Airliners.net

I love it

It`s a "looker" for sure!

one more:


https://twitter.com/PilotSalaryHQ/statu ... 8227952645

The official rollout is scheduled for 12:30pm EST according to the Boeing website. Not sure if it will be live streamed or not.

Bravo. Seems monstrous. Can't wait for a ride on her.

Meh...the 789 is the looker of the family...the 10 looks too long for it's tail and wing.

The new composite wing plant in Everett does seem rather large. Do you think it could manufacture a more optimized wing for the TEN in the future?

That's a beauty!

travelhound wrote:

The new composite wing plant in Everett does seem rather large. Do you think it could manufacture a more optimized wing for the TEN in the future?

The difference between the wing the -9 and -10 have now and the wing they were originally planned to have is the wingtip extension part. It would have been a few meters longer than the one on the -8.

I thought that the -10 was supposed to have the 6-wheel undercarriage?

777222LR wrote:

I thought that the -10 was supposed to have the 6-wheel undercarriage?

Nope, if they pursue a 787-10HGW then yes it will have to have it. Or they could just use a larger 4 wheel bogie.

777222LR wrote:

I thought that the -10 was supposed to have the 6-wheel undercarriage?

I think you're thinking of the A350, where the -900 has a 4-wheel MLG bogie and the -1000 has a 6-wheel one.

The 787-10 is a straight stretch of the 787-9. Same wing, same gear, same engines (once the -9s start getting the latest standard), same weights.

And it's a loooooooong one! Looks a bit too long IMO. I prefer both of the shorter variants. But any 787 is a good-looking plane.

QuarkFly wrote:

Meh...the 789 is the looker of the family...the 10 looks too long for it's tail and wing.

We always have these discussions. For instance some feel the A359 is better looking than the A35K and vice versa.

One potentially sad thing this points out is we've had a nice run of new a/c introductions (737MAX, A320neo, 78J, A35K, C Series, etc) and we get A330neo this year and 77X next, but it's not too clear which aircraft we'll see next after those.

Revelation wrote:

One potentially sad thing this points out is we've had a nice run of new a/c introductions (737MAX, A320neo, 78J, A35K, C Series, etc) and we get A330neo this year and 77X next, but it's not too clear which aircraft we'll see next after those.

Hopefully it won't be a fugly BWB !

Revelation wrote:

QuarkFly wrote:

Meh...the 789 is the looker of the family...the 10 looks too long for it's tail and wing.

We always have these discussions. For instance some feel the A359 is better looking than the A35K and vice versa.

One potentially sad thing this points out is we've had a nice run of new a/c introductions (737MAX, A320neo, 78J, A35K, C Series, etc) and we get A330neo this year and 77X next, but it's not too clear which aircraft we'll see next after those.

And only four clean sheet designs in a decade (and thats with the A380 just sneaking in with a October 2007 EIS - if you go by first flight, only three clean sheets during that time).

And no clean sheets to look forward to in the foreseeable future. How exciting...

moo wrote:

Revelation wrote:

QuarkFly wrote:

Meh...the 789 is the looker of the family...the 10 looks too long for it's tail and wing.

We always have these discussions. For instance some feel the A359 is better looking than the A35K and vice versa.

One potentially sad thing this points out is we've had a nice run of new a/c introductions (737MAX, A320neo, 78J, A35K, C Series, etc) and we get A330neo this year and 77X next, but it's not too clear which aircraft we'll see next after those.

And only four clean sheet designs in a decade (and thats with the A380 just sneaking in with a October 2007 EIS - if you go by first flight, only three clean sheets during that time).

And no clean sheets to look forward to in the foreseeable future. How exciting...

You say that like 4 clean sheets in a decade isn't a lot.

Polot wrote:

moo wrote:

Revelation wrote:

We always have these discussions. For instance some feel the A359 is better looking than the A35K and vice versa.

One potentially sad thing this points out is we've had a nice run of new a/c introductions (737MAX, A320neo, 78J, A35K, C Series, etc) and we get A330neo this year and 77X next, but it's not too clear which aircraft we'll see next after those.

And only four clean sheet designs in a decade (and thats with the A380 just sneaking in with a October 2007 EIS - if you go by first flight, only three clean sheets during that time).

And no clean sheets to look forward to in the foreseeable future. How exciting...

You say that like 4 clean sheets in a decade isn't a lot.

It isn't when there is nothing on the horizon - we may not see another clean sheet for another decade and all we have to look forward to are refreshes of existing designs.

moo wrote:

Polot wrote:

moo wrote:

And only four clean sheet designs in a decade (and thats with the A380 just sneaking in with a October 2007 EIS - if you go by first flight, only three clean sheets during that time).

And no clean sheets to look forward to in the foreseeable future. How exciting...

You say that like 4 clean sheets in a decade isn't a lot.

It isn't when there is nothing on the horizon - we may not see another clean sheet for another decade and all we have to look forward to are refreshes of existing designs.

That is how aircraft development goes. Cycling between replacement and updating. It is too expensive to completely update all of your product line with brand 100% new product every ten years.

Look at 1997-2007, for example, and its plethora of new clean sheet designs (not). Nothing is ever on the horizon, until suddenly something is.

Boeing has uploaded a PTQ video showing the build of the 787-10.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BQnSvXtB5-V ... eing&hl=en

And here is the first official photo:


https://twitter.com/BoeingAirplanes/sta ... 33/photo/1

Few more:


https://twitter.com/willjudd/status/832600905165967360


https://twitter.com/TheAviationBeat/sta ... 3901912064

The B787-10 in British Airways livery will be awesome ¡¡¡¡¡

Quite an accomplishment in my home state. Congrats to Boeing SC.

The rollout is being live streamed here:

https://www.periscope.tv/ABCNews4/1yNxaPylvyXJj

817Dreamliiner wrote:

The rollout is being live streamed here:

https://www.periscope.tv/ABCNews4/1yNxaPylvyXJj

New link: https://www.periscope.tv/w/1lDxLRDPpjYGm

It would be really cool if Boeing parked the 787-10 beside a 77W, for comparison..

moo wrote:

Polot wrote:

moo wrote:

And only four clean sheet designs in a decade (and thats with the A380 just sneaking in with a October 2007 EIS - if you go by first flight, only three clean sheets during that time).

And no clean sheets to look forward to in the foreseeable future. How exciting...

You say that like 4 clean sheets in a decade isn't a lot.

It isn't when there is nothing on the horizon - we may not see another clean sheet for another decade and all we have to look forward to are refreshes of existing designs.

Don't despair, there's a few clean sheet designs still in the pipeline:
- MRJ is in flight test
- MC21 is gearing up for first flight
- C919 is gearing up for first flight
- Chinese/Russian widebody may happen next decade
- Boeing MoM may happen next decade

V/F

In those last two photos posted, it looks like a 2-engine DC8-62 to me.

Am looking forward to seeing it in person as I am sure it'll be making appearances at BFI

The -10 just makes the A350's proportions confusing to me a even more. The -10 is just 2m longer than the A359, and 5m shorter than the -1000, yet it looks waaaay longer than either.

Polot wrote:

moo wrote:

That is how aircraft development goes. Cycling between replacement and updating. It is too expensive to completely update all of your product line with brand 100% new product every ten years.

Look at 1997-2007, for example, and its plethora of new clean sheet designs (not). Nothing is ever on the horizon, until suddenly something is.

High oil forced demand for new technology. Now oil is cheap again, so more effort to just update existing product.

Aviation advances in spurts. We've had prior droughts and unfortunately we're going into another one.

We'll have years to debate 787-10/779 vs. A359/A35J here on a.net. The debate will last longer than the A330 vs. 767 debates (ironically, both of those are still in production...).

Lightsaber

Why isn't there a separate post about this on the main page? If only to alert readers? This is quite a big announcement, I only happened to hear about it by chance and I'm sure others would appreciate it too. Instead it's in a thread that maybe not all follow.

That said, what a beauty! Long and sleek. Nice replacement for a 757 fanboy.

She's beautiful!!

crimsonchin wrote:

The -10 just makes the A350's proportions confusing to me a even more. The -10 is just 2m longer than the A359, and 5m shorter than the -1000, yet it looks waaaay longer than either.

I think that's because the 787 is narrower and sits lower on the ground, so if you drew a box to fit the -10 fuselage and wheels, the box would have a larger ratio of length to height than the A350-900 or -1000.

Looking at fuselage aspect ratio alone, 787-10's length/height 68.3/5.94 = 11.5, right in between A350-1000's 73.78m/6.09m = 12.1 and A350-900's 66.8/6.09 = 11.0.

I like the extra length- it definitely makes it look more like a 757

I wonder what its field performance will be like?

It looks like its sitting pretty close to the ground, just like the 737!

travelhound wrote:

It looks like its sitting pretty close to the ground, just like the 737!

787 actually has deceivingly high engine clearance, relative to some other widebodies.

One fast question, if the body is stretched, and the wings are the same, how do the extra load affect the wing ?
Can we say that the 787-9 is in terms of wing loads better so les prone to fatigue o cracks?

spacecookie wrote:

One fast question, if the body is stretched, and the wings are the same, how do the extra load affect the wing ?
Can we say that the 787-9 is in terms of wing loads better so les prone to fatigue o cracks?

The 787-10 has the same MTOW as the 789, so max wing loading is the same. But on typical missions the 787-10 will usually have a higher wing loading than the 789 on a comparable route as it will have more weight.

Presumably Boeing designed the wing to safely take the wing load without cracks or fatigue.

spacecookie wrote:

One fast question, if the body is stretched, and the wings are the same, how do the extra load affect the wing ?
Can we say that the 787-9 is in terms of wing loads better so les prone to fatigue o cracks?

Same MTOW. ( ... and why the stretch cuts so hard into range.)

Hopefully, when the 787-10 flies for the first time, it'll get its own thread. Frankly, this rollout is more interesting than that plane with horse genitals.

Personally, I find this -10 the best looking among the Dreamliners. The length gives it the elegance the -8 lacked. The fat fuselage also looks better with the added length compared to the -9. The vertical stab does look proportionally small though.

carlokiii wrote:

Hopefully, when the 787-10 flies for the first time, it'll get its own thread. Frankly, this rollout is more interesting than that plane with horse genitals.

But gonad dragging is such a popular sport! ( here, by some )

All the 787 are good looking, by all means.
The caveat is that good looks (in the eye of the wider public) doesn't have much of a technical function
or indication of achievement.

crimsonchin wrote:

The -10 just makes the A350's proportions confusing to me a even more. The -10 is just 2m longer than the A359, and 5m shorter than the -1000, yet it looks waaaay longer than either.

Indeed. Using the numbers on Wikipedia, the -10 is 1.5 m longer than the A359, and 5.5 m (8%) shorter than the -1000.

A presentation online said the A350 wing is 20% bigger in area than the 787.

Comparing the -9 models (from keesje's photobucket account via google) we see the XWB is xtra wide and xtra long:



This photo ( ref: http://www.popphotos.net/media/BQndG_6Br6Q ) gives a good sense of the -10's proportions:



Aesthetically, the wing does look a bit small for that long fuselage, kind of like the A321's wing looks too small for its fuse (in my opinion).

WIederling wrote:

All the 787 are good looking, by all means.
The caveat is that good looks (in the eye of the wider public) doesn't have much of a technical function
or indication of achievement.

Aww, you came so close to sounding magnanimous....

seabosdca wrote:

777222LR wrote:

And it's a loooooooong one! Looks a bit too long IMO. I prefer both of the shorter variants. But any 787 is a good-looking plane.

Just as long as it doesn't need a "kickstand" like a 737-9!

Fine looking aircraft until forward of the L1 and R1 doors. The whole series. XWB series, the same thing. But that's just me.

First Boeing 787-9 for Abu Dhabi Amiri Flight in full livery LN 537

A6-PFE Abu Dhabi Amiri Flight Boeing 787-9(BBJ) - C/N 37146 / LN 537 by Woodys Aeroimages, on Flickr

LAX772LR wrote:

787 actually has deceivingly high engine clearance, relative to some other widebodies.

Yes because of the arc of the wing... but as the original poster said...

travelhound wrote:

It looks like it's sitting pretty close to the ground, just like the 737!

Which it does.

A plane is made to fly in the air, not to fly on the ground.

Has Boeing announced an estimated first flight date? Or did I over look it in this thread.

Yahhhh, the 757 replacement has arrived, long live the 757, is there any reason why this is not in a thread by itself?
(gotta get up to speed on the new smileys)

PC12Fan wrote:

Has Boeing announced an estimated first flight date? Or did I over look it in this thread.

From NYC777's blog, its estimated to be between the end of this month and the 10th of March

See: http://nyc787.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/bo ... 10-on.html