Boeing's 787 flies today!

D

drankin

I have not been following this airplane too closely, but apart from being composite, why is this thing special? How does its performance look like compared to a similar airplane?

My guess is that its only 5-10% more efficient.....<YAWN>. Someone build that damn blended wing body airliner already! They all look like the same ole B-707 from 1960!
It's like Windows7, it's new, looks newer, higher "tech", has bigger... windows. If you don't have it your competitors will. Other than that, it's just more expensive and keeps the money moving in the industry.

Oh, and it's "green"er.
 

Borek

Mentor
27,870
2,447
On pictures it looks blue.
 
So what really are the advantages of the 787?
 

Borek

Mentor
27,870
2,447
According to Boeing it will use up to 20% fuel less plus it will be much quieter than other planes.
 

Wallace

Science Advisor
1,249
0
I've flown a few times now in the new A380's and they are a dream! So quiet and smooth compared to anything else I've flown it. I'm very far from an expert in the aviation field, but Airbus seem to have gotten such a first mover advantage from the A380; the Dreamliner will have to be pretty special to out-do it.
 
343
0
I've flown a few times now in the new A380's and they are a dream! So quiet and smooth compared to anything else I've flown it. I'm very far from an expert in the aviation field, but Airbus seem to have gotten such a first mover advantage from the A380; the Dreamliner will have to be pretty special to out-do it.
I'm pretty sure it already has... I remember seeing something like 900 Boeings were already ordered. The most for any aircraft.
 

Wallace

Science Advisor
1,249
0
Do you know any figures about how many A380's have been bought/ordered by comparison?
 
343
0
Do you know any figures about how many A380's have been bought/ordered by comparison?
The figure was actually 840 ordered for Boeing. A380 in comparison to date has 202.

EDIT: Reason that it is lower than what I said before I suppose is due to the delays, it was at 910.
 

Borek

Mentor
27,870
2,447
Thay are not easily comparable, as they are targeted at different markets. Or perhaps at different philosophies of air transport.
 

Wallace

Science Advisor
1,249
0
Ah okay, I had though they were essentially direct competitors. Is the Dreamliner aimed at smaller, shorter flights than the A380?
 

jtbell

Mentor
15,231
2,837
This has a direct impact on my income so this is great news for me personally as well as everyone at Boeing.
And for a lot of people here in South Carolina. Boeing is going to build a second assembly plant for the 787 near Charleston.
 

minger

Science Advisor
1,497
1
According to Boeing it will use up to 20% fuel less plus it will be much quieter than other planes.
Notice the chevrons on the jet nozzle. That is very state-of-the-art right now with a lot of work being to done to understand exactly how they even work. For acoustic reasons btw.

Also, did anyone notice as the plane flew over the camera, the change in perspective gave the eerie illusion that the wings were being swept back?

p.s. As far as the differences between the 707 and 787. Well the 707 was like a 180 passenger airline, where the 787 is almost twice that. Sure, similar shape, way different scale. Lots of difference there.
 

Borek

Mentor
27,870
2,447
Ah okay, I had though they were essentially direct competitors. Is the Dreamliner aimed at smaller, shorter flights than the A380?
I think A380 is more aimed at the idea of large hubs supported by local networks of short flies, while Dreamliner is aimed more at the peer-to-peer type of airport network. But I can be wrong.
 

FredGarvin

Science Advisor
5,016
6
Notice the chevrons on the jet nozzle. That is very state-of-the-art right now with a lot of work being to done to understand exactly how they even work. For acoustic reasons btw.
I thought the 787 only had secondary nozzle chevrons because of the large bypass ratio. I can't tell from the videos that Ivan linked to.

Also, did anyone notice as the plane flew over the camera, the change in perspective gave the eerie illusion that the wings were being swept back?
I always thought they were! I thought they were going with a kind of hybrid delta wing configuration. I never looked into it though.

p.s. As far as the differences between the 707 and 787. Well the 707 was like a 180 passenger airline, where the 787 is almost twice that. Sure, similar shape, way different scale. Lots of difference there.
Lower emissions, greater range with less fuel consumption, quieter (in both the cabin and surrounding areas).
 
So what really are the advantages of the 787?
I recently flew on one of Continental's new airplanes. Wasn't near as noisy and had much less turbulence than anything else I've flown in. Also had outlets at every seat and tvs in the seat in front of you, it made for a much more enjoyable flight. I would definately pay a few extra dollars to fly in that plane again rather than another flight on another airline. I think that is going to be the biggest advantage for the 787. It will attract customers to the airlines that have them because they know they will have a more comfortable, enjoyable experience.
 
2,786
13
Notice the chevrons on the jet nozzle. That is very state-of-the-art right now with a lot of work being to done to understand exactly how they even work. For acoustic reasons btw.

Also, did anyone notice as the plane flew over the camera, the change in perspective gave the eerie illusion that the wings were being swept back?

p.s. As far as the differences between the 707 and 787. Well the 707 was like a 180 passenger airline, where the 787 is almost twice that. Sure, similar shape, way different scale. Lots of difference there.
So.....................why don't I just upgrade the engines on my existing airplanes and save hundreds of millions of dollars?

In other words, I want to see the Cd of this airplane in a wind tunnel compared to other airplanes. If it is indeed 20% lower, I'll buy Boeings marketing ploy. Otherwise, they should just say it has 20% more efficient engines and thank whoever makes the engines. This is exactly what boeing does when selling their hummingbird helicopter. Its engine has a very low SFC, but they attribute it to its 'optimum speed rotors'.......woooo optimum speed rotors yeah sure...
 

minger

Science Advisor
1,497
1
I thought the 787 only had secondary nozzle chevrons because of the large bypass ratio. I can't tell from the videos that Ivan linked to.
They've found the chevrons to reduce acoustical waves, but don't really (that I know of) successful numerical models. From what I know they experimentally found that x number of chevrons reduced noise while y increased. If they were angled at a they reduced and b they increased.

I was recently at a conference a NASA rep was presenting some stuff on it (among other aeroacoustic research). Pretty cool stuff. They may be there for another reason, but that one I do know of.
 

minger

Science Advisor
1,497
1
So.....................why don't I just upgrade the engines on my existing airplanes and save hundreds of millions of dollars?

In other words, I want to see the Cd of this airplane in a wind tunnel compared to other airplanes. If it is indeed 20% lower, I'll buy Boeings marketing ploy. Otherwise, they should just say it has 20% more efficient engines and thank whoever makes the engines. This is exactly what boeing does when selling their hummingbird helicopter. Its engine has a very low SFC, but they attribute it to its 'optimum speed rotors'.......woooo optimum speed rotors yeah sure...
Even if the Cd is the same, it has a bigger cross sectional area. In order to be bigger and consume less fuel, I would imagine the Cd would be lower. We have MUCH better tools today to help with design, which helps with that.
 
2,786
13
Even if the Cd is the same, it has a bigger cross sectional area. In order to be bigger and consume less fuel, I would imagine the Cd would be lower. We have MUCH better tools today to help with design, which helps with that.
I'll believe that when I see some actual numbers. Companies are notorious for marketing things in a shady way. I can show you plots of tilt rotors on helicopter websites that make them look like a godsend. I don't believe Boeing. I'm pretty sure the guys that build the 707 did a pretty good job, I don't see much difference in aerodynamic shape between those two pictures. Looks like business as usual to me. I still think its the same airplane, made of different materials (ok, kudos on that at least) with better engines (thats where the fuel savings comes from).

If their airplane is really that good and they are really proud of what they did, give a plot of Cd*A compared to other airplanes.
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"Boeing's 787 flies today!" You must log in or register to reply here.

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Top Threads

Top