd rather fly an L1011.

Airlines expect the 787 to offer travelers much more comfort, open up new routes and provide significant fuel savings.

The first one goes to Japan's All Nippon Airways, which has been printing the 787 logo and "We Fly 1st" on its business cards for years.

Airlines love the jet, which Boeing calls the Dreamliner. They've ordered more than 800, well above levels for previous new jets.

"A lot of carriers are betting that this is going to be a winner," says George Hamlin, president of Hamlin Transportation Consulting in Fairfax, Va.

Instead of the usual aluminum skin, most of the 787 is covered in carbon fiber, basically a high-tech plastic that is strong but lightweight. Military planes and portions of other jetliners have used that material for years, but this is the first time so much has been used on an airliner.

The new material brings improvements that passengers should notice.

Its strength allows windows to be bigger and higher, so passengers don't have to hunch over to see the horizon. Electronic dimming replaces pull-down shades. That should mean you'll no longer be blinded when the guy next to you falls asleep with the shade up.

Finally, the cabin is pressurized to the equivalent of 6,000 feet, instead of the usual 8,000 feet. That means air pressure will be closer to what passengers are used to on the ground. And without corrosion-prone aluminum skin, the humidity can be kept higher. Those two changes should reduce dry noses and throats.

All Nippon plans to begin flying the 787 from Tokyo to Okayama-Hiroshima on Nov. 11. The first international route will be Tokyo to Frankfurt starting in January.

The first U.S. customer is United Continental Holdings Inc., which will get its first 787s next year and plans to fly them between Houston and Auckland, New Zealand, and Houston and Lagos, Nigeria.

Those are good examples of "thin routes" that airlines say the 787 will be good for -- routes for which there is regular demand that won't fill a larger plane. The 787's size, fuel efficiency and long range should allow airlines to turn a profit on those routes.

The jet will be as much as 20 percent more fuel-efficient than planes it replaces. Its efficiency was a nice perk when Boeing first proposed the 787 in its current form in 2003. Now it's essential for airlines dealing with high fuel costs.

The 787’s list price runs between $185 million and $218 million.

http://www.ana.co.jp/promotion/b787/en/

http://www.newairplane.com/787/firstDelivery/#/en

http://boeingblogs.com/randy/

At times I wish I too flying lessons to become a pilot. I love flying and love these new planes. Nothing beats a nice flight on a clear day. What sucks though is flying on *****ty days where there are thunderstorms and rain along with lightning or typhoons in the area I will try to get on the new A380 flight one day and then this new Boeing.

Originally Posted by tagheuer

you guys have great points...it doesn't do anything particularly special for passengers.

all that engineering and hard work (and I have no doubt the engineering is top notch and absolutely amazing) only yields "up to" 20% fuel savings.

Wonder if that fuel savings will be passed along to the consumer....

The plane is so expensive any fuel savings is completely negated....

Any specific data to compare?

Yea, I like the fanfare and it will be exciting to see and fly the new planes at least once so we can all brag about it. But when Tom Bodett said "We'll Leave the Light on for You" I'll go one step further. When you turn off the lights and shut your eyes to go to sleep, there is no difference between Motel 6 and the Marriott.

Originally Posted by Dave 330i

... I'll go one step further. When you turn off the lights and shut your eyes to go to sleep, there is no difference between Motel 6 and the Marriott.

So then why don't just pitch a tent or sleep in the car..

Originally Posted by Dave 330i

Yea, I like the fanfare and it will be exciting to see and fly the new planes at least once so we can all brag about it. But when Tom Bodett said "We'll Leave the Light on for You" I'll go one step further. When you turn off the lights and shut your eyes to go to sleep, there is no difference between Motel 6 and the Marriott.

I haven't flew in a commercial flight for a long time. In fact, last plane I flew in was a USAF cargo plane, very uncomfortable for long flight. So, new planes are nice but not for me.

Originally Posted by beewang

So then why don't just pitch a tent or sleep in the car..

why are you so *^&^*%* dumb? I'm comparing M6 and that Mormon Temple. I can rough it if I need to.

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Planes still have not become any faster, just quieter and more economical for the carriers to profit from.

It does not make sense to go supersonic (beyond Mach 1). The most efficient speed is around Mach 0.85 at 33000 ft altitude.

Of All the innovations on the Boeing 787, from the majority composite structure and dimmable electro-chromatic windows to the more-electric architecture and next-generation fuel sipping engines, no revolution will be felt more than the hands-free toilet seat closer and flusher in the lavatory of All Nippon Airways 787. This is the way of the future.

787 First Revenue Flight

Oct 26, 2011

Tokyo – Hong Kong

a lot of welcomed fanfare. Good job, Boeing.

Originally Posted by beewang

So then why don't just pitch a tent or sleep in the car..

because the Motel 6 or Marriot has bed and HVAC. Last time I slept in a tent, it got pretty cold at night, and my dog wasn't fond of all the noises outside.

I'll guess I'll have to fly a 787 to see that self-flushing toilet. I guess all those years of pushing a button I didn't know how hard I had it.

Originally Posted by cwsqbm

because the Motel 6 or Marriot has bed and HVAC. Last time I slept in a tent, it got pretty cold at night, and my dog wasn't fond of all the noises outside.

I'll guess I'll have to fly a 787 to see that self-flushing toilet. I guess all those years of pushing a button I didn't know how hard I had it.

On top of that you won't feel claustrophobic because you get a window to view outside while taking a big dump.

ANA 787

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/thewan...tag/Dream2011/