← Back to Squawk list
  • 18

Boeing's most important plane could be headed for trouble

Submitted
The 787 Dreamliner is the first new plane Boeing has designed and built from scratch in 20 years, but its entry into service has been far from smooth. (www.businessinsider.com) More...

MH370
Weekly PickNews junkieEnthusiastTrusted friendHonor RollDaily PickAmateur PhotographerPromoterAltruistAnnouncerAutobiographer

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


mattwestuk
Matt West 15
Although I'm an Airbus fan, the 787 is still a fantastic aircraft. Fuel prices fluctuate wildly, I'm sure they will go up again soon making the 787 viable. However, from my personal experience, the 787 may be falling out of favor not because of fuel prices, but because Airlines insist on cramming people into the darn thing - when you stick 9 seats abreast into an air-frame that was optimally designed for 8, passengers tend to hate the aircraft.

If anyone disagrees, go to Seatguru and look at the reviews for AA and BA 787 air-frames. It's not Boeing's fault the airlines did this, but when the aircraft has been branded as the height of comfort, passengers tend to avoid it if it is anything but.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
TOMROM
TOMROM 8
So sad to learn that "Preacher" past away. I loved reading his comments. May his soul rest in peace. Our condolences to his family.Tony
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
conx
charlie lange 6
Oil prices will never rise again! Remember, you heard that here first. And if you believe that, well, I got mountain log cabin in Florida to sell you, on the west coast. Remember when the 747s came out and they were loaded with lounges and pianos? What happened to them? Oh yah, the beancounters can put 40 more seats in. There goes the great passenger "experience" as the clowns call it. Now, it's all just a ride.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
pilot62
Scott Campbell 4
Speed with sound reduction in and out + China ='s the 787 won't be " in trouble " for decades
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
ssobol
Stefan Sobol 4
When Boeing was getting close to rolling out the 787, I had a tour of the design center where they designed and tested the interior layouts. They went into detail about how they did it and the psychological theories and testing they did to make the passenger experience great. They showed us various layouts that they proposed for the 787 interior. They were all very nice and spacious. However, it was pretty clear that no carrier (US anyway) would use them because there was too much space that could be used for seats that was not being used that way. There was almost no chance that the average coach passenger would see an interior as spacious as Boeing proposed.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
wx1996
wx1996 4
Would someone be able to educate me on why the A350 does not have the same concern?
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Cabin width at armrest level is 22 cm wider on the A350 compared to the B787.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
n9341c
n9341c 2
OK let's see if I have this right...the 787 program is in trouble. The story ends with a mention that fuel prices are back up to $50 a barrel which makes the plane attractive again, and there is a backlog of 750 airplanes.

