There is one thing that I really dislike about the Boeing 787. The crew can and sometimes do black out all the windows and disable the individual window tint controls, so you could have a window seat but you cannot see a thing.
This is for your safety. It is only done on take offs and landings. It is so that in case of an emergency your eyes don't have to adjust to the outside. example if you come in a dark roo from outside it takes a few seconds for your eyes to adjust and that few seconds can mean if you get out alive.
@@stevenlemieux7220 What is for your safety is making all the windows clear for taxi, take-off and landing so that passengers' eyes are accustomed to the lighting outside and they will be able to see clearly if anything goes wrong and the aircraft has to be evacuated. Blacking them out for most of the flight does not have any safety benefit.
@stevenlemieux7220 they do it mid flight over night, just when you can see many things at night that you'd never see otherwise, I'll not fly 787 for that reason, I'd take another airline
You may not have all that much knowledge of the aerospace industry or the world aviation market......"the legazy of Wall Street" gives us a clue about that. Do you not at least have spellcheck on your computer?
I know. It was huge mistake for Boeing to drop them and stick with the severely antiquated 737 or the ultra expensive more futuristic 787. Simply reviving the 75/76 series with modern avionics and a NEO option like Airbus did would've been much more successful. Then Boeing could take its time designing proper nextgen planes, also like Airbus did. And don't get me started on the lack of commonality between all Boeing planes, their systems, and cockpits. If you can fly one Airbus, you only need a day or two to get typed in any other model. Plus as a new pilot an a different model everything feels much more familiar, ultimately making you a safer pilot. Then compare the 737 to the 787. 737 has toggle switches and steam gauges. 787 doesn't have bleed and is all glass. They are insanely different planes. They were on the right track with the 75/76, even the earlier 777s, but wow have they failed since then.
I hear you! I still feel safer on the 757 and 767. And yes, I do love the 777-200s and 300s. Furthermore, I am fascinated and not fully comfortable of fly the newer aircraft for example across the ocean yet. JetBlue is a good aircraft and they fly their Airbus 321s I take it from New York over to London. And there is the Mint or Business/First seats to lay down. I still would fly a wide-body 767 over instead. Finally, I haveflown the 757-200s over to Hawaii from Los Angeles a few times in Polaris Business/First Class. And that was so nice. But we will see how the industry continues to grow. ☺
Its an old air frame now, the advancements made with the airbus a350 are huge in comparison. And the a350 doesnt have landing gear that sticks, batteries that blow up....
The 787-10 is the one not selling. It has a much shorter range than its other competitors. Also, a narrow aisle airplane is not in the same passenger comfort class as a wide-body aircraft. A widebody aircraft will always make a better, more comfortable and versatile aircraft on long haul routes.
Airplanes designed by engineers: Early 737s, 757, 767, early 777s. Airplanes designed by accountants: 777X, 787, 737 Max. Which ones continue to have problems and make the news? 777X, 787, 737 Max. Need I say more?
This sounds like a lot of promotion, especially for Airbus. It is also pro Dreamliner, and yes theoretically the Dreamliner is a beauty. The problem for me is that I'm not convinced that Boeing is near solving its management problems, corporation attitude, and issues on the shop floor. The idea of flying on a Dreamliner or 737 Max makes me very warry, very uncomfortable. Force fitting wings to the body of an aircraft and not using proper hardware to fit an aircraft together should be a problem for many who travel on aircraft. Simply put I have lost faith in the Boeing product, airlines might not have my problem but like Boeing they are focused on money not my life.
I hate it because of the dimming windows. I flew from Heathrow to Hong Kong at 10pm knowing the sun would soon rise. The windows remained dark because the cabin crew overrode the seat aisle controls so I saw nothing of Russia or China on my journey. Wouldn’t fly one again! 😎😇
Everyone keeps talking about the xlr as being the 2nd coming of the Concorde and the original 747, when they first came out, nearly 60 years ago. One for it's tremendous speed and the other for its combination of size, comfort and speed. Fast forward nearly 60 years and all of the excitement revolves around a cramped regional jet that has been configured in a manner that allows it to cross the ocean at significantly slower speeds than what the original 747's did nearly 60 years ago. Yes, it acheives a better fuel burn the same way a Toyota Corolla gets better gas mileage than a Roll Royce. I dont see many people jumping out of their skin to buy a Toyota Corolla over a Rolls Royce. My point being, there is zero to be excited about. The only one who benefits are the airline executives who will undoubtedly pad their pockets with the fuel savings this cramped jet will bring them. This is not an exciting moment in aviation history. The fact that airlines are turning away from a comfortable larger jet like the 787-8 in favor of a cramped, slow flying albeit fuel efficient 40 year old design with longer range should be grounds for concern for the claustrophobic traveler who is forced to fly on a regular basis for his or her job.
