I'm the guy in this video driving the tanker spraying the protein foam and water for the brake tests. I was a firefighter at Edward's AFB, I remember these tests well.
I watched this in the UK in 1994 on Channel 4 as a kid. Several years later I graduated and became an Aerospace Engineer (missed the dream of becoming a pilot, partly inspired by this documentary)....
Thank you for making this series available, especially to those of us outside the US. A long time ago I was the delegated device-physics modelling person for a team of microwave prototype circuit designers. The flavour of the meetings, the endless heartburn over deadlines, it all returned watching this - alongside the thrill of when things come together. Luckily I had very llittle of the personal stress that the engineers had to contend with; but, as their minutes-taker at meetings, I couldn't help being awed by their performance under pressure. I agree with Feynman: more theorists should get to see how people in the world of real technology handle things.
Those were the days. One of the British brake engineers was spot on : everyone (Boeing and suppliers) need to establish trust and work as a team, putting aside contractual limitations. That's what is missing at Boeing today.
I enjoyed every episode of this inspiring documentary. It's people and companies featured here that make the world a great place and time in which to live.
‘I think there are beautiful butterflies in all of us.’ -Alan, 1994, the Tao of Mulally. Too bad he wasn’t put in charge of Boeing in the mid 2000s, maybe that would make the 787 and 737 max programs work out better? 🤷
The 777 is one of my most popular favorite aircraft to fly in. The engine cowling is so very big! I have flew over 2 months time of my life on this aircraft in total! I love this aircraft!
Wonder if Alan's view on the entertainment system has changed in the 24 years since this was filmed, seeing now in-flight entertainment has really blown up 20 fold
That is absolutely awesome airliner! I absolutely enjoy flying on the triple 7's Boeing 777. I flew on one of her many siblings and family members in reference to these wonderful powered birds! I flew on the Delta Flight 7 or 8 depending on flying towards or from the middle east from ATL Alanta, Georgia to DXB Dubai, UAE! when I deployed overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sure I like the new ones like Airbus A-380 and Boeing B-787, but the B777 is my favorite! Congratulations to everyone who was part of this program!
Anybody know why only the rudder is painted on the plane at 22:05? I also noticed in the plane painting videos the rudder is treated in a different manner.
In order for the rudder to be "hung" it has to be perfectly balanced. The weight of the paint must be taken into account when doing this. Thus the painted rudder.
had the pleasure of flying a British 777 JFK to LHR and back (got bumped to business class on the return) Sweet, sweet ride, 2nd only to the Queen of the skies herself....the 747
It's so sad to watch this 30 years later and see how they went from first flight to entry into service in about a year, knowing that the 777X performed its first flight almost five years ago and is still two or three years from entering service. Boeing has fallen so far.
Most jey airliners today have had their wings modified by the addition of 'Winglets' at the end of the wings. Has the Boeing 777 got different aerodynamics where it will not be beneficial to have 'winglets'?
Newer 777LRs and ERs are equipped with raked wingtip, which are works something like a winglets but better. All new Boeing jets like the 747-8 and 787 are designed with it rather than the conventional winglets...
The 737 and 747-400 have winglets. Other Boeing planes have the raked wingtip, which was found to be better than a winglet, by Boeing and NASA. The newer planes have a more swept (rounded) raked wingtip.
