2:18 You could have added that "But, while A220 series can fly, the 737 Max cannot". Lol Also, team A350 all the way. But we don't have to scream it all the time.
We're so sure of the a350 superiority that we don't even fell the urge to shout to everyone about it. Team a350 all the way, the aircraft is in another level.
Team a350. It’s more capable and viable for the job it’s built for (replacing the 777) than the 787-10 and the 777x is still in the development phase. The 787 was probably built to replace the 767 and the a330 is also built for that job.
The A350 only has (2) variants, yet can both compete with the many variants of the B787 (3) and the B777 (2). If you ask me, that's versatility and competition whilst being cost-effective. Team A350 for sure.
Well, that is what a desperate band-aid does. Boeing built so many kind of planes because they wanna fill specifics sectors of the market. Airbus just wanna, You know, dont die for Boeing and Embraer.
I love the A350-1000! Flew it on Qatar Airways and the hugest thing for me was the air quality. It didn’t feel as dry inside. Plus the interior was so spacious!
Boeing designed the B787 as a B767 replacement and Airbus designed the A350XWB as a B777 replacement. Both aircraft initially proposition has minimal overlaps. However Due to some turns of events and decisions, the B787 which was originally designed for 8 abreast configuration ended up with a majority of 9 abreast economy layout. This indirectly resulted in the B787 stepping into the A350-900 market segment and somewhat competes with it indirectly. As mentioned in the video, The decision to launch the stretch B787-10 was to defend against the A350-900. And the now defunct A350-800 was initially targeted at the B787-9.
I flew numerous times in both 350 & 787 in different airlines. Somehow the general / overall feel for 350 is much more comfortable and roomier. It has to be the seats configuration & interior.
Yep, because the A350 is a wider plane so it would feel roomier. When the 777x comes out it will feel roomier than the A350 because the interior width is 14 inches wider. Seats are all the airlines choice. It has nothing to do with the plane.
@ British Airways is in the process of changing all their business class seats to the new layout on existing planes. Yes, the airlines all have a choice of seat designs they want from 3rd party companies. The leaflets are for what the plane can look like. It's up to the airline for final say.
Well, the 787 is flat out narrower while having (usually) the same number of abreast economy seats. I've rubbed shoulders with people in economy 787s, not a good sign.
A350-900 no doubt!! The best sleep on a flight of my life was on a Latam flight flying one of them. The air was very breathable, it was dead silent, seats comfortable, lighting natural... clear winner for me.
Ata Korkut Fact. I was on Lufthansa’s A350 from ORD-MUC and back and when I got back home it turned to my favorite plane. Still like the 787 and 777 series tho I have never been on any of those yet.
@The Rails Aviation probably built better by workers how u say less coked up and more unionized so u can't shit on their wages to sell million dollar planes to billion dollar companies at a 50% discount
I've flown on the AIr NZ 787-10 and the Cathay A350 and I liked them both. Big windows are nice and the engines are quiet. Not really too much between the two aircraft, to be honest. Both are engineering marvels and a pleasure to fly.
When you realise that the A350 is made to replace the A340 and A380 to compete against to the 777, 777X and 787 I am team A350 too Edit: Thanks for all the likes, never knew this would be one of the top comments
Capacity-wise, the 787-9 better replaces the 767-400ER. However the 767-400ER was more recently produced, right at the turn of the century, so neither Delta nor United need to retire them yet, and will likely replace them (and probably their -300ER variants too) with the future NMA, in whatever form the NMA takes.
@@nntflow7058 Depends on how an airline outfits their 787s. Some 787-8s have a capacity similar to a 767-300ER while others, yes, do have a capacity similar to the -400ER. Boeing largely marketed the -8 as a 767-300ER replacement however.
@@intergalactic_butterfly Let me put it this way: 787-8: Replacement for A330-200s and 767-300ER 787-9: Replacement for the A330-300s and 767-400ER (Even Though Some Airlines (Like American) Use It To Replace The 777-200ER As Well) 787-10: Replacement For The 777-200 (Non-ER Variant (Won't Replace The ER Due To Limited Range)) A350-800 (Non Existent): Replaces the A330-300 and A340-200 (Although the A330-900Neo Takes Over The A350-800's Role) A350-900: Replaces the A340-300 and the 777-200ER A350-1000: Competes With The 777-300ER, 777-8X and 777-9X, and replaces the A340-600
Team 787 here, and it’s not even close. The 787 just looks so futuristic and elegant with its curved wings, engine chevrons, big windows, windscreen and the way it verticals stabilizer is curved rather then being flat. I have an ANA 787-9 1:200 on my work desk, and it always brings a smile to my face when I need a breather.
I think from the outside the 787 looks a bit squat, sitting low to the ground, leaning forward, while the A350 is an overall better proportioned aircraft, without sacrificing the aerodynamic modern look.
I never have. When I was a kid on the farm we used to watch the DC-3s heading north over us to northwestern Western Australia. All that noise and unpressurised - it must have been a uncomfortable journey. The 787 on the other hand is one of the most comfortable planes.
A lot of how you define “comfort” though is up to how the airline furnishes the aircraft and the class of cabin you’re in. Take the economy section of each I’ll compare: Emirates Airlines, their 777’s are definitely more comfortable than Air France’s 777. However I’d prefer the Air France 777 over the Lufthansa A350. (Yes, I have flown all several times and feel qualified to judge.)
@@petergajda3732 Can't speak for him, but for me (holding the same opinion) it was a few things: The A350 cabin feels way nicer than the 777's or 787's cabin; it's ceiling is higher (and the cabin is a bit more roomy in general (especially compared to the 787), the air quality is better (higher pressure and humidity) and it's so much more quiet. The lights are quite nice too, but not really the main selling point. I also dislike the 787's window dimming, since it doesn't really stop all the light from entering and I get headaches from the lighting it generates, but that might just be me personally.
Great video! Just a few points to make: - 787-10 has range 6345nmi, 777-200er 7065 and A350-900 8100nmi - A350 is arguably also reactionary to the hugely popular 777 outselling A340 at the time, and the new 787 - 787-9 is indeed most optimised but -10 is also optimised in seat cost just that it takes a hit in range Thanks for the great video looking forward to more!
In the end, the 787-9 was intended for flying "long, thin" routes on point-to-point services between smaller cities. For example, it allowed Chinese airlines to operate out of airports besides Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou on long-distance routes.
It just proves that the A350 was designed to compete with the 787. The blackout of the cockpit window frames was to hide the A350's old look to the 787's newer look. Also they needed to cut down on development time cause the 787 was ahead in it's progressing to deliveries of the type to airlines.
@@johnhenry6762 absolutely... They were really pressed to make the A350 jet look futuristic.... Its a cool look though because I have always disliked the airbus cockpit window design. I'm sad Boeing didn't try something cool on the 777x though.. Would have been dope.
@@superskullmaster lmao they don’t copy eachother they just use the latest technologies meaning they look similar due to that being a more aerodynamic design
I'm Team Both. I love the because I’ve been on Lufthansa’s A350 from ORD-MUC and back but I still love the 787 as well. Same with the 777 series I just haven’t been on a 787 or 777 yet. But I’ve seen a Thai 777 at Munich. Overall I love all the planes I named in this list.
Wow this is truly the hard one. Last year I flew on Singapore Airlines that took me on both A350-900 and B787-10. Hands down no comparison. B787-10 was a plane in its own. At 6'3" seats are dreadful and the B787-10 was heaven. When I got on the A350-900 it quickly dawn on me the layout was the same as their B777-300er. However, the A350 was quieter and roomier the the older B777. Thumbs up to both planes!
Team 787 came out in force to show their superiority complex. Team A350 don't have to shout about it being the better aircraft, because everyone knows it is.
Great video. Let me tell you what happened since I was on the 787 Design team. At the time, Airbus was trying to compete with Boeing, and we were so far into the design phase, that we were getting ready to do our final layout design. Airbus waited, and I suspected that they did this on purpose to see what our final design was going to look like. Then Airbus decided to do a little bigger on certain aspect. So yeah, the 787 was the first to enter the market, it was the first to gain a lot of orders. We originally had 4 design variants. 787-3, -8,-9 and -10. The -3 was smaller and it was going to have metal wings. The marketing team has found that we would never make money on the -3, so it was scrapped. We started producing the -8. First flight took place December 2009. A350 First flight took place in June 2013. That's nearly 4 years gap. So, it was originally going to be competitors, but Airbus cheated by delaying the project. I was on the program for 7 years. But I can tell you this...787 Dreamliner is way ahead of A350, not by design advantage, but ahead in design knowledge. Boeing is ready for 797 with 787 background.
The B787 was born to replace another Boeing product: B767. The A350 was later born to compite with the B787 and to replace the A330 but Airbus decided to upgrade the last to Neo. Airbus never expected that the life of the A340 will that short same with the A380. Now, the B777X was born to replace the old B777 versions and the B747, but will be the plane to replace also the A340 and A380. At the end, the only wide body planes flying for the following 30+ years will be the B747-8, B787, B777, and the A350.
@@arnulfonapoleonhernandez-g1995 nah man, 787 carries less, less range, and less time capability with 1 engine. Also the most fuel efficient plane for its size. I would like to hear you again
I flew on A350-900on singapore airlines and 787 -10 on anz but I have to say the air quality is more than just talk in the a350 and the cabin was top class! Definately team A350 on this one but I am a great admirirer of boeing too :)
They are competitors in the replacement cycles, 777-200s and even 777-300s will be primarily replaced by these two aircraft. Airbus is marketing the a350-900 against the 787 in the 200 campaigns and Boeing is marketing the 787 against the a350 in 300 campaigns. The a350-900 and the 787-10 are both less optimized than their siblings.
Cabin width; A350; 5.61m 787; 5.49m Cabin length; A350-900; 51m A350-1000; 58m 787-8; 42m 787-9; 48m 787-10; 53m Empty weight A350-900; 135t A350-1000; 155t 787-8; 120t 787-9; 129t 787-10; 135t Surely both type of widebody doesn't compete each other although there's some close number between them 😎🛫👍🏻
The key capacity indicator here is the length of the cabin. Due to some turns of events and decisions, the B787 which was originally designed for 8 abreast configuration ended up with a majority of 9 abreast economy layout. This indirectly resulted in the B787 stepping into the A350-900 market segment and somewhat competes with it indirectly.
787 is my favorite. i flew one to france and back and it was better than any other plane experience i had. it was nice and quiet and did quiet well in the massive amounts of turbulence we had on the trip.
I’ve flown on both planes many times with several different airlines. Dreamliner any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Every time I’ve flown on the A350 I notice a ton of exhaust getting into the cabin when firing up the engines. The 787 is quieter and I love the adjustable tint windows.
I am hands-down a 350 supporter, but I have noticed that kerosene smell on startup, and it is unpleasant. I've also noticed it on the 330's. I believe that the 350 is quieter, though I haven't used a meter on either of them. Those 787 tinted windows? Both good and bad. They won't completely block the sun like the shades, BUT, the FA's are able to override the one idiot on the entire plane that wants to open his shade when everyone else on the aircraft has theirs closed and are trying to sleep.
Personally, its quite hard to choose which aircraft should operate if i have an airline, regardless of cost, given that i do love all four of the twinjet widebody (A330, A350, 777 and 787). But i'll make it short for my personal likes, at least for airliner in the 2020s, regardless of the cost to operate: On narrowbody, the A220 will be the overall workhorse. This operate along with 737ng (-800 and -900er) that delivered in early 2010s, and the A320neo and A321neo. The A330neo have always become one of my favourite aircraft, even all the way to its first Airbus, the A300. This aircraft will do work as the workhorse widebody on mid-to-long haul. Probably replacing the A330ceo. The 777-200, both ER and non-ER, while a lovely aircraft, needed to be replaced as it aged. Not concerning the cost, it would be replaced by the 787-10 and A350-900, for mid-haul and long-haul respectively. In mixture of the A340-600, 777-300 and some 747-400, it will be replaced by 777-300er on earlier retired model, and A350-1000 on later retired model. Last but not the least, the remaining 747-400 will be replaced by the 747-8i. The A380 would be nice, but rather in small quantity in second-hand (and later refurbished) from airline that are having trouble on getting rid of it. Also, the thumbnail looks like an idea for fictional widebody twinjets in games, like GTA.
I have flown both A350 and 787. I think A350 does better than 787. Again this is just my opinion and it could be because one was Egypt Air and the other was Qatar. I think 350 feels bigger, better and more comfortable than 787. Plus I hated that window dimming feature because I felt like I had no control if I want to look outside when feeling claustrophobic. Lastly, I think in coming years, 350 will compete with 777X more than anything else. 787 will be there but will fall out of the competition and let’s see what Airbus has to offer as an alternative.
Sorry, but your analysis is wrong. Aircraft don't compete by size alone; they compete by cost per passenger for the target route. Usually the largest plane you can put on the route has the lowest cost per passenger, but the 787 upended that by using new technologies that substantially reduced the cost per passenger. This is why the original A350 was doomed: it had substantially higher costs per passenger than the 787 without any compensating advantages. Likely the original A350 concept would have gained not a single order. Airbus was under the gun for the A350xwb design, so they didn't have time to build a fully composite jet like the 787. Instead, they had to resort to making the plane larger in order to drive down the per passenger costs to match the 787. The resultant plane competes directly with the 787 on the per passenger measure, and drove 787 orders off a cliff for several years after it was announced. That wouldn't have happened if the planes didn't compete. As for Delta's replacements of older, out of date 777s, the fact that they were replaced by A350s doesn't mean the A350 competes with current 777s. If the A350 hadn't been available, it's likely Delta would have replaced many of them with 787s, the plane the A350 really competes with.
If I were an airline replacing 777-200s I would go for the 787-10 over a350 because then I could have commonality with smaller variants of the 787. These smaller variants would be a lot more useful than a350-1000s. And for where the lower 787-10 range becomes an issue, just use a 787-9 with more frequencies. United, Air New Zealand, and British Airways have all likely ordered the 787-10 for this reason!
@@KasabianFan44 actually marquis is not wrong. In terms of the length of cabin, the A350-900 is right in between the 2 B787 variant. The B787-9 was originally designed for a smaller market, to replace the B767-300ER, but most airlines opted for a higher density layout and that lead it to indirectly compete with the A350-900. The A350-1000 on the other hand was designed to directly replace the B777-300ER. It's has almost the same exact cabin dimensions in terms of length, only few inches different. The only substantial difference between the two is the A350-1000 has 4 doors while the B777-300ER has 5 doors.
Ching Wei Xion “In terms of the length of cabin, the A350-900 is right between the 2 787 variants” - wow, not only is this completely not true at all, but clearly you didn’t pay attention either. This video literally says that the only planes of comparable sizes are the largest 787 (-10) and the smallest A350 (-900). And even then, this video explicitly says that the A350-900 is over 20 seats bigger (NOT smaller!) than the 787. These are facts that you can very easily look up yourself; it will take you about 2 minutes, and you will save yourself the time you’d otherwise spend on pointless arguing. For the last time: there exists NO variant of the A350 that is smaller than any 787. There would have been, had the A350-800 been built as originally planned, but that was cancelled soon after the -900’s first flight.
@@KasabianFan44 I'm sorry to say this but coby has got his fact wrong on this. You can spend 10 mins to compare the dimensions provided on the airport planning and characteristics document available from both airbus and boeing websites. Take the distance from the first door to the last and you will see that what I mentioned was right. With both aircraft having the same seating configuration of 9 abreast in economy and 1-2-1 in business, there is no way the A350-900 can seat more people with the same standard/specification.
Ching Wei Xion Wrong, you say? Considering that on their official websites the companies state that its three-class A350-900 can seat about as many passengers as a two-class (!) 787-10, I’ll have to go with Coby’s word on this. Annoyingly Boeing doesn’t give maximum capacity in its spec but I can assure you it’s nowhere near the 440 mark that Airbus claims for its -900. www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a350xwb-family/a350-900.html#details www.boeing.com/commercial/787/#/technical-specs
@@grahamturner2640 From my quick 60 seconds of research, it doesnt look like there is a truly cargo 787, however Boeing has ones such as the 757, 767, 777, and of course the 747 as all excellent freighters.
Boeing’s philosophy of stretching Engineering to meet Market needs. Maybe you could do a video on this. When I learned that the 737 has the highest landing speed? ,tail strike concerns and generally a more primitive approach than its competitor, I wondered now much of a handicap this is for Boeing.
Boeing 787 and Airbus A350 both are so cool in their on places... Its so difficult to choose one... I will go with the Boeing 787 😊🙏 cuz its name is a Dreamliner and A350 named it XWB (eXtra WideBody) damn both look so beautiful though but again in their own ways... 😅
As your video says, it’s absurd to ask which one I prefer because they are different, it is like asking: which plane you prefer, the a340 or the 767? Makes little sense even though some variant might compete against each other
No matter what, even if Boeing releases new super hot jet, the A350 will always be my favorite. Mainly because Philippines Airlines operates it and I like them.
Zedric Louis Bores Same here. I’ve not flown on the Philippines Airlines version but I have flown in the Qatar Airways 900 and 1000 variants. I also got to fly on the 787, and I can say, I think I prefer the A350. It’s technology is slightly more advanced.
Am a boeing fan and surely like the Dreamliner especially the b787-10 but the a350 family is also cool especially the a350-1000 and also cant wait for the B777x-9 & 8 to enter into service
The 787 is as much a competitor to the a350, as it is a competitor to the 777....and as the a350 is a competitor with the a330...i.e. if you ignore route requirements (i.e. demand, distance, airport size restrictions, etc.), in perfect conditions the 787 competes with the a330neo AND the 777 competes with the a350....when you start adding requirements, you may have cases where a330/787 is a better option than a a350/777.... I cannot really understand where people struggle with this....
Team A350 here. I used to prefer all Boeing. However, after flying on competing Airbus planes, even within the same carrier, I have since shifted to prefer Airbus. They are just much more comfortable as a passenger. Now I actively look for what plane is on a route before booking and will often choose an Airbus option over a Boeing option if there are choices within my timeframe and preferred carriers. To me, the 787 has fantastic marketing, and is a great plane on it's own, but it just doesn't quite measure up to passenger comfort on the A350. I think the marketing is why so many "prefer" the 787. Let's go team A220/A320Neo/A350!
How about this, to compete with the A350-900 for way more range than the 787-10, they should modify the 777-200ER variant with the same engine and wings used in 777x, and create the 777-7x, if they can't come up with the 787-10ER.
I haven't had a chance to fly on either the 787 or the A350 yet, but hopefully we'll be flying again soon and I'll get to. I think the Airbus did a very clever thing switching the A350 from a 787 competitor to a (mainly) 777 competitor. The A330NEO is still somewhat competitive with the 787, and I think there's still scope for at least one more generation of that airframe. However, it was clear that airlines were moving away from 4-engine jets, and the only thing Airbus had that was in the same league as the 777 was the 4-engined A340. Clearly they needed a new aircraft in that sector, and the fact it came out around the time airlines were replacing their 777s (and when Boeing's 777-8 isn't ready) puts the A350 in a very good place. I'd love to experience both the 787 and the A350, but if I had to pick one to experience first, I think I'd have to go with the A350.
I'm mostly an Airbus guy, but I got to say: Since it launched, for me, the 787 Dreamliner is the most beautiful plane ever created. And although the A350 is the pretty boy of Airbus (alongside the acquired A220), they can't match the beauty of the Dreamliner, specially the wings. However, I'm still biased. #TeamA350 FTW!!
With that statement getting you into a tight space, l'll get an original Bell JetRanger 206 (beautiful) helicopter to pull you out of the spot you're in!
Because of the 787-10's shorter range, it's still not direct to the A350-900. You see, before Boeing made the 777-300, 777-200LR, and 777-300ER, Boeing sold 2 versions of the 777: 777-200 and 777-200ER. One example airline that has operated both the 200 and 200ER as well as operating both the 787-10 and A350-900 is Singapore Airlines. Technically, all their 777-200s were the ER versions, but some of their 777-200s had de-rated engines, so some of those 777s were meant for shorter flights. Now, SIA retired both the 777-200ERs and their de-rated counterparts in favor of the 787-10 and A350. The 787-10s replaced the de-rated 777-200s while the A350s replaced the 777-200s that were not de-rated.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is no competition between any one of these two airplanes. They both are equally amazing. There's just simply not one better then the other. They both were great clean sheet designs.
So you talked about variants of the different aircraft family which competes with one another, yet you’re saying that they aren’t competitors. Mind you, the A350-900 might be designed for a different purpose from 787-10, but that doesn’t stop airlines from operating it in the same missions as the 787-10 are. Heck, there’s even an A350-900 Regional which is restricted on paper to allow it to compete with the 787-10 for that exact Regional/Medium haul routes.
Haven’t flown on an A350, as my transatlantic flights have been on A330/A340 or 747 for the last 15 years. I did fly on a 787 once on a short flight from LAX to MEX and found the seats to be cramped and narrow so I am team A350 without even having stepped a foot on it.
I don't think I have a preference anymore. I used to think the a350's snub-nose looked a little awkward, but I'm over it and I think both are absolutely gorgeous airframes. I would love to get a chance to fly on both types, either as a passenger or in the front!!!
Suggestion for future topic: given that B787 and A350 are the newest, most-advanced widebodies, how do they differ / which is better or worse in passenger in-flight experience, irrespective of the furnishings chosen by a specific airline.
A good reference would be Singapore Airlines that have both 787-10 and A350-900 being used for different missions 😀 in fact the 787-10 replaces their A330-300 and 777-200 whereas A350-900 is replacing their 777-200ER and 777-300. They have ordered the 777-9 to replace their A380s and eventually their 777-300ERs.
Hi, Where are you getting the astronomical range figures for these aircraft ? B787-10 has a max range of 6430 Nmi, B777-200ER has a range of 7510 Nmi & the A350-900 has a range of 8100Nmi. Now the A340-500 has a range of 9000Nmi the B777-200R has a range of 8555Nmi and A350-900ULR has a range of 9700 Nmi
How about make the 787-10 a HYBRID aircraft, to use both the jet turbine fuel and electric motors with a battery to turn the engine turbofan, to extend the range
Team 787 for me, the 787 should have some titles, and the titles are: First Airliner to be a Carbon Composite airframe, and last is that it was the first jet to adopt Chevrons on its engine.
Team 787 here (co-pilot), both planes are incredible, but 787 uses substantially less fuel, has more ease in cruising altitudes and we have Cabin air Compressors in stead of Air conditioning packs which are absolutely incredible !
1. I agree that both aircraft are incredible tech marvels. 2. The 787-10 uses about 0.7L/100km less fuel than the A350-900, but, the A350-900 has a 54 ton higher payload capacity or MTOW. Ergo, we can't really compare the fuel efficiency of these aircraft. 3. The Cabin air compressors are a part of every air conditioning system. The a/c system as a whole is called an Air conditioning Pack and a cabin air compressor is a component of it. 4. Please don't take this reply the wrong way. Just a random stranger on the internet spreading some knowledge...hope you point out the same in the future to somebody else...:)
Hi Colby that's another EXCELLENT video - thank you! Wikipedia has a very good page on this general topic which is well worth a read - "Competition between Boeing and Airbus". The articles main point is that GENERALLY speaking the product range of Airbus and Boeing COMPLIMENT each other rather than compete with each other The points that you make in your two videos is consistent with Wikipedias
787 got more votes because of the American fans on this channel who are proudly Boeing lovers no matter. Europeans don’t need to show out for support because they know deep inside Americans prefer European design. I mean Americans would choose Mercedes or BMW over any American car or Chanel and Dior over any American fashion label. When it comes to aviation airbus has caught on and has surpassed Boeing and that’s facts !!!
Coby this should help on the topic "A350 vs B787 Origin". Bear in mind that in time the A350 XWB came out as the A350-900 version after the A350-"800" was rejected by certain interested parties in purchasing the type (-800 version that is) that was AIRBUS's answer to the 787-8, by which time Boeing was introducing the 787-9 and airlines went for it instead of the A350-800 AIRBUS was planning to come out with. "Google" "Why did AIRBUS design the A350 to begin with?" Then scroll down to the page BBC.com BBC News June 14, 2013 A350: THE AIRCRAFT THAT AIRBUS DID NOT WANT TO BUILD. Again the emphasis is the -800 version of the A350 to go against the 787-8! IN THE BEGINNING!!! After, AIRBUS went after the 777 series with the A350-1000 but not before going after the 787-9 with the A350-900XWB.
2:18 You could have added that "But, while A220 series can fly, the 737 Max cannot". Lol
Also, team A350 all the way. But we don't have to scream it all the time.
Yeah, we're the true ones💪🏽
Only the 737 Max 8 is the grounded one, he brought up the max 7, different
We're so sure of the a350 superiority that we don't even fell the urge to shout to everyone about it. Team a350 all the way, the aircraft is in another level.
@@John.0523 all 737 MAX are grounded, as they all share the same systems. Not just the 8.
@@jardarsundeolsen3123 facts
Team A350 over here! Always been an Airbus man myself but have a lot of respect for Boeing (I hope they sort their issues out)
I wish more people were like you.
#TeamAirbusA350
I want to try both A350 & B787 someday
#TeamAirbusA350
@Vesta 2022 sounds great
Team a350. It’s more capable and viable for the job it’s built for (replacing the 777) than the 787-10 and the 777x is still in the development phase. The 787 was probably built to replace the 767 and the a330 is also built for that job.
I love the a350! It is so quiet!! I just remembered it being quiet. 747 I remember being very loud. A330 is also pretty quiet.
The 787 was designed to replace the 767. That is true.
Yep, team a350 I love a350
The A350 only has (2) variants, yet can both compete with the many variants of the B787 (3) and the B777 (2). If you ask me, that's versatility and competition whilst being cost-effective.
Team A350 for sure.
The original B777 has 5 variants
But there all pretty much the same with diff names
Well, that is what a desperate band-aid does.
Boeing built so many kind of planes because they wanna fill specifics sectors of the market.
Airbus just wanna, You know, dont die for Boeing and Embraer.
Team boeing
actually, the A350 has THREE variants. the -900, -1000, and the -800.
@@zedriclouis87 dont forget the A350ULR
I love the A350-1000! Flew it on Qatar Airways and the hugest thing for me was the air quality. It didn’t feel as dry inside. Plus the interior was so spacious!
1000 factorial? That's a massive number. Btw, do you watch twosetviolin? You seem to be a violist.
@@monika.alt197 So defensive He's just telling what he experience in the a350
787 gang
Boeing designed the B787 as a B767 replacement and Airbus designed the A350XWB as a B777 replacement. Both aircraft initially proposition has minimal overlaps.
However Due to some turns of events and decisions, the B787 which was originally designed for 8 abreast configuration ended up with a majority of 9 abreast economy layout. This indirectly resulted in the B787 stepping into the A350-900 market segment and somewhat competes with it indirectly.
As mentioned in the video, The decision to launch the stretch B787-10 was to defend against the A350-900. And the now defunct A350-800 was initially targeted at the B787-9.
I flew numerous times in both 350 & 787 in different airlines. Somehow the general / overall feel for 350 is much more comfortable and roomier. It has to be the seats configuration & interior.
Yep, because the A350 is a wider plane so it would feel roomier. When the 777x comes out it will feel roomier than the A350 because the interior width is 14 inches wider. Seats are all the airlines choice. It has nothing to do with the plane.
@ British Airways is in the process of changing all their business class seats to the new layout on existing planes. Yes, the airlines all have a choice of seat designs they want from 3rd party companies. The leaflets are for what the plane can look like. It's up to the airline for final say.
Well, the 787 is flat out narrower while having (usually) the same number of abreast economy seats. I've rubbed shoulders with people in economy 787s, not a good sign.
A350-900 no doubt!!
The best sleep on a flight of my life was on a Latam flight flying one of them. The air was very breathable, it was dead silent, seats comfortable, lighting natural... clear winner for me.
a350 team way better plane in terms of room comfort quietness
good choice brother
Ata Korkut Fact. I was on Lufthansa’s A350 from ORD-MUC and back and when I got back home it turned to my favorite plane. Still like the 787 and 777 series tho I have never been on any of those yet.
@The Rails Aviation probably built better by workers how u say less coked up and more unionized so u can't shit on their wages to sell million dollar planes to billion dollar companies at a 50% discount
I've flown on the AIr NZ 787-10 and the Cathay A350 and I liked them both. Big windows are nice and the engines are quiet. Not really too much between the two aircraft, to be honest. Both are engineering marvels and a pleasure to fly.
When you realise that the A350 is made to replace the A340 and A380 to compete against to the 777, 777X and 787
I am team A350 too
Edit: Thanks for all the likes, never knew this would be one of the top comments
yup. It's so versatile af
Yesss A350 gang
Andres Camargo 🤩🤩🤩🤩
But can it compete against the BIG BOYS in the freight market like the 777F? I think that's the bigger question that everyone tends to ignore
@@sulil1938 hmmm, you got a point, hopefully we see a freighter for the A350
Corby getting facial hair is the best thing to come out of 2020
Best video yet lol
We need to get him down to just the moustache...
Riyad Moussaid you mean coby right?
Krish R Gaming and Vlogs The additional R is part of his post lockdown look
Corby
I always believed that the 787-10 was meant to be a replacement for the 767-400ER
Capacity-wise, the 787-9 better replaces the 767-400ER. However the 767-400ER was more recently produced, right at the turn of the century, so neither Delta nor United need to retire them yet, and will likely replace them (and probably their -300ER variants too) with the future NMA, in whatever form the NMA takes.
@@intergalactic_butterfly well said
B767-400ER have similar capacity to B787-8.
@@nntflow7058 Depends on how an airline outfits their 787s. Some 787-8s have a capacity similar to a 767-300ER while others, yes, do have a capacity similar to the -400ER. Boeing largely marketed the -8 as a 767-300ER replacement however.
@@intergalactic_butterfly Let me put it this way:
787-8: Replacement for A330-200s and 767-300ER
787-9: Replacement for the A330-300s and 767-400ER (Even Though Some Airlines (Like American) Use It To Replace The 777-200ER As Well)
787-10: Replacement For The 777-200 (Non-ER Variant (Won't Replace The ER Due To Limited Range))
A350-800 (Non Existent): Replaces the A330-300 and A340-200 (Although the A330-900Neo Takes Over The A350-800's Role)
A350-900: Replaces the A340-300 and the 777-200ER
A350-1000: Competes With The 777-300ER, 777-8X and 777-9X, and replaces the A340-600
Team 787 here, and it’s not even close. The 787 just looks so futuristic and elegant with its curved wings, engine chevrons, big windows, windscreen and the way it verticals stabilizer is curved rather then being flat. I have an ANA 787-9 1:200 on my work desk, and it always brings a smile to my face when I need a breather.
Team dreamliner !! 🏅
I think from the outside the 787 looks a bit squat, sitting low to the ground, leaning forward, while the A350 is an overall better proportioned aircraft, without sacrificing the aerodynamic modern look.
Why is 6 scared of 7?
Because 7 8 [ate] 9.
Couldn’t think of any other jokes.
Wow what an original joke
???
approximately -0.89594417
Always confused the Dreamliner with a DC-3...Cheers to Coby.
huh?
Randall Carrier Lol.
DC-3 has props and 787 dosen't.
@@이주연-x4x lmao
I never have. When I was a kid on the farm we used to watch the DC-3s heading north over us to northwestern Western Australia. All that noise and unpressurised - it must have been a uncomfortable journey. The 787 on the other hand is one of the most comfortable planes.
a350team here :( ( its just better)
Facts
good choice brother
I’ll team777 to compete with u :0)
Agreed
A350
the a350 has much better comfort than the 787 or 777 so its a no brainer, when i have to chose, i would 10/10 fly with a a350 over a 787 or 777
I do not have an opinion on this topic. Could you please explain how you reached this conclusion? Thanks!
I’m going on two in December, 777-300er to Qatar and the a350 to Johannesburg, I’m a350 gang too but who knows
A lot of how you define “comfort” though is up to how the airline furnishes the aircraft and the class of cabin you’re in.
Take the economy section of each I’ll compare:
Emirates Airlines, their 777’s are definitely more comfortable than Air France’s 777. However I’d prefer the Air France 777 over the Lufthansa A350.
(Yes, I have flown all several times and feel qualified to judge.