787 program quality starting to fall apart?

[Godalmighty83]

dr_gn said:

BTW, we're still waiting for a reference for your statement on the other thread that the F-16 E/F has 1,000,000 times the computing power of the current USAF F-16C/D...Or did you simply make it up?

Or the reference to his claim that the f-35 b has suddenly dropped over 2g's of performance over night with no-one realising.

[TimJMS]

I wish Boeing every success with this project. It's the way forward. :smile:

[croyde]

Honest question.

What's the big deal about this aircraft. Looks like a 767 to me with different wings. Surely all airframes can be updated with that interior and avionics.

So why not use a proven aircraft using proven engines unless it is massively bigger like the A380.

[anonymous-user]

croyde said:

Honest question.

What's the big deal about this aircraft. Looks like a 767 to me with different wings. Surely all airframes can be updated with that interior and avionics.

So why not use a proven aircraft using proven engines unless it is massively bigger like the A380.

It's made out of completely different materials. It might look the same but it's a quantum leap in technology.

What's different for the operator? Fuel savings, shorter flight times, reduced maintenance costs, range increases.
What's different for the passenger? Bigger windows, lower cabin altitude pressure, quicker journeys.

[croyde]

Thank you

[anonymous-user]

croyde said:

Thank you

You're welcome.

http://www.newairplane.com/787/design_highlights/#...

[croyde]

It's just that with the name Dreamliner, I was hoping for something like this:

[croyde]

I just looked at a video of a flight in one of the first ANA 787s and the interior looked pretty ordinary, totally unlike the promo video you posted.

I suspect that the flashy interiors will be 1st class so it would be very unlikely for me to ever experience them. Much like the first videos of the A380 interiors showing cabins and showers

[anonymous-user]

croyde said:

I just looked at a video of a flight in one of the first ANA 787s and the interior looked pretty ordinary, totally unlike the promo video you posted.

I suspect that the flashy interiors will be 1st class so it would be very unlikely for me to ever experience them. Much like the first videos of the A380 interiors showing cabins and showers

In ANA the B787 is replacing the B767. The 767 is 70s technology and although it's a great aircraft it's now a bit old and inefficient. Airlines can't afford to be operating older fuel hungry aircraft even if the unit costs are much cheaper. As an economy class passenger, the benefit would be bigger windows and a more spacious feel, the lower cabin altitude will mean you feel better after a long flight. it is quieter in the cabin and rides turbulence better. You'll also get there quicker.

The cabin interiors themselves are just a function of the airline and type of service they offer. You'll see more benefits like mood lighting and larger overhead bins with better designed seats and entertainment systems, iPod connectors and wifi etc but you'll still be limited by the fact that the airline has to fill it as much as possible with seats.

People like flying on the A380 due to the quiet cabin and spacious feel. They might still have the same seat width and pitch as an A340 or 330 but it's a more enjoyable experience, the 787 is the same kind of improvement.

[russ_a]

Every time I see a 787 take-off I always think that it wings will snap! But only when those heavy GE engines are attached

[Mojocvh]

Godalmighty83 said:

Or the reference to his claim that the f-35 b has suddenly dropped over 2g's of performance over night with no-one realising.

Actually it never had it in the first place but do carry on....

[Mojocvh]

Chuck328 said:

Do you know something we don't?

I sincerely hope not..

[Mojocvh]

Godalmighty83 said:

It's not the first time he has used that phrase to avoid posting any sort of info or source or infact anything to support his opinion.

Oooo I'm being monopulsed tracked then

[AbarthChris]

el stovey said:

In ANA the B787 is replacing the B767. The 767 is 70s technology and although it's a great aircraft it's now a bit old and inefficient. Airlines can't afford to be operating older fuel hungry aircraft even if the unit costs are much cheaper. As an economy class passenger, the benefit would be bigger windows and a more spacious feel, the lower cabin altitude will mean you feel better after a long flight. it is quieter in the cabin and rides turbulence better. You'll also get there quicker.

The cabin interiors themselves are just a function of the airline and type of service they offer. You'll see more benefits like mood lighting and larger overhead bins with better designed seats and entertainment systems, iPod connectors and wifi etc but you'll still be limited by the fact that the airline has to fill it as much as possible with seats.

People like flying on the A380 due to the quiet cabin and spacious feel. They might still have the same seat width and pitch as an A340 or 330 but it's a more enjoyable experience, the 787 is the same kind of improvement.

You notice the difference in a 777 over something like a 747 or an Airbus. The whole experience is so much more modern and spacious, and thats even in poverty class.

[croyde]

I traveled in a 767 to the Bahamas and back a month ago. The seating in the back was 2 3 2 which gave an impression of space, especially when I got the 3 to myself

I notice that coach on the 787 is 3 3 3

[Mojocvh]

el stovey said:

dr_gn said:

el stovey said:

Godalmighty83 said:

Chuck328 said:

Do you know something we don't?

It's not the first time he has used that phrase to avoid posting any sort of info or source or infact anything to support his opinion.

He has some connection to EADS.

I would say that is extremely unlikely. Maybe 30 years ago but little knowledge of the state-of-the-art. In my opinion

I don't know but there's a clear anti Boeing stance. I'm not saying people from EADS are anti Boeing or vice versa but he is for some reason.

Far from it.

However their use of **grandfather rules in aircraft certification is quite exceptional, I think you will agree.

787 fuselage crash testing, just use an empty barrel that will be representative of a finished aircraft. Etc, etc.

• where existing designs are allowed to stay in production and "skip" aircraft types, despite more up to date legislative requirements having been issued by the authorities.

Door size, want to talk about that ES?.

[Mojocvh]

el stovey said:

He has some connection to EADS and posts this twaddle all the time.

Wrong! Have extensive experience of a number of aircraft manufacturers procedures and quality systems, some are good, some have their get-out clauses and some, well, are just contradictory

[Mojocvh]

dr_gn said:

BTW, we're still waiting for a reference for your statement on the other thread that the F-16 E/F has 1,000,000 times the computing power of the current USAF F-16C/D...Or did you simply make it up?

Nope. And that isn't what I said either, is it.



However.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article10.html

"he aircraft's advanced avionics suite has room available for future improvements. The Block 60's modular mission computer has a processing throughput of 12.5 million instructions per second and provides sensor and weapons integration."

und

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-uaes-f-16-...

have a wee read to yourselves.

[dr_gn]

Mojocvh said:

dr_gn said:

BTW, we're still waiting for a reference for your statement on the other thread that the F-16 E/F has 1,000,000 times the computing power of the current USAF F-16C/D...Or did you simply make it up?

Nope. And that isn't what I said either, is it.



However.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article10.html

"he aircraft's advanced avionics suite has room available for future improvements. The Block 60's modular mission computer has a processing throughput of 12.5 million instructions per second and provides sensor and weapons integration."

und

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-uaes-f-16-...

have a wee read to yourselves.

Errr, yes that is what you said:

Mojocvh said:

now this little bugger could really spoil someones day though.....[pulled from lloyds link while it lasts]...1 million times the computing power of the issue US F-16C for starters....

And no, surprise surprise, it's not right is it?

[dr_gn]

Godalmighty83 said:

dr_gn said:

BTW, we're still waiting for a reference for your statement on the other thread that the F-16 E/F has 1,000,000 times the computing power of the current USAF F-16C/D...Or did you simply make it up?

Or the reference to his claim that the f-35 b has suddenly dropped over 2g's of performance over night with no-one realising.