God what a confusing article.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
Bert076
Bert Wustenberghs 1
This month I flew a couple of times with the 787 Dreamliner. I found there are serious pros and cons. As pros it has reduced noise levels inside, and the flight at cruising altitude is very smooth and stable. But as cons I must say that the whole aircraft's construction feels too 'light'. Not only the sounds of flaps mechanics and landing gear become very intrusive this way, but more seriously, cabin sturdiness is a real issue during take off and landing. When the wheels hit the ground, the whole cabin is shaking enormously, the bagage bins wobble an inch or more. The toilet 'cabins' are only attached to the floor and not to the ceiling (!), and so you see clearly in the gap between the toilets and the ceiling how the whole airplane body is rocking and swinging inches from left to right above the toilets. It does not feel sturdy, at all. And indeed the seating is a bit too narrow for a 100 kg male.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
RandomX9
RandomX9 1
Aircraft are designed to flex slightly. If an airliner was rigid it would not be able to absorb the forces of takeoffs, landings, maneuvers and turbulence. I would guess the 787 would be particularly flexible because of its composite construction, and Boeing designed it to do so. http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/267122/
However, take this all with a grain of salt because I haven't been on one.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
Bert076
Bert Wustenberghs 1
Yes, I know. But I'm comparing with other Boeing planes like 767-300, 777-200, 747's or with comparable Airbus planes. Mind you, I do like Boeing. And I'm not so easily scared (I found out during a near crash at Funchal airport). And yes, I fly regularly. Still, the Dreamliner's landing was a disappointing experience IMHO.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
rndsm1
Brent Vegors 1
Bert, I am spot on with your comments. The one thing I would point out regarding the aircraft's construction feeling too "light" is the intentional flexibility of the aircraft in general. As far as the interiors, as I am sure you are aware, that has nothing to do with Boeing's aircraft. I have noticed, increasingly on US carriers especially, the lack of attention to the actual cabin inserts. They do not seem to anchor the sections in place as sturdily as they likely were on initial delivery. I have found the aircraft take-off & landings to be rather smooth. The flaps, wheel retraction, and deployment do seem to be a bit more "noticeable" but I believe the overall flight quietness, along with the increased humidity & cabin air circulation cancel out my negative feeling regarding the wheels, flaps, etc. I am a firm believer the American carriers will continue to push the limits on what we will tolerate as a flying public. Unfortunately, with all of the acquisitions, mergers, and takeovers, there has become too little competition so it is highly unlikely the carriers will do anything customer comfort driven. It will be a continuation of too many seats for the size/type of aircraft. (Sorry for the additional "rant", taking us off subject, just a bit.)
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
Bert076
Bert Wustenberghs 2
Yes Brent, you're right about the improved cabin air humidity and circulation. I would put that on the pros side.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
atsdroid
Andrew Skretvedt 1
Slow news day at BI? This seems like a big non-story. It's a hot airplane, with lots of orders, but sales are drying up?! Day-traders, buy puts! Airlines are keeping their older and less efficient 767s because they can afford the cheap fuel?! Well sure...for the moment. This may only change the rate of fleet replacement, not that the fleet will be replaced. And what are they gonna buy? It's a better and more efficient airplane, so fuel price doesn't matter if you plan on playing Airline Tycoon for the long run. Here I was expecting a story about how someone discovered the wings may snap off...(they do flex alot).
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
IMissPiedmont
Steve Cravener 1
Chicken Little is screaming here. Obviously, the person who wrote this has no experience in writing on aviation history.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report
linbb
linbb 3
I agree but the crap that is being posted on here by some is getting very tiring to put up with. Its just another armchair wanna bee. Used to be when Preacher was on here he posted things that were relevant not some National Enquired crap.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
30west
30west 1
linbb, I agree with you 100%. Flight Aware has changed significantly from discussions on "pilot stuff" to squawks that are a waste of time to read which can be seen in many squawks never getting any comments.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
joelwiley
joel wiley 7
There are quite a number of posters who appear to work for some online rag and post 5, 10 or more 'stories' from them weekly. I surmise it is to draw revenue-generating traffic to their sites. There are others appearantly with an axe to grind, such as the OP here. A far cry from 'hangar flying' as the late and geatly missed Preacher1 called it.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 2
You pretty much say it all, too many novices with opinions on everything they know nothing about. I wish there were a filter that would let qualified posters say their piece and prevent anyone with an Ipad or computer from posting drivel. I personally never minded a well thought out question or statement from a non pilot but lately these posters come off as complete idiots and yes I miss Wayne's posts.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
RandomX9
RandomX9 3
I am not a pilot. I know very little compared to most of the contributors and commenters, so you can judge me on that. However, I agree that there's been a change in the comments section. it does seem the squawk quality has gone into a descent. I used to enjoy the articles on squawks because they weren't the news-feed all-for-clicks items it seems like gets posted now. It seems language and responses have gotten rougher.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
The signal-to-noise ratio has dropped significantly. Preacher1 used to make comments that stimulated thoughtful discussions. After his passing, nobody has yet taken up the slack. There do seem to be a lot more postings that are ads intended to draw attention to aviation themed websites to benefit their advertisers more than to provide information and discussion topics. I am among those who miss Wayne's input.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Would you please e mail me, [email protected].
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
Welcome to the bottom of the food chain!
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 0
I just looked at who wrote this. Business Insider. They are entirely anti-business left wing and don't deserve to be taken seriously in my opinion. In other words, they write crap.

As for whether the 787 is uncomfortable or not, I'm going to find out this for myself in December. 15 hours from LAX to MEL.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 6
I don't quite understand your message. Do you want to say preacher posted crap on here?
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
linbb
linbb 10
That statement is total BULL SHIT he had been there and done that and could answer most questions due to that.
I am offended by your post and so would he. But due to the fact he passed away due to illness, check around I think you can find the posts when he did.
I asked him questions on here that only someone who had flown AC of many types could know.
His replys were always polite and to the point and that went for anyone he answered.
UNLIKE YOURS
Preacher may you rest in peace,winds be calm skys blue,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,RIP
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
CaptainFreedom
CaptainFreedom 3
lights out, latasingh....my thumbs down will be #10.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
CRAANoise
CRAA NOISE 5
The Preacher passed away a few months back
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
linbb
linbb 5
Thanks I forgot to add that to my post. He was a great moderator and commenter on here as he had BEEN THERE DONE THAT unlike most posers on here.
He went west and will forever remain in my thoughts as I read posts on here from those who do know what they are talking about.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
zennermd
zennermd 3
It is one thing to have an opinion, but it is another to blatantly attack someone else's, especially someone like preacher. Right or wrong at times, he was a good man with great thoughts and opinions.

Blue skies and fair winds Preacher.
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
pilot62
Scott Campbell 2
And hey even the best of us will age, miss him here, and none of us are perfect
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
I regret that I have but one downvote to give for this drivel
Reply ↓•Permalink•Parent•Report

Login

Forgot password?
Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Join FlightAware
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss