Slashdot Mirror
Boeing To Deliver First 787 Today
mosb1000 writes "The era of the plastic jumbo jet has finally arrived. Boeing is delivering their first Dreamliner to All Nippon Airways today. From the article: '"Comfort and cost are concerns of the business traveller and the 787 will deliver extreme advancements in fuel efficiency and many traveller features that will improve the journey," said Michael Qualantone, senior vice president & general manager, American Express Global Business Travel. Indeed, this twin-engine, bendy winged, widebody craft has raised the bar for fuel efficiency. Some 50 percent by weight of the 787 airframe is lightweight carbon-fibre composites that could, Boeing says, help reduce fuel costs by 20 percent.' I can't wait for my first chance to fly in one."
This is like when a car manufacturer makes a new car!
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
The countless delays just lead me to think that there were too many problems with this new design or application of technology.
I'm not a materials chemist, but I'm pretty sure graphene doesn't quite meet the definition of "plastic." I guess the criteria aren't as well-established as I'd assumed. Long live the all-devouring synecdoche.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
No thanks, I will wait for the first crash/accident before I fly on one...
Exactly that.
The A380 has greater cabin air pressure and larger windows (...).
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
No thanks, I will wait for the first crash/accident before I fly on one...
Using your logic one is a guinea pig on *every* flight, new design or old, fresh off the manufacturing line or in the fleet for a while. More aircraft have probably gone down to pilot error, mechanic error, or management (ex lack of proper maintenance) than have gone down to designer error. That said, being a guinea pig for the airlines is safer than being a potential target for an idiot on the highway. Life is full of risks, one has to leave mom's basement sometimes. :-)
Some 50 percent by weight of the 787 airframe is lightweight carbon-fibre composites that could, Boeing says, help reduce fuel costs by 20 percent.
"Why, this thing is so dang light, I could prolly fly it with the engines off. I think I'll try..."
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
Most smokers seem to have to be reminded that they're not allowed to smoke by frequent, visible, almost obnoxious signs. Even then sometimes they forget....
Depends how you look at it - the A380 has some of the largest composite structures ever used in the aviation industry, and tonne-to-tonne each A380 contains more composites than a 787.
telecommunications and the internet, are these things really all that relevant to international business? I cant imagine they serve any other purpose than airborne cattle-cars for the unwashed in economy class, and exotic chariots of booze and decadence for wealthy elite.
Funny that humans seem to really want to interact with other humans rather than some simulacrum. If you think this desire for person to person contact just results in an 'unwashed economy class' or 'booze and decadence' I think you need to get out more often.
Basements aren't a very healthy place to spend your entire life.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
What does that mean? Do the wings bend (in the vertical axis I suppose) more than normal? Or are they curved along the front or trailing edge?
I once read somewhere that commercial jetliner wings are unbelievably strong, they can be bent almost till they touch at the top before breaking. I recall that they are tested this way, and that on occasion they are tested until failure (in a heavily shielded test facility I hope!).
Oh well, I'm hoping that the next generation of aircraft have transparent hulls like some forecasts I think some european group made. Then airlines could market their flights as entertainment like theme park rides.
A380 has 5000-ft cabin pressure, 787 has 6000-ft cabin pressure - so the A380 is better in this regard.
Windows on the 787 are 196.88 inches square vs "bigger" for the Airbus (I can't find the number). I doubt it makes much difference.
But why compare these two planes? They are for very different markets...
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Seating may not be better, but the air will be at least. Higher air pressure, higher humidity, dedicated intake compressors, and sophisticated filtering.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
On some recent planes, mostly smaller regional jets like the CRJ-900 and the Embraer 175, I have noticed the lack of no smoking signs. They had been replaced with "Turn Off Electronic Devices" signs, which we can only hope will be obsolete (and for the right reason) soon, as well.
There are some things that can't be done via telepresence. Like it or not, business almost always boils down to personal connections. This is especially true outside of North America. In Europe and Asia, it can take years to build a relationship between a vendor and customer to the point where the customer will be willing to spend significant amounts of money. However, once you've built that relationship, you'll need to do a lot to lose that business.
By the same token, telepresence doesn't let you turn a wrench or otherwise get your hands onto equipment. Not everything has a command line or a web interface, and even those that do occasionally fail.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Borderline psychotic is blowing out stinky carcinogenic gasses and particulates for innocents to breath. Borderline psychotic is endangering other families in a townhouse or apartment building by going to sleep smoking. Borderline psychotic is throwing butts out a window by fields in a drought. And just look at how they act when they can't get their nicotine fix, many go over the borderline at that point. Why accommodate people like that in any way? They should be banned from having health insurance or receiving any public medical benefits.
You might want to see where Boeing are getting a lot of the 787 from, if you think its American...
Wings from Japan, fuselage pieces from Europe, major assemblies from China and Korea, design packages in Russia... hell, the large composite rear pressure bulkhead is made by EADS, the owner of Boeings largest competitor Airbus!
The cry to "fly American" (and it is actually one you hear a lot) really ignores the direction in which Boeing is going for a lot of its production...
Wonder if the Chinese subcontractors cut some corners ro quality to make a little more money? or the other foreign subcontractors who make up 30% of the craft?
Because its not illegal to smoke onboard an aircraft in many countries, although the airline may still ban smoking themselves.
The average smoker also has trouble judging distances, as evidenced by the accumulation of cigarette butts right next to "no smoking within 40 feet of entrance" and similar signs.
I don't see the -9 stretch being offered at the same OEW (operational empty weight) as the -8, no way at all, so if you didn't mean that can you clarify which weight you meant (MTOW - nope, MFEW - again nope...)?
Maybe he knows more about their maintenance department than he's willing to semi-publicly state.
A brand new composite is about as trustworthy as a brand new metal component.
After 20 years of good maintenance, I'd trust them both about equally.
After 20 years of neglect, I'd trust a metal component rather than composite. People have been beating the heck out of metal for longer than plastic.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Guess what airlines, 32.5 does not fit into 31 especially on 12hr sectors. Now where's my lawyer?
Telling you to buy a seat you fit in, I hope. I'm taller than you and I don't go about suing car companies who make many nice cheap cars that I can't fit in - I buy a car that fits me.
Tall men have plenty of advantages in life - we have to let the little guys win once in a while.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Both the 787 and A380 pressurize to 6,000 feet instead of the usual 8,000 feet. But the cool part is that the 787 doesn't bleed hot air from the engines as is normal. It uses a variable speed electrically driven compressor with a humidifier, heater and filters.
The 787 also has bigger windows.
The A380 really didn't introduce much new in technology, mainly built what we had bigger. The 787 is pretty radical.
Looking at the two wiki pages, I'd say there's nothing 'nearly' about it -
787-8: 210-250(242 typical airline)
787-9: 250-290(280)
A380: 525-853(525)
Going by minimum seatings, the 787 carries less than half. Going by max cattle car arrangements, the A380 carries nearly 3 times the passangers.
Comparing new features is a good thing, but there are different structural issues between a single floor 787 and a two floor A380. That doesn't change that they're both targeting what are, in the end, very different markets. Not necessarily a bad thing. Airbus offers maximum seating for the highest density routes, Boeing offers a very affordable plane to handle the multitude of lower traffic routes.
While I'm sure the A380 is a very nice plane, my impression is that it's also a more conservative one than the 787,
I don't read AC A human right
Both the 787 and A380 pressurize to 6,000 feet instead of the usual 8,000 feet.
I heard this on the news today and paused to consider how, since my house is at 7,500 feet, the new pressurization is likely to leave me feeling *more* invigorated when I'm in the air than I'll feel when I land.
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
About the only important place the A380 uses composites is in the wing box, and it's about 20% by weight overall. The rest is just bits here and there to save weight, a chunk of fuselage here, a chunk of wing there.
The 787 uses composites almost everywhere, and depends on them for complete structural integrity. , Composites in a 787 are 50% by weight, 80% by volume, so you look at a 787, only about 1/5 of what you see is metal.
The situation is understandable, since when Boeing started talking about making a mostly composite plane, Airbus was pretty much dismissing the idea. At the time they'd only gone as far with serious use as the vertical stabiliser and rudder and the A330.
This was a huge risk by Boeing that delayed the project several times. I'm glad to see it finally coming through.
Its about time we hear about great advancement in fuel efficiency for planes...now maybe we can start seeing cheaper fares
I would expect that the best we can hope for is that fares won't rise as rapidly as they would have otherwise.
Now if we can get the EPA to butt out of CO2 regulation, which was never any of their business in the first place, we might still be able to fly in 5 years.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I'd like to do a "borderline psychotic" rant based on your vices, or those you approve of.
No, I do not smoke.
Well, this says nothing about boeing, but here's an example:
On an ERJ-140, prior to more recent planes (or those fixed) you could blow the APU compressor right out of the tail of the craft by accidentally pushing two buttons (inches apart from each other) in at the same time (bleed air from the engines - enable both and BOOM!).
Sure it wouldn't crash the plane, but still... prime example of a stupid design flaw.
(buttons to either side of item 4 in this mockup/sim-panel)
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
We certainly could build a next-generation Concorde. It would be beautiful and very fast.
Unfortunately, 99% of airline customers value low price over speed. Only a very tiny number are willing to pay the premium for that speed (ie, several times more than a regular ticket), and there aren't enough of them to justify keeping Concorde in the air, much less the development of a new supersonic airliner. Plus, there's the (overstated?) concern of sonic booms over land.
In the next ten years, though, I expect to see a supersonic business jet or two, offering that speed to those who are willing and able to pay for it. There's at least some kind of market for this.
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
Because some people get snotty about a European aircraft vs an American aircraft. Stupid isn't it?
Boeing was working on the Mach 0.98 Sonic Cruiser, but the airlines shot it down, desiring lower operating costs instead of more speed. I doubt an SST is anywhere in the near future.
But at least a lot of tech for that went into the 787. So instead of getting more speed, we got the same speed but much more efficiency.
