Boeing's 787 Dreamliner takes flight for the first time
By Nilay Patel 
posted December 15th 2009 2:09PM
posted December 15th 2009 2:09PM
posted December 15th 2009 2:09PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
it's made of 50% carbon-fiber reinforced plastic composite material. but yeah, you could just dumb down a potentially game changing leap in fixed wing aircraft by comparing it to something fisher price makes.
and the weight issues are always present in the first few flight tested planes of any model from almost any manufacturer.
@willowtwf
The weight has to do with that fact that the computer designed wing didn't work.
@stabbytheicepic
No, the plane was already overweight before that. But willowtwf is right, brand new planes come in overweight on the first few of pretty much any new model. That's why stipulations on the plane's weight are standard in commercial airline purchase agreements, especially with the launch of a new model. Boeing will get the weight down, as production proceeds, and a slightly higher weight is no reason to knock this excellent plane that bring so many new and wonderful innovations to the table.
@stabbytheicepic
Dumbass, the wing in the picture is working.
finally a new airliner is in the skies that might make it into heavy rotation for continental use. the 737 is such a dated system overall.
when these finally hit the skies, starting late 2010, you'll never want to fly anything else.
@willowtwf
This isn't going to replace a 737 on any route.
@stabbytheicepic actually there is potential for airlines to switch dense 737 routes to more spaced out 787 routes over time. flying one 787 is cheaper than flying two 737 flights.
over time we'll see more and more flights switch over to newer standards like the 787. i mean they still have 840 ordered planes (even after the delays and the downturn in the economy).
@willowtwf
You are completely ignoring how the airline industry works.
The same argument was made when the 747 came out. How many domestic wide bodies are even being used.
Oh few to none, the US market is based on frequency is why. If a route is currently using a 737/a320, don't expect it to get a plane twice the size ,and double the fuel anytime soon.
@willowtwf Do you know that most of those 800+ orders were not even close to be firm nor an actual order, don't you?
I assume Creative Accounting Practices are one of the few industries where the US still has a significant leadership.
You can track it on flightaware, I assume this is it, the only 787 in the air.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE1
Damn you United and American for being late to the game on ordering this damn thing. It's gonna 6 years AT LEAST before I get to see these beautiful birds in and out of O'Hare in any significant number.
@KeegdnaB
US based airlines don't make money, so of course they couldn't afford some out of the game.
@stabbytheicepic Then explain how Continental and Northwest were 2 of the first to order it.
Its called spending money to make money. UA and AA just fail at everything, and this wouldn't be the first time.
@KeegdnaB
yeah, and northwest did so well they got bought out by Delta.
next!
@KeegdnaB
Northwest went out of business, and delta is going to delay those orders. Continental refuses to buy anything other then boeing, and pretty much had to order the 787.
United waited until the market favored them before buying the 787 and a350s, aka smart.
American is broke, and is waiting until the 787 proves it can do what they say it can do( it's already overweight).
@willowtwf Northwest got bought because their former CEO became CEO of Delta and realized that their respective route networks complimented each other perfectly and combined would be a much better airline than either of the 2 separately.
@KeegdnaB
lol northwest was broke and cash poor, and needed to replace most of their domestic jets. If Delta didn't buy them, they were done.
@stabbytheicepic Newflash, Airlines don't make money in this day and age
Every major (except Continental, and American....somehow) has been in bankruptcy at least once in the last decade. Delta and Northwest both went bankrupt in 2006, cleaned up their act and came out stronger (by comparison) than the rest. Their merger was a rare case of being an actual merger, meaning two coming together as one, instead of one buying the other out because it failed (like America West buying US Airways). Regardless of their health, the merger was going to happen eventually anyway. Both already had very close knit partnerships with Air France (Delta) and KLM (Northwest). When they themselves merged, the writing was basically on the wall for DL/NW.
As for NW's fleet, if it's safe to fly, why get rid of it unless you're downsizing or replacing it with something more fuel efficient. Their DC9s may be 30+ years old, but they're still more than airworthy as long as they're maintained (you may not be aware that airlines adhere to VERY strict maintenance schedules). Douglas built their planes like tanks, and while may be gas guzzlers, they're paid for so not making lease payments etc. makes up for it in part. Northwest also redid the interiors on them a few years ago. From a passenger perspective, you wouldn't know the plane you're on is as old as it is if someone didn't tell you.
@KeegdnaB
Like when my 62 year old colleague says he rode this very plane twenty five years ago.
@KeegdnaB
I am scared to death of DC- anythings :/
its about time boeing. Thats all i got.
boeing has failed alot. I guess most of you don't know much about boeing. other than finally getting the flop into the air there isn't anything to get excited over. its the laughing stock in the airline industry
@Ops Everyone in the industry is a clown.