You are missing a lot of points here. First of all, it’s not cramped. The space you get as a passenger, is the same as in a wide body aircraft. It doesn’t fly significantly slower. The time will be made up with boarding and de-boarding, which goes a lot quicker. Also, getting through immigration will be quicker, as well as getting your luggage. The reason the XLR is a game changer is because it can do direct flights. If you were to live in Pittsburgh for instance and you needed to go to London, you would first fly to JFK or Newark on a small airplane, transfer to a wide body and fly to Heathrow. With an XLR, since it needs less than 200 passengers, could fly directly from Pittsburgh to Stansted, London. So you as a passenger, could save 3, 4 or even more hours. Again, these airplanes are not more cramped than a 787.
Yep, When a new plane is touted as a game-changer and revolutionary they mean for airline accountants...most modern jet economy class is pretty awful to fly in. The 787 may be high tech and efficient but i have done about 10 long haul flights in 787s from 5-6 different airlines and all of them were mediocre at best, hard cramped seats, tiny toilets etc. The A350 is a much better passenger experience than the 787 but its still a plane built for airline accountants.
I agree but I guess it’s also what the “market” wants. People want to be able to fly “all the time” instead of “sometimes” so they will come up with this flying Toyota Corolla instead of flying rolls Royce. As soon as this seems to be the “standard” people will start to complain about the lack of legroom, despite their tickets were cheap. Of course the problem is partly the greedy airline executives, but also the customer who is less willing to pay a “real” price.
@@julesschollum5641I wonder if there will be a passenger-oriented aircraft/airline ever again. I mean like pan am. It’s simply not viable, I’m afraid. Lots of people would say they prefer it over a cramped jet but I wonder how many would actually fly it if tickets were like 30-40% more expensive. Suddenly for most people the discomfort is not THAT valuably when comparing prices I assume.
@@slennie lack of legroom? Why would there be a lack of legroom? I don’t understand why people think that flying long haul on a narrow body means you get the same seats as on short haul flights. I recently flew on JetBlue from Europe to New York. I flew on their Business class. I’ve flown business class on most major airlines and the JetBlue was in the top 5 for me. And when I took a look in economy, the seats looked comfy with good legroom.
I was on a 787-9 owned by British Airways on a London-Japan flight and it was straight-up the worst long haul flight I've evern been on since a Boeing 747 flight London to NZ via Singaport (Air New Zealand) around 1990 - that's nearly 35 years of multiple annual long haul. Cheap and nasty trim that rattled, terrible hard seats, stupid toilet placement (one broke down making life very difficult indeed) - and this was premium economy.. I'd have slit my wrists if I was back in coach. My favourite remains the Singapore Airlines A380. That's how it should be done. (BTW Boeing in general I have tried to avoid for a while now and do 100% since that Japan flight. It was really hard to find a route from London to Cleveland recently that avoided the current iteration 737).
Oh so 787 is a shit? Do you even know the 787? The 787 is extremely good aircraft that its very fuel efficient, good for airlines and has no trouble with construction at all and so many airlines ordered the 787
Since Boeing doesn't manufacture much of the 787, their profit is probably low. They do put the aircraft together from foreign-made components. And they designed it. So, it gets the Boeing name. The modernization of their own 767 might be a better bet for their continued prosperity than to use the 787 to replace aging 767s. Can they make new 767s that are more affordable to operate? That is the question- along with "to be or not to be."
I can understand this from the perspective of the airlines. But what about the customer? I would not want to take a longhaul flight in a single-aisle aircraft, even in Business Class. And that's especially true when there is competition from other carriers who offer widebodies on the same routes. I always choose the A380 as my default on longhaul routes and would even prefer a stopover (in DXB or wherever) to make this happen. And in Asia where I live, the quality carriers even offer widebody services on short regional flights with full Business Class flat beds and suites. IMHO this strategy will meet large customer resistance for other than LCCs.
Each one has its passenger segment. Many love the A3 21 XLR and feel good with it, meanwhile, others are in contrast. So, airlines prioritize their benefit first.
Not enough information given early enough in the video for the viewer to appreciate the difference between the 787 Dash 8, Dash 9 and Dash 10. A layman's attitude to Boeing's problem is simply that it could now concentrate on the latter two versions. Also there was no mention of the lithium batteries catching fire, a slight enigma which I imagine has now ben solved.
When Boeing moved 787 production to east coast and assembled by unskilled labor….you know Boeing sr. management care less of its passenger’s lives over profit.
Believe it or not almost every day at some point in time I randomy start thinking about 777x and worrying if it's gonna receive enough orders, good enough to compete in the market and the funniest part is I literally live in Russia, where everything is sanctioned and will be so for decades to come(not saying it's undeserved) so I'll likely never see the 777-9, the only chance is Emirates. But if something goes wrong....747 Max is actually their last hope like i'm not even trying to be dramatic
You may not be trying to be dramatic. But it appears that you do need a bit more meaning in your life. Is there a park or open space nearby where you can go to breathe in a taste of nature?
BOEING 787 is in big trouble and no one bought it ? I think because of every airlines prefer to AIRBUS A350 over the BOEING 787 for the future of the long haul flight route. Just like QANTAS that use AIRBUS A350-1000 ulr for the long haul flight route from Australia to UK and USA over the BOEING 787 for the nonstop flight from Sydney to London. Even Garuda Indonesia for the future of the long haul flight route including European route, African route, South/North American route Oceanian route (Australia and New Zealand) and other Asian route for International route also Umroh and Hajj route to replacing all of the BOEING 777 if it is get crisis forever year on this 2024 until the next year later on 2045 during Indonesia become the world's most developed country ever for the future. So that's why every airlines prefer to AIRBUS A350 than BOEING 787 just like KLM, Delta Airlines and QANTAS that will use AIRBUS A350 for the future. For make this airlines become so profit than before.
Hong Kong Airlines is looking to purchase up to 3 Boeing 787 aircraft. The purchase would be for its long haul flight to North America starting as early as next year. With that be said, They aren't going to purchase them straight from Boeing do to the extremely long wait times so instead Hong Kong Airlines said they will purchase the 787 aircraft second hand from other sources.
But in my opinion just like that, I choose on AIRBUS A350 over the BOEING 787 @@Deepblue744 ! Just like KLM, Delta Airlines and QANTAS that will use AIRBUS A350 for the future of long haul flight route over the BOEING 787 if it is get crisis forever year on this 2024 as I'm afraid of.
Most airline passengers don't have a clue what aircraft they are flying on, or even regnise there are single aisle and twin aisle planes operating the same route. What they do know is that the legroom and seat comfort is inadequate and that there is a queue for the loo. Only enthusiasts know the difference between Airbus and Boeing options. More concentration on the things that actually matter would be helpful when discussing aircraft models. Seat pitch matters most and it tends to be too small in economy on all aircraft. Height does not equal wealth for many. Increasing seat pitch can also lead to faster evacuation in an emergency. oheloo
I worked some american elecronic company we design manufacturing for Boeing civil and Lockheed military aircraft avionics electronic systems. Most advanced is Lockheed then Boeing is next civilian planes
the flying quality cannot be compared to 320 Neo 787 is more comfortable and ambience is better. I would prefer to buy ticket for 787-8 than 320 Neo if the options are like that
A320neo/XLR with 18” seat width, 6 abreast is much better junk 787 with narrower seat width less than 18”, mostly cramped cabin 787 worldwide using 9 abreast config that I will avoid at all costs, second I hates the dimming windows can override by flight attendant that you cannot control by your self, some times I will anger to brake the windows dimmer button on lousy 787. 👎🏻👎🏻
Very confusing and poorly designed documentary. I got completely lost among the different models and their advantages/disadvantages relative to each other. A much better strategy would have been to tabulate ALL the Airbus AND Boeing models on the same table, and to then rank them with respect to a given feature (such as range, or passenger miles per gallon or aquisition & running costs. Down voted for being a confusing waste of viewing time.
Hong Kong Airlines is looking to purchase up to 3 Boeing 787 aircraft. The purchase would be for its long haul flight to North America starting as early as next year. With that be said, they aren't going to purchase them straight from Boeing themselves do to the extremely long wait times so instead Hong Kong Airlines said they will purchase the 787 aircraft second hand elsewhere from other sources.
Does anyone have flown on A321 Neo long haul. I did and never again so uncomfortable. I rather switch carrier than be on an A321 Neo for long flights. Frequent fliers do not like the A321 neo on long flights either this is why the Delta isn’t ordering the A321LXR.
B787 is all electrical electronic system with advanced engines not like airbus hydrolic old system s old electronic system s. B787 is first fully electric no hydrolic lithium baterries advanced backup systems
The main solution to all aviation problems is cheaper jet fuel. Governments have to fight the crude oil suppliers for cheaper prices. Somehow they are not concerned about this.
Talking BS again.... So nearly 2000 orders isn't good enough for you.. Hey bot man. You do realize the 787 has outsold the A350/A330 neo combined...!!! Clickbait intro as usual... Notice how he won't compare it to the trashy A330 neo ..rips into the 787 instead..
Never again this flying sardine can A320/A321 with its garden chairs. Not even on short routes. In contrast, Vienna - Tokyo with ANA 787/9 in premium economy was a real pleasure.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 The same seats in aircraft, like for example in the AUA A320 with its gardenseats. Thanks a lot. It seams you did not often fly with good airlines.
@@alfredturnowsky2546 you missed my point. Most airlines who will use the XLR on long haul flights, will have seats fitted n them for long trips. You can’t compare those seats with short haul flights. The A321, with 3 and 3 layout in economy, will have wider seats than the 787 in a 9 seat layout per row. In business class, you will have 2 seats per row, 1 on each side of the isle, whereas a wide body will have 2 seats in the middle as well. Seats are the same, just less seats.
Flying long haul on a single aisle aircraft sucks. I would definitely avoid airlines using single aisle aircraft for long haul.
Silly thing to say. These single isle longhaul planes will have the same seats as the twin isle airplanes. You won’t notice a difference
There is one thing that I really dislike about the Boeing 787. The crew can and sometimes do black out all the windows and disable the individual window tint controls, so you could have a window seat but you cannot see a thing.
Agreed.. I'd not fly the 787 for that reason...
This is for your safety. It is only done on take offs and landings. It is so that in case of an emergency your eyes don't have to adjust to the outside. example if you come in a dark roo from outside it takes a few seconds for your eyes to adjust and that few seconds can mean if you get out alive.
@@stevenlemieux7220 What is for your safety is making all the windows clear for taxi, take-off and landing so that passengers' eyes are accustomed to the lighting outside and they will be able to see clearly if anything goes wrong and the aircraft has to be evacuated. Blacking them out for most of the flight does not have any safety benefit.
@stevenlemieux7220 they do it mid flight over night, just when you can see many things at night that you'd never see otherwise, I'll not fly 787 for that reason, I'd take another airline
Boeing is going down, the legazy of Wall Street.
You may not have all that much knowledge of the aerospace industry or the world aviation market......"the legazy of Wall Street" gives us a clue about that. Do you not at least have spellcheck on your computer?
I’ve been flying it for about five years. It’s ny favorite plane at the end of a 49 year career.
Yes. Dreamliner is great. I love it too.
Thank you for sharing Aviation News here.😊 I still like the 767s and 757s. They have both been great aircraft to fly on.
Thanks for sharing!
You are welcome.
I know. It was huge mistake for Boeing to drop them and stick with the severely antiquated 737 or the ultra expensive more futuristic 787. Simply reviving the 75/76 series with modern avionics and a NEO option like Airbus did would've been much more successful. Then Boeing could take its time designing proper nextgen planes, also like Airbus did. And don't get me started on the lack of commonality between all Boeing planes, their systems, and cockpits. If you can fly one Airbus, you only need a day or two to get typed in any other model. Plus as a new pilot an a different model everything feels much more familiar, ultimately making you a safer pilot. Then compare the 737 to the 787. 737 has toggle switches and steam gauges. 787 doesn't have bleed and is all glass. They are insanely different planes. They were on the right track with the 75/76, even the earlier 777s, but wow have they failed since then.
I hear you! I still feel safer on the 757 and 767. And yes, I do love the 777-200s and 300s. Furthermore, I am fascinated and not fully comfortable of fly the newer aircraft for example across the ocean yet. JetBlue is a good aircraft and they fly their Airbus 321s I take it from New York over to London. And there is the Mint or Business/First seats to lay down. I still would fly a wide-body 767 over instead. Finally, I haveflown the 757-200s over to Hawaii from Los Angeles a few times in Polaris Business/First Class. And that was so nice. But we will see how the industry continues to grow. ☺
Its an old air frame now, the advancements made with the airbus a350 are huge in comparison. And the a350 doesnt have landing gear that sticks, batteries that blow up....
The 787-10 is the one not selling. It has a much shorter range than its other competitors. Also, a narrow aisle airplane is not in the same passenger comfort class as a wide-body aircraft. A widebody aircraft will always make a better, more comfortable and versatile aircraft on long haul routes.
Seats are the same. There is no difference at all. So how is a wide body more comfortable?
Same here
Airplanes designed by engineers:
Early 737s, 757, 767, early 777s.
Airplanes designed by accountants:
777X, 787, 737 Max.
Which ones continue to have problems and make the news?
777X, 787, 737 Max.
Need I say more?
Great.
787-9 is well-balanced(either short, medium, long or ultra long haul) of the 787 family
This sounds like a lot of promotion, especially for Airbus. It is also pro Dreamliner, and yes theoretically the Dreamliner is a beauty. The problem for me is that I'm not convinced that Boeing is near solving its management problems, corporation attitude, and issues on the shop floor. The idea of flying on a Dreamliner or 737 Max makes me very warry, very uncomfortable. Force fitting wings to the body of an aircraft and not using proper hardware to fit an aircraft together should be a problem for many who travel on aircraft. Simply put I have lost faith in the Boeing product, airlines might not have my problem but like Boeing they are focused on money not my life.
Airbus deserves the promotion, though.
Boeing director makes $ 32.000.000 a year..staff has not had a raise in 10 years,
and you wonder why it does badly???
I hate it because of the dimming windows. I flew from Heathrow to Hong Kong at 10pm knowing the sun would soon rise. The windows remained dark because the cabin crew overrode the seat aisle controls so I saw nothing of Russia or China on my journey. Wouldn’t fly one again! 😎😇
thanks for sharing your experience
"No one buys!" is click bait. It's just one variant. Over 1100 total sold (so far) is not too shabby. I agree that the 350 is great.
The 350 is a good airplane but it is very underpowered. I can only speak for the 900 tho!!
Everyone keeps talking about the xlr as being the 2nd coming of the Concorde and the original 747, when they first came out, nearly 60 years ago. One for it's tremendous speed and the other for its combination of size, comfort and speed. Fast forward nearly 60 years and all of the excitement revolves around a cramped regional jet that has been configured in a manner that allows it to cross the ocean at significantly slower speeds than what the original 747's did nearly 60 years ago. Yes, it acheives a better fuel burn the same way a Toyota Corolla gets better gas mileage than a Roll Royce. I dont see many people jumping out of their skin to buy a Toyota Corolla over a Rolls Royce. My point being, there is zero to be excited about. The only one who benefits are the airline executives who will undoubtedly pad their pockets with the fuel savings this cramped jet will bring them. This is not an exciting moment in aviation history. The fact that airlines are turning away from a comfortable larger jet like the 787-8 in favor of a cramped, slow flying albeit fuel efficient 40 year old design with longer range should be grounds for concern for the claustrophobic traveler who is forced to fly on a regular basis for his or her job.
You are missing a lot of points here. First of all, it’s not cramped. The space you get as a passenger, is the same as in a wide body aircraft.
It doesn’t fly significantly slower. The time will be made up with boarding and de-boarding, which goes a lot quicker. Also, getting through immigration will be quicker, as well as getting your luggage.
The reason the XLR is a game changer is because it can do direct flights. If you were to live in Pittsburgh for instance and you needed to go to London, you would first fly to JFK or Newark on a small airplane, transfer to a wide body and fly to Heathrow.
With an XLR, since it needs less than 200 passengers, could fly directly from Pittsburgh to Stansted, London. So you as a passenger, could save 3, 4 or even more hours.
Again, these airplanes are not more cramped than a 787.
Yep, When a new plane is touted as a game-changer and revolutionary they mean for airline accountants...most modern jet economy class is pretty awful to fly in. The 787 may be high tech and efficient but i have done about 10 long haul flights in 787s from 5-6 different airlines and all of them were mediocre at best, hard cramped seats, tiny toilets etc. The A350 is a much better passenger experience than the 787 but its still a plane built for airline accountants.