A380 has 5000-ft cabin pressure, 787 has 6000-ft cabin pressure
Well, duh, that's because the A380 uses PAL and the 787 uses NTSC.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Part of the concept of the 787 is that it will reduce travel time by offering more direct flights. Hence the plane holds just 250 people but has a range of 8000 miles.
Apparently you've never been familiar with the usual humidity levels in a plane. 12%. Ever spend regular time in a climate with 12% humidity?
The 787 will allow them to up that level a bit allowing them to move out of the Atacama. Reason humidity is normally kept so low is (a) there's just no water at 35,000 ft and (b) damp conditions ruin metal, of which every other plane is mostly made of.
It was in one of the articles about the 787-8 delivery. The -8 had unexpected weight problems. The -9 is currently spec'ed on WP as being 6 tons heavier. The article said that Boeing now expected that the -8's weight problems had been solved, and the technology would be first delivered in the -9, making the first -9 an equivalent weight to the -8. Then the newer -8's would receive the weight reductions after that (which would make the -9's heavier again).
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
and there aren't enough of them to justify keeping Concorde in the air,
The original problem was that it was deemed too noisy to land at inland airports (such as Dulles), so they lost a good chunk of the potential market. But there apparently were enough to keep Concorde in the air once they realized they could raise their prices significantly without affecting ridership. The speed was value enough for a limited class of customers to pay fares that could keep it going.
Then one plane had a problem on takeoff ("luckily" enough on a chartered plane full of tourists rather than the usual VIPs and celebs), and they decided that it wasn't worth the trouble to continue to keep them running. (Never mind that IIRC it was caused by junk on the runway.)
But there surely won't be enough now to justify the R&D costs of a whole new SST.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
wait, I thought calling them Nips was non-PC these days?!!
Also, remember that "All Nippon Airways" isn't some English translation; that is the official name of the airline given by the Japanese. Nippon is one of the older western-translations of the country's name "Nihon".
Boeing will never be stupid as they were with this one. They outsourced loads which is exactly what created this situation. They think that they saved money from the unions. Not even. The delay alone will set back payback about 7-8 years. However, if anybody has outages (and they will), then Boeing is going to suffer all over. Worse, they spread around the technology. Boeing has slit their own throat.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I'm all for a little nationalist rivalry (otherwise what fun would soccer or the Olympics be?), but comparing two completely different airplanes seems a little screwy. The closest thing Boeing makes to the A380 is the refreshed 747, though they don't make anything quite that large - nor do they plan to. The closest thing Airbus makes to the 787 is the A340, though they don't make anything as small as the 787 with that kind of range - nor do they plan to.
Where they compete directly is the 737/A319/A320, 767/A330, and the 777/A340... That's where the sporting barbs should be aimed :)
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
... a 380 which uses some carbon-fiber in certain areas.
Certain areas like the central wing box, the tail, the leading edges, the central fuselage, etc?
There's not much there that would need a "different architecture", right...? You talk like they just changed a couple of doors or something.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Airbus_A380#Advanced_materials
No sig today...
IANAAE (Aerospace Engineer) but I asked my AE friends a couple of weeks back why airplanes (commercial) aren't going faster than the ~700 Km/h that seems to be the cruise speed nowadays.
They said that after that speed one type of drag starts to increase very fast, if I'm not mistaken because the wingtips start to approach the sound barrier.
From TFA:
Economy class will see some luxury additions, with a bar, female-only lavatories and Panasonic entertainment on demand for every passenger.
Female-only lavatories? - How can that be a good thing - in general that is. There are at least 50% men on a flight, and unless they also add some men-only toilets, they actually reduce the number of toilets available to more than half the passengers. The women can use them all but the men can't. That's neither fair nor a good thing. Besides, unless it is done for purely androphobic reasons, they won't benefit much. Women can just as easily make a mess, throw up or whatever as men. The pee on the floor issue can easily be prevented by installing sensors that pick up if you pee on the floor and if triggered locks the door and summons a flight attendant. She'll let you out and you'll then be given the choice of cleaning up yourself or be billed for it.
Something completely different... I just watched the first episode of the new show "Pan Am" and really enjoyed the amazing recreation of the time period and its technology. What really struck me was the beautiful experience it seems to have been to fly back then. People dressed nice (both the passengers and the crew) and were treated with respect all the way, both at the airport and on the plane.
We so badly need that these days. It's a disaster that a few stupid terrorists have made us accept to be treated like 2nd grade cattle. After all, none of the security measures currently in place (the security theater) at the airports really work (they miss like 60-80% of test items) and the highly invasive porn scanners or the equally invasive grope-search doesn't change much. Security shouldn't be a last minute thing at the airport; potential terrorists should be stopped long before they even get near an airport. I mean, currently nothing prevents a suicide bomber from lining up in the security queue and then detonate his bomb at the checkpoint. He'll still kill a lot of people who are packed there exactly because morons like him should be deterred from trying to get the bomb on the plane. If we didn't search people there, but stopped the moron while he was assembling his bomb instead, only the bomber would be a casualty if he detonated early.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --