787 Dreamliner - Emperor's New Clothes ?

Almaviva

Am I missing something, or is the Boeing puff, and the way it was carried by media in general, for the 787 just a big con ?

Lightweight body materials and low operating costs are valid developments - but are we the common customers likely to notice them as a 'gamechanger' as they are trying to make us believe? In a world of rising costs and fuel prices, I hardly think anyone is going to be saying, 'wow, isnt it great the way the dreamliner made air travel so much cheaper' in the way deregulation did.

And when the best offerings from Boeing after that are 'mood lighting' (havent got that had home, so can probably manage with out it for few hours while on a plane), cleaner/wetter air (never noticed it as a problem in hundreds of long and short flights to be honest), bigger windows (I either sleep, read, or watch a movie - and not much benefit to those with the inner seats even if they did want to look out), and 'easy open' toilet doors and overhead stowage (now you know they have detached from the real world).

Am no plane expert, but a passing interest in them, have been on all of the major passenger jets, and was interested to see what this new machine would bring us.
But is the biggest success in the 787 project just its marketing department ?

Tenger

Well the new materials will have little tangible effect on passengers. (As in would most of them even be aware of being on a composite aircraft?) One benefit of the composites is that they allow larger windows (due strength), and better quality cabin air.

While you say the windows don't affect you in particular, overall flying is an easier chore in daylight if the pax have more natural light surrounding them.

In the same vein the 'mood lighting' is not confined to the B787, several airlines already have it (VS, EK and SQ off the top of my head) This lighting makes the cabin a bit more restful for the pax, less white office glare. It is easier on the eyes and allows people to sleep a bit better. I believe some airlines also use it to slowly raise cabin lighting rather than suddenly shocking pax awake with bright lights.

The cabin pressure/moisture is probably the biggest difference (IMO) Current aircraft have a cabin pressure of 8000 feet, this is a big contributing factor in the effects of long flights. By allowing the airline to set a lower pressure the passengers are able to breath more oxygen. (higher pressure height means less air density)

The better moisture levels in the cabin should do the same in that the pax will not feel as dehydrated and/or drained after each flight.

Now saying all that we have to wait and see what the passenger opinions are after the first few months of B787 service on longhaul.

L1011

I believe the A350 is going to have lower-altitude cabin pressure also, despite not using composite in the same manner as Boeing so I suspect that this is down to newer seals etc rather than composite body panels.

Stinicker

The real difference the 787 will make is it will make point to point flying more accessible rather than the hub and spoke method which depends on passengers flying to the big hub airports like Heathrow, JFK or Dubai where large aircraft carry several hundred passengers dumping them at these hubs to catch their connecting flights onwards to their smaller destinations.

The 787 is small and its smallest version only takes something like 220 passengers which is almost in A320/737 territory but it has massive range so a flight could be operated perhaps from Cork to Los Angeles (for example) wheras the smaller airport like Cork would normally never have enough passengers to this type of destination to warrant an airline running your typical 777, A340 or 747 on the route.

The A380 is about squeezing in as many passengers as possible on the trunk congested routes.

The A380 will lower costs thus increasing profitability and the 787 will open up new markets allowing long haul to go small and I think that they will both compliment each other, considering the massive growth in Aviation across Asia and the sheer numbers of people flying I can see the A380 winning here due to sheer numbers wheras the 787 will become popular in the west as passengers opt to avoid the congested hubs and go point to point.

LeakRate

It drops in nicely as a 757 replacement,the smaller version anyway!!Except with a much greater range,just look at how the US carriers in particular use the 75 at the moment to great success,There's a nice gap in the market for it with the airbus 350 a little on the large side IMO.Then there is also the fantastic technological advances on the 787 aswell which will greatly reduce maintenance,electric brakes,5,000 psi Hydraulic systems,no bleed air from engines for wing anti-ice or air conditioning meaning the engines wont be getting tapped of air which in turn reduced the fuel required to keep the engine operating at the thrust required!My only concern would be when they take a knock on the fuse,repairs on the composite pressurized area's should be interesting.

xflyer

There's always marketing hype with new aircraft. With the A380 some would have you believe it would have bars, shops, gyms and swimming pools. It could but they don't. Same with the 787, most airlines won't bother with anything that adds weight or complexity thus eating into the revenue.

No harm in generating a bit of positive media.