@Ops
how are they the laughing stock of the industry?
they produced the finest aircrafts, the boeing 707:the first popular commercial jet liner.
the 747: the first jumbo jet
the 737: the most popular airliner
the 777: the longest range aircraft (777-200LR)
all of these aircraft are if not the most successful planes in the sky.
This is an american site fool, what do you expect !
@europe
Most of the 787 isn't made in america?
Nothing is made in america anymore, except bombs for some reason, seems odd since I'm sure you can make them cheaper offshore too, but maybe it's the transport getting too troublesome.
@stabbytheicepic
The 787 is 100% final assembled in Everett, Washington (until the SC plant goes online in a few years)
@WasAPasserBy Assembled is not the same as "made in" Most of the big super assemblies are made in Japan by Mitsubishi et al (and a crap load of stuff was subcontracted to China). A similar deal, sans the contracting to China, went on with the 777 which is made in Japan in a very significant way also.
There have been some significant Q&A issues at the Vought plant in SC, BTW.
Yay! That is a beautiful plane right there!
I didn't know that there were still 55 airlines in business.
What a great picture !
Bags-$100, legroom-$100, use of the bathroom-$100
Dear Boeing,
FUCK YOU.
Sincerely,
Northrop Grumman Employee
@HotBBQ
Right, go develop another shitty concept fighter.
Im in the area! I wonder if I will see it!? *looks outside* oh :( its cloudy, probably not :(
I heard the cabin pressure is supposed to be lower than all previous Boeing planes. That would be an extremely good news. I simply hate the dryness in the air and the uncomfortable atmosphere in the cabins.
Both the Airbus and Boeing are worldwide efforts (in terms of parts sourcing). I'm not sure that all of the parts for either could be made in the US.
This plane will have the smallest seats in the industry so the airlines can cram 9 abreast instead of 8 it was designed for.
Definitely not looking forward to that.
@stabbytheicepic Man, you've been making stuff up this whole topic long, stabby
@stabbytheicepic The cabin cross section is wider than the A330/A340 which uses 8 across but narrower than the 777 which uses 9 across (normally). It could go either way with 8 or 9 and it's the airlines' call how they want it configured.
Just be glad 9 across on a 787 shouldn't be nearly the inescapable hellhole that 10 across on a 777 is.
As long as British Airways can replace 5 flights from Heathrow to Singapore with 3 flights and the same amount of people get moved back and forth...then reducing the number of planes used by 2 will probably not be al that bad fuel wise... Yes the 787 is a good idea and will probably be a good and fuel efficient plane..but so is the A380....and so will be the A350XWB, by then the Airbus proposition looks a bit better...because I still don't see a 747-8 flying around and still if they build that plane it isn't better than an A380...the A350XWB be most likely on par with the 787...so when push comes to shove they'll both (Airbus and Boeing) will keep competing and we'll be better of for it..
@iMaarten
747-8i was was knee jerk reaction to the a380 actually selling. The fact that only two airlines have placed orders for it, two airlines that also fly the a380, shows that it will end up a nitch aircraft. Like the 767-400.
@stabbytheicepic
Yeah, um, you don't know what you are talking about, but that is okay. Boeing made the 747-8 because they could get a plane with new engines and the most advanced flight system out there - all resulting in 16% fuel savings over the previous 747-400.
Need help doing the math? It's a large amount of money son.
@EmbraerFlyer You do realize your answer did nothing to address what the previous poster was talking about. So, before telling other people that "they know not what they are talking about..."
@iMaarten Despite what you may believe, the 747-8 and A380 aren't direct competitors. Lufthansa and Korean Air have each ordered both of them because there is a difference between a market that needs ~400 seats and one that needs ~500 seats. The reason you don't see any 748s flying around is because it's not done yet. The freighter version is set to have it's first flight within the next month and the passenger version is still a year or 2 down the road.
Also, the 787 and A350 aren't as interchangable as most would think either, they're not the same size. The larger 787-9 (not largest, because they may still launch the 787-10) will be around the same size as the smallest A350-800. Because the middle-sized -900 will launch first anyway, it will be years before they have 2 that are direct competitors to each other.
@stabbytheicepic
the 747-8 isn't a knee jerk reaction, it is just an update to the ageing 747-400, and it is actually primarily marketed as a FREIGHTER not a passenger aircraft.
R.I.P. 777
@(Unverified)
the 777 isn't dead.. maybe it will replace the -200 model but not the -300 variants and the -200LR/ER
I know a lot of people wonder why this is such a big deal. This is not just another airplane. This is the next stage in commercial aviation. It doesn't look all that different (like the Boeing 707 when it first came out), but this aircraft will do things no other aircraft has ever done before.
To learn more about how this plane is different check out the blog "Why the Boeing 787 Matters" http://www.airlinereporter.com/?p=2508