Nigel Curling I found an article interesting article about this: "Raked wingtips vs Winglets There are four aircraft that use raked wing tips: The Boeing 767-400, 777, 747-800, and the 787. There is one thing all these aircraft have in common: They are ultra-long range (6500 nautical miles plus). Raked wing tips are more efficient in ULTRA LONG cruise segments. Whereas other wingtip treatments like winglets are more efficient in climb. Winglets do reduce drag, but they actually generate a bit of lift due to the way in which wingtip vortices strike the leading edges of the winglet...but that only happens to a significant degree when the wing is at higher angles of attack....like in climb configurations. Aircraft with winglets are shorter range...like the 737. It makes more sense and saves more fuel to optimize the climb and approach segments than it does to try to optimize the cruise phase of the flight. That might seem counter-intuitive, but Boeing engineers proved the math. Raked wingtips on the other hand don't generate lift...what they do is reduce drag in a special way...by redirecting wingtip drag (vortices) farther outboard and aft of the rest of the wing... and it also redistributes the lift across the entire wing (called wing loading). The result is that they work in ultra long cruise segments. They don't depend on wing angle of attack, and they reduce fuel consumption when engine power is already set to cruise. Short answer is winglets and raked tips both reduce drag and extend the range of an aircraft. But they do it in different ways...and which way is best depends mostly as a function of cruise flight time." Source: facebook.com/atpltheory/posts/486422511385684 Also the new 737 MAX will utilize Split Scimitar Winglets, which is a combination of Winglets and Raked Wingtips
+jetenginestar I flew on a 3 month old 737-900 almost 2 months ago and it had a funky split winglet, like a much bigger version of what's on the A320. I thought I was getting into a new 757 at first because it's so extended.
As far as I know it had lithium ion batteries And they never burst into flames if not over charged or loaded. So they put batteries that were just good enough for the job barely and they fixed the problem by just installing a smoke vent in the compartment containing the batteries, since the 787 has two, one in the front and one in the rear and too my knowledge didnt change to bigger batteries yet, so the engineers made many elementary mistakes probably because of cost and that's why they just put a vent there because incidents still happen its just unnoticeable now.
Airbus did not pioneer fly by wire. NASA pioneered the technology on the Apollo Lunar Landing Training Vehicle(LLTV) and was subsequently used on U.S. military aircraft. I believe the narrator was trying to convey that Airbus pioneered the technology within commercial aviation.
Soviets had fly by wire aircraft in the air by early 60s. Everyone in aviation world knew that this was next thing in aircraft development by late 50s, only electronics and computers would have to become mature enough to trust passenger lives with it.
Boeing was a different company by the time the 787 project was taken up. It was a company with a greedy executive board who had eyes on wall street as opposed to the product that they were making. No wonder there were super long delays, critical quality issues and in the end a failure. It was a shameful period for Boeing as a company.
He seems like the kind of guy where you can just tell he's a real truly great pilot. No question. If I knew he was at the helm of any flight I was on I'd feel very comfortable.
aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/19329/why-dont-the-landing-gear-go-up-on-a-first-flight-of-a-new-airplane From memory, I heard on the first test flight they don't retract the landing gear. I have enclosed a link of people discussing this. I am not a pilot or engineer, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
The most prominent question that runs through my head with 777 program is its comparison to the 787 Dreamliner program. Is the 787 that much better of an aircraft than the 777 ?
It isn't. The 787 has so many problems, some have been fixed but some cannot be just because of the nature of the aircraft. The 787 is just supposed to be a sized down and more luxurious airliner. They've got lots of ground to cover before it become comparable to the 777. Although I know you didn't say this, the truth is that the 787 will never be as good as the 777.
Dylan Defalco for the record, you can't say the 787 has so many problems. as of right now the 787 has almost 100 aircraft in service with multiple airlines, the aircraft has been in commercial service for less than 3 years, this is called teething for an aircraft and fixes are always in development. The 777 is a magnificent aircraft, with over 1100 in service currently and in that time there has only been 4 hull losses, the 777 is by far but debate is still possible, the safest commercial jet in service. The two aircraft are entirely different, different markets and different capabilities, with a difference in service of over 15 years ofcourse the 777 is going to be better tested and more dependable but there is nothing wrong with the 787 and within the next few years, more 787's in service and it's history will disappear. As said at the start, the media dramatises every little problem, trust the 787 it is the future and so is the 777, i'm very proud of both aircraft and would be happy to use both.
I am aware that an aircraft is not perfect from the moment it rolls off the factory floor, this is definitely something to expect and understanding that "teething" must take place is a no-brainer. From memory, the aircraft has had: four fuel leaks, one large panel falling off and, of course, a whole mess of battery fires. The 787 is the first airplane to have had the ENTIRE fleet grounded since the DC-10 in 1979... 34 years. As for the category of the aircraft, I never said that the 787 is supposed to replace the 777 (And I'm not saying you did) although this shouldn't have much of an effect on the comparison, I'm talking about safety and reliability, not how many passengers you can load or how far you can go. My point is, the 787 has had a shit first few years and definitely more problems than most jets. I'm not about to bet on the safety of an aircraft that the ground handlers are terrified of bumping with the jet bridge because they've been briefed on how careful you have to be with composites.
Qpilot625 Don't know what the consensus is but I know of a couple of United pilots. Fly Chicago to Hong Kong, SF to Hong Kong. They said they didn't like it. It doesn't have a good flying feeling. But then most of their flying was done on the 747, and they said, nothing, absolutely nothing can compare to the feel of the 747.
It really is a cool airplane, but do they have to clap for everything? I mean it's like every time a person at Taco Bell puts cheese on a Taco the whole store erupts in clapping for the success.
Boeing fucked up.. 2024 it just continues to get worse even after 380 sum people die in the 737-8max.. incidents just continue to happen. Production issues. Management moving a billion miles away from production. They need to go back to times like this, in the 90s. This was the height of Boeing
Goddamnit why do documentaries so often focus on the people. With all due respect but I couldn't care less about the drama of the people who built it, I want to see the 777 itself!!
Uhm, because it is a documentary about building the aircraft. It didn't build itself. Go find a montage of aircraft pictures (or a cartoon) if you find the grown up documentary too taxing for your attention span.
No, I watch intelligent programming (which this documentary is). I don't need pictures to keep me entertained. I also don't consider intelligent discussion between, or by engineers "human drama." Like I said before, if this program is too taxing for you, go put on teletoon, or find a colouring book.
I'm the guy in this video driving the tanker spraying the protein foam and water for the brake tests. I was a firefighter at Edward's AFB, I remember these tests well.
really? no wayy man wow how old were you?>
@@Eugenepanels I'm 62 now so I was probably in my early forties.
impressive stache
@@3x3-x3x-oXo indeed. Impressive ‘tache/glasses combo
Its beacause of people like you we fly in safe hands today.
I watched this in the UK in 1994 on Channel 4 as a kid. Several years later I graduated and became an Aerospace Engineer (missed the dream of becoming a pilot, partly inspired by this documentary)....
Alan Mullaly's expressions are priceless.. He had the absolute proud father look when the 777 took off
whats better is he went from building planes to building cars
Yes.. He was rumoured to be considered for the Secretary of State job in the Trump Administration
That's Alfred Haynes at 24:50 of United flight 232 fame.
My husband and I flew from St Louis to Frankfurt, Germany on a 777 in October, 1996. It was a great flight! I'm glad I happened upon this documentary.
I really miss seeing Alan at Ford, it was like losing a good friend when he stepped down. Such an incredible leader.
Thank you for making this series available, especially to those of us outside the US. A long time ago I was the delegated device-physics modelling person for a team of microwave prototype circuit designers. The flavour of the meetings, the endless heartburn over deadlines, it all returned watching this - alongside the thrill of when things come together. Luckily I had very llittle of the personal stress that the engineers had to contend with; but, as their minutes-taker at meetings, I couldn't help being awed by their performance under pressure. I agree with Feynman: more theorists should get to see how people in the world of real technology handle things.
Those were the days. One of the British brake engineers was spot on : everyone (Boeing and suppliers) need to establish trust and work as a team, putting aside contractual limitations. That's what is missing at Boeing today.
I enjoyed every episode of this inspiring documentary. It's people and companies featured here that make the world a great place and time in which to live.
‘I think there are beautiful butterflies in all of us.’ -Alan, 1994, the Tao of Mulally.
Too bad he wasn’t put in charge of Boeing in the mid 2000s, maybe that would make the 787 and 737 max programs work out better? 🤷
He is definitely a brilliant guy.
The 777 is one of my most popular favorite aircraft to fly in. The engine cowling is so very big! I have flew over 2 months time of my life on this aircraft in total! I love this aircraft!
After all these years, I still come back to this series for the complex and beautiful ending music.
Wonder if Alan's view on the entertainment system has changed in the 24 years since this was filmed, seeing now in-flight entertainment has really blown up 20 fold
American Made! Feeling Damn Proud!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Congrats 777
It's not American, the 777 is French
Great series. Thanks for sharing.
Very smooth landing particularly taking in to account that this was his and the first ever real landing of a 777!
I wish I could be apart of something like that
Why not?
That is absolutely awesome airliner! I absolutely enjoy flying on the triple 7's Boeing 777. I flew on one of her many siblings and family members in reference to these wonderful powered birds! I flew on the Delta Flight 7 or 8 depending on flying towards or from the middle east from ATL Alanta, Georgia to DXB Dubai, UAE! when I deployed overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sure I like the new ones like Airbus A-380 and Boeing B-787, but the B777 is my favorite! Congratulations to everyone who was part of this program!
top notch series,
whats the music score for this episode
20:52 imagine that popping up on your IFE
People looked so happy men and women united we got to get back to.
Anybody know why only the rudder is painted on the plane at 22:05? I also noticed in the plane painting videos the rudder is treated in a different manner.
In order for the rudder to be "hung" it has to be perfectly balanced. The weight of the paint must be taken into account when doing this. Thus the painted rudder.
It's made of different material.
Therefore diff under lay before paint.
lol..
No.
had the pleasure of flying a British 777 JFK to LHR and back (got bumped to business class on the return) Sweet, sweet ride, 2nd only to the Queen of the skies herself....the 747
Such a nice looking airplane.
Really fascinating tech, at that era .
Blowing it out of proportion and misinterpret is what the press does. It's who they are.
3:17 Flight deck door.....closed and locked!
Yeah I had to pause and watch that again hahah amazing, what a different time it was
It's so sad to watch this 30 years later and see how they went from first flight to entry into service in about a year, knowing that the 777X performed its first flight almost five years ago and is still two or three years from entering service. Boeing has fallen so far.
Most jey airliners today have had their wings modified by the addition of 'Winglets' at the end of the wings. Has the Boeing 777 got different aerodynamics where it will not be beneficial to have 'winglets'?
Newer 777LRs and ERs are equipped with raked wingtip, which are works something like a winglets but better. All new Boeing jets like the 747-8 and 787 are designed with it rather than the conventional winglets...
The 737 and 747-400 have winglets. Other Boeing planes have the raked wingtip, which was found to be better than a winglet, by Boeing and NASA. The newer planes have a more swept (rounded) raked wingtip.
the newest 777X has raked wingtips that fold up for taxi. pretty cool stuff! makes the wingspan absolutely massive.
Nigel Curling I found an article interesting article about this:
"Raked wingtips vs Winglets
There are four aircraft that use raked wing tips: The Boeing 767-400, 777, 747-800, and the 787. There is one thing all these aircraft have in common: They are ultra-long range (6500 nautical miles plus).
Raked wing tips are more efficient in ULTRA LONG cruise segments. Whereas other wingtip treatments like winglets are more efficient in climb. Winglets do reduce drag, but they actually generate a bit of lift due to the way in which wingtip vortices strike the leading edges of the winglet...but that only happens to a significant degree when the wing is at higher angles of attack....like in climb configurations. Aircraft with winglets are shorter range...like the 737. It makes more sense and saves more fuel to optimize the climb and approach segments than it does to try to optimize the cruise phase of the flight. That might seem counter-intuitive, but Boeing engineers proved the math.
Raked wingtips on the other hand don't generate lift...what they do is reduce drag in a special way...by redirecting wingtip drag (vortices) farther outboard and aft of the rest of the wing... and it also redistributes the lift across the entire wing (called wing loading). The result is that they work in ultra long cruise segments. They don't depend on wing angle of attack, and they reduce fuel consumption when engine power is already set to cruise.
Short answer is winglets and raked tips both reduce drag and extend the range of an aircraft. But they do it in different ways...and which way is best depends mostly as a function of cruise flight time."
Source: facebook.com/atpltheory/posts/486422511385684
Also the new 737 MAX will utilize Split Scimitar Winglets, which is a combination of Winglets and Raked Wingtips
+jetenginestar I flew on a 3 month old 737-900 almost 2 months ago and it had a funky split winglet, like a much bigger version of what's on the A320. I thought I was getting into a new 757 at first because it's so extended.
what about when the 787 was grounded because of a fire caused by faulty batteries in the rear of the aircraft
As far as I know it had lithium ion batteries And they never burst into flames if not over charged or loaded. So they put batteries that were just good enough for the job barely and they fixed the problem by just installing a smoke vent in the compartment containing the batteries, since the 787 has two, one in the front and one in the rear and too my knowledge didnt change to bigger batteries yet, so the engineers made many elementary mistakes probably because of cost and that's why they just put a vent there because incidents still happen its just unnoticeable now.
Well, this is a documentary about the 777. There is other media that talks about the production nightmare of the 787.
They fixed it.
Seems to be working eh.
the rollout is usually done on a completed aircraft and first delivery was three years late
Always a complainer in the bunch.
Impressive. I like this plane...
Airbus did not pioneer fly by wire. NASA pioneered the technology on the Apollo Lunar Landing Training Vehicle(LLTV) and was subsequently used on U.S. military aircraft. I believe the narrator was trying to convey that Airbus pioneered the technology within commercial aviation.
Soviets had fly by wire aircraft in the air by early 60s. Everyone in aviation world knew that this was next thing in aircraft development by late 50s, only electronics and computers would have to become mature enough to trust passenger lives with it.
the rollout of the 787 was a joke
the plane was a empty shell
The 747 couldnt even fly at the time of its rollout
Boeing was a different company by the time the 787 project was taken up. It was a company with a greedy executive board who had eyes on wall street as opposed to the product that they were making. No wonder there were super long delays, critical quality issues and in the end a failure. It was a shameful period for Boeing as a company.
787 is a failure?
Hmm.
Lotsa people would disagree with that one.
@@alhanes5803 Sure as hell needs better quality control
LOVELY ! : )
Love the test pilot
He seems like the kind of guy where you can just tell he's a real truly great pilot. No question. If I knew he was at the helm of any flight I was on I'd feel very comfortable.
Yes, John is class act!
Who makes the tires for the 777?????
Goodyear.
30 years ago
14:48, something for the press :)
The launch-customer / design episode
The collaborate-to-build episode
The engines episode
The first-flight-to-VMU episode
The ETOPS episode
This is quite apparently correct.
CEO at the time didn't believe in keeping secrets? Not the new CEO people get silenced who don't keep secrets.
Don't care what anybody says I prefer to fly over the oceans with 4 engines
I agree completely.
...American engineering.....best in the world!
*laughs in BMW*
Micheal Beers definitely not never will be please tell me of a American car that beat British or German car even some Japanese
Jan Grebe lol we are talking about planes
Not these days
did they actually do all the test on the first flight?? balls.
noo they did not
Is it me or did they say Derp at 49:00
I berped.
Sorry.....
Is it just me, or did they forget to raise the landing gear?
aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/19329/why-dont-the-landing-gear-go-up-on-a-first-flight-of-a-new-airplane
From memory, I heard on the first test flight they don't retract the landing gear. I have enclosed a link of people discussing this. I am not a pilot or engineer, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
The most prominent question that runs through my head with 777 program is its comparison to the 787 Dreamliner program. Is the 787 that much better of an aircraft than the 777 ?
It isn't. The 787 has so many problems, some have been fixed but some cannot be just because of the nature of the aircraft. The 787 is just supposed to be a sized down and more luxurious airliner. They've got lots of ground to cover before it become comparable to the 777.
Although I know you didn't say this, the truth is that the 787 will never be as good as the 777.
NO
Dylan Defalco for the record, you can't say the 787 has so many problems. as of right now the 787 has almost 100 aircraft in service with multiple airlines, the aircraft has been in commercial service for less than 3 years, this is called teething for an aircraft and fixes are always in development. The 777 is a magnificent aircraft, with over 1100 in service currently and in that time there has only been 4 hull losses, the 777 is by far but debate is still possible, the safest commercial jet in service. The two aircraft are entirely different, different markets and different capabilities, with a difference in service of over 15 years ofcourse the 777 is going to be better tested and more dependable but there is nothing wrong with the 787 and within the next few years, more 787's in service and it's history will disappear. As said at the start, the media dramatises every little problem, trust the 787 it is the future and so is the 777, i'm very proud of both aircraft and would be happy to use both.
I am aware that an aircraft is not perfect from the moment it rolls off the factory floor, this is definitely something to expect and understanding that "teething" must take place is a no-brainer.
From memory, the aircraft has had: four fuel leaks, one large panel falling off and, of course, a whole mess of battery fires. The 787 is the first airplane to have had the ENTIRE fleet grounded since the DC-10 in 1979... 34 years.
As for the category of the aircraft, I never said that the 787 is supposed to replace the 777 (And I'm not saying you did) although this shouldn't have much of an effect on the comparison, I'm talking about safety and reliability, not how many passengers you can load or how far you can go.
My point is, the 787 has had a shit first few years and definitely more problems than most jets. I'm not about to bet on the safety of an aircraft that the ground handlers are terrified of bumping with the jet bridge because they've been briefed on how careful you have to be with composites.
Qpilot625
Don't know what the consensus is but I know of a couple of United pilots. Fly Chicago to Hong Kong, SF to Hong Kong. They said they didn't like it. It doesn't have a good flying feeling. But then most of their flying was done on the 747, and they said, nothing, absolutely nothing can compare to the feel of the 747.
It really is a cool airplane, but do they have to clap for everything? I mean it's like every time a person at Taco Bell puts cheese on a Taco the whole store erupts in clapping for the success.
Big difference between making a $1.59 taco and a 250 million dollar aircraft.
Boeing fucked up.. 2024 it just continues to get worse even after 380 sum people die in the 737-8max.. incidents just continue to happen. Production issues. Management moving a billion miles away from production. They need to go back to times like this, in the 90s. This was the height of Boeing
I would have to say the pilots had the most at stake.. for obvious reasons
"Being English makes it sounds more intelligent"?
Mile high Overconfidence.
Great documentation - however - the music is so shitty that I wish it could be turned off.. :-(
+Morten Reitoft Oh c'mon, it's not that bad.
Actually come back to this video for the music. It's nearly as complex as the aircraft.
Great video...! Thank U Shareoldvideos for downloaded. I am feelling very proud to be human. We are son of GOD! Amazing...
JUST PLANE COOL !
People in the 90s had big teeth lol
Big balls too.
Lukas Smith 🍳
Goddamnit why do documentaries so often focus on the people. With all due respect but I couldn't care less about the drama of the people who built it, I want to see the 777 itself!!
Uhm, because it is a documentary about building the aircraft. It didn't build itself. Go find a montage of aircraft pictures (or a cartoon) if you find the grown up documentary too taxing for your attention span.
Sir S-Spec
Alternatively, if you're so interested in human drama instead of engineering solutions, maybe reality-TV fits your desires better.
No, I watch intelligent programming (which this documentary is). I don't need pictures to keep me entertained.
I also don't consider intelligent discussion between, or by engineers "human drama."
Like I said before, if this program is too taxing for you, go put on teletoon, or find a colouring book.
That accounts for ONE member of the audience.
Sir S-Spec
Nice straw-man argument there.
Did anyone else think Alan Mulally was on drugs??? BTW He's now on Google's board of directors...
Why did he leave Boeing
Owen Mitchell No
odiesback
Go back and watch it again then, he's fucking stoned....
Owen Mitchell 29:50 "Beautiful butterflies."
+Owen Mitchell Look!!!----------> An Unicorn!
It's very unfortunate that Boeing built the 777.