I agree but I guess it’s also what the “market” wants. People want to be able to fly “all the time” instead of “sometimes” so they will come up with this flying Toyota Corolla instead of flying rolls Royce. As soon as this seems to be the “standard” people will start to complain about the lack of legroom, despite their tickets were cheap. Of course the problem is partly the greedy airline executives, but also the customer who is less willing to pay a “real” price.
@@julesschollum5641I wonder if there will be a passenger-oriented aircraft/airline ever again. I mean like pan am. It’s simply not viable, I’m afraid. Lots of people would say they prefer it over a cramped jet but I wonder how many would actually fly it if tickets were like 30-40% more expensive. Suddenly for most people the discomfort is not THAT valuably when comparing prices I assume.
@@slennie lack of legroom? Why would there be a lack of legroom?
I don’t understand why people think that flying long haul on a narrow body means you get the same seats as on short haul flights.
I recently flew on JetBlue from Europe to New York. I flew on their Business class. I’ve flown business class on most major airlines and the JetBlue was in the top 5 for me.
And when I took a look in economy, the seats looked comfy with good legroom.
I was on a 787-9 owned by British Airways on a London-Japan flight and it was straight-up the worst long haul flight I've evern been on since a Boeing 747 flight London to NZ via Singaport (Air New Zealand) around 1990 - that's nearly 35 years of multiple annual long haul. Cheap and nasty trim that rattled, terrible hard seats, stupid toilet placement (one broke down making life very difficult indeed) - and this was premium economy.. I'd have slit my wrists if I was back in coach. My favourite remains the Singapore Airlines A380. That's how it should be done. (BTW Boeing in general I have tried to avoid for a while now and do 100% since that Japan flight. It was really hard to find a route from London to Cleveland recently that avoided the current iteration 737).
How to avoid one of the most popular aircraft :((
The Airbus A330NEO is a much better aircraft than the B787
Bullshit..787 Qantas is flying London-Perth nonstop. A 330 Neo is an outdated design
@barracuda7018 so what your point?
two of them are excellent. but 787 has better technology and can go further
😂.. No, it isn’t..
Oh so 787 is a shit? Do you even know the 787? The 787 is extremely good aircraft that its very fuel efficient, good for airlines and has no trouble with construction at all and so many airlines ordered the 787
Since Boeing doesn't manufacture much of the 787, their profit is probably low. They do put the aircraft together from foreign-made components. And they designed it. So, it gets the Boeing name. The modernization of their own 767 might be a better bet for their continued prosperity than to use the 787 to replace aging 767s. Can they make new 767s that are more affordable to operate? That is the question- along with "to be or not to be."
I can understand this from the perspective of the airlines. But what about the customer? I would not want to take a longhaul flight in a single-aisle aircraft, even in Business Class. And that's especially true when there is competition from other carriers who offer widebodies on the same routes. I always choose the A380 as my default on longhaul routes and would even prefer a stopover (in DXB or wherever) to make this happen. And in Asia where I live, the quality carriers even offer widebody services on short regional flights with full Business Class flat beds and suites. IMHO this strategy will meet large customer resistance for other than LCCs.
Each one has its passenger segment. Many love the A3 21 XLR and feel good with it, meanwhile, others are in contrast. So, airlines prioritize their benefit first.
There is no difference in seats and seat space between a narrow body and wide body on long flights.
Not enough information given early enough in the video for the viewer to appreciate the difference between the 787 Dash 8, Dash 9 and Dash 10. A layman's attitude to Boeing's problem is simply that it could now concentrate on the latter two versions. Also there was no mention of the lithium batteries catching fire, a slight enigma which I imagine has now ben solved.
Fan less engine architecture? You mean bleed less….price is the main problem, almost half the price for a 321XLR
Boeing 787-9 got some sale last months …. So airlines are buying them ….
The Airbus A330neo-800 is a better jet then the Boeing 787-8 !!
Yep, maybe.
No it is not.. clean-sheet 787 vs. re-engined old design A330 NEO
@@ACPilot Maybe hes referring to the passenger experience, the A330NEO is much nicer flight than the 787 from an economy passenger perspective.
Not many have been sold so far.
@@julesschollum5641 Not what he is writing. 787 uses bleed-less cabin air system, and is much better than the A33NEO in all aspects..
When Boeing moved 787 production to east coast and assembled by unskilled labor….you know Boeing sr. management care less of its passenger’s lives over profit.
You're right
At 74 years of age and a frequent flyer the 787 is the most comfortable and pleasant aircraft I have ever flown on period!
Great! Thanks for your sharing
I take it you have also flown on the Airbus 380
There's your answer right there. Earmark all 787 flights for older folks. Extra toilets, extra pillows and soft foods. By the way, I am 84.
As of july 2024, Boeing still has 790 orders on the 787, yet to be built and delivered.
Was on 787-8 yesterday
Was it good?
Believe it or not almost every day at some point in time I randomy start thinking about 777x and worrying if it's gonna receive enough orders, good enough to compete in the market and the funniest part is I literally live in Russia, where everything is sanctioned and will be so for decades to come(not saying it's undeserved) so I'll likely never see the 777-9, the only chance is Emirates. But if something goes wrong....747 Max is actually their last hope like i'm not even trying to be dramatic
You may not be trying to be dramatic. But it appears that you do need a bit more meaning in your life. Is there a park or open space nearby where you can go to breathe in a taste of nature?
BOEING 787 is in big trouble and no one bought it ? I think because of every airlines prefer to AIRBUS A350 over the BOEING 787 for the future of the long haul flight route. Just like QANTAS that use AIRBUS A350-1000 ulr for the long haul flight route from Australia to UK and USA over the BOEING 787 for the nonstop flight from Sydney to London. Even Garuda Indonesia for the future of the long haul flight route including European route, African route, South/North American route Oceanian route (Australia and New Zealand) and other Asian route for International route also Umroh and Hajj route to replacing all of the BOEING 777 if it is get crisis forever year on this 2024 until the next year later on 2045 during Indonesia become the world's most developed country ever for the future. So that's why every airlines prefer to AIRBUS A350 than BOEING 787 just like KLM, Delta Airlines and QANTAS that will use AIRBUS A350 for the future. For make this airlines become so profit than before.
Hong Kong Airlines is looking to purchase up to 3 Boeing 787 aircraft. The purchase would be for its long haul flight to North America starting as early as next year. With that be said, They aren't going to purchase them straight from Boeing do to the extremely long wait times so instead Hong Kong Airlines said they will purchase the 787 aircraft second hand from other sources.
But in my opinion just like that, I choose on AIRBUS A350 over the BOEING 787 @@Deepblue744 ! Just like KLM, Delta Airlines and QANTAS that will use AIRBUS A350 for the future of long haul flight route over the BOEING 787 if it is get crisis forever year on this 2024 as I'm afraid of.
Is it possible that you are over thinking this whole thing a bit?
Not at all@@roberthenry9319!
“ why nobody buys it” because of poor workmanship.!!
You're right! :)
Bring back 757
Too bad am fan of dream liner
Most airline passengers don't have a clue what aircraft they are flying on, or even regnise there are single aisle and twin aisle planes operating the same route. What they do know is that the legroom and seat comfort is inadequate and that there is a queue for the loo. Only enthusiasts know the difference between Airbus and Boeing options. More concentration on the things that actually matter would be helpful when discussing aircraft models. Seat pitch matters most and it tends to be too small in economy on all aircraft. Height does not equal wealth for many. Increasing seat pitch can also lead to faster evacuation in an emergency.
oheloo
If it's Boeing I ain't going!
Airline management is nuts if it buys Boeing.
I worked some american elecronic company we design manufacturing for Boeing civil and Lockheed military aircraft avionics electronic systems. Most advanced is Lockheed then Boeing is next civilian planes
Great infor!
Why is it called Dreamliner ? I wonder who came up with such a silly name for an aeroplane ? Could it be the CEO who has just been fired ?
They were going to call it something else. But they made a poll on twitter I think and it had multiple names to call the plane dreamliner won.
航空会社にとっては経済的で採算性の高い航空機を好むだろうが、一乗客の立場で考えるとナローボディ機で長時間の飛行はとても不便に感じる。
You're right. Many still love to fly on Dreamliner
Completely wrong about the narrow body range. 321XLR has barely 4400 mile range with a limited seating capacity of about 155-160.
In Farnborough Boeing has bested Airbus 😂😂😂😂
the flying quality cannot be compared to 320 Neo 787 is more comfortable and ambience is better. I would prefer to buy ticket for 787-8 than 320 Neo if the options are like that
Good luck with that!
Ya.... A320 Neo and 787 are two different clasess of aircraft all together. The comparison does not make sense respectively
A320neo/XLR with 18” seat width, 6 abreast is much better junk 787 with narrower seat width less than 18”, mostly cramped cabin 787 worldwide using 9 abreast config that I will avoid at all costs, second I hates the dimming windows can override by flight attendant that you cannot control by your self, some times I will anger to brake the windows dimmer button on lousy 787. 👎🏻👎🏻
I wish Philippine Airlines will order 787-9s with GENx engines for fuel efficiency and reliability - 787s cockpit rating is similiar to the 777
Booo Hoooo! Boeing! 😂
If it's Boeing, I'm not flying
Very confusing and poorly designed documentary. I got completely lost among the different models and their advantages/disadvantages relative to each other. A much better strategy would have been to tabulate ALL the Airbus AND Boeing models on the same table, and to then rank them with respect to a given feature (such as range, or passenger miles per gallon or aquisition & running costs. Down voted for being a confusing waste of viewing time.
many thanks for your feedback
Delta does not have 787. Very weak video lots of faults
correct, and Icelandair does not either
Boeing can't even get a paper airplane certified! Give it up, Boeing! Stop your murderous ways.
:(
Ah. Another comment on Boeing from @dewyakana. This comment is angry, juvenile, nonsensical and dumb as a rock. So, we learn more about @dewyakana.
😂
Hong Kong Airlines is looking to purchase up to 3 Boeing 787 aircraft. The purchase would be for its long haul flight to North America starting as early as next year. With that be said, they aren't going to purchase them straight from Boeing themselves do to the extremely long wait times so instead Hong Kong Airlines said they will purchase the 787 aircraft second hand elsewhere from other sources.
Thanks for your information!
Does anyone have flown on A321 Neo long haul. I did and never again so uncomfortable. I rather switch carrier than be on an A321 Neo for long flights. Frequent fliers do not like the A321 neo on long flights either this is why the Delta isn’t ordering the A321LXR.
Lol and what do they buy instead? Boeing? Comedy now.
B787 is all electrical electronic system with advanced engines not like airbus hydrolic old system s old electronic system s. B787 is first fully electric no hydrolic lithium baterries advanced backup systems
Thanks for your feedback
Didn't make it to 3 mins with this AI drivel. Thumbs down!
Thanks for your feedback!
The main solution to all aviation problems is cheaper jet fuel. Governments have to fight the crude oil suppliers for cheaper prices. Somehow they are not concerned about this.
Price of jet fuel July 2024: $ 2.39/gallon....How much cheaper do you want it?
Btw NO TAX on commercial aviation fuels...
More or less then the Airbus A-350.....😂😂😂😂😂
Lol
does not know what he is talking about
Talking BS again....
So nearly 2000 orders isn't good enough for you..
Hey bot man.
You do realize the 787 has outsold the A350/A330 neo combined...!!!
Clickbait intro as usual...
Notice how he won't compare it to the trashy A330 neo ..rips into the 787 instead..
Thanks for your feedback. I said 787-8, the smallest variant. And nearly 2000 orders are total orders of all variants.
The 787 was 4 years earlier on the marked, so combined order 350/330 NEO of ca 1600 A/C is great!
Never again this flying sardine can A320/A321 with its garden chairs. Not even on short routes. In contrast, Vienna - Tokyo with ANA 787/9 in premium economy was a real pleasure.
Great!
Seats are a choice by airlines. The seats will likely be the same as on wide body aircraft
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183
The same seats in aircraft, like for example in the AUA A320 with its gardenseats. Thanks a lot. It seams you did not often fly with good airlines.
@@alfredturnowsky2546 you missed my point. Most airlines who will use the XLR on long haul flights, will have seats fitted n them for long trips. You can’t compare those seats with short haul flights.
The A321, with 3 and 3 layout in economy, will have wider seats than the 787 in a 9 seat layout per row.
In business class, you will have 2 seats per row, 1 on each side of the isle, whereas a wide body will have 2 seats in the middle as well. Seats are the same, just less seats.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183
ANA 787/9 wide body has 2+3+2 in Premium economy!
airbus cryfans without aviation knowledge
Do you work in the aerospace industry? You should get your facts straight
Long winded narrative, repetitive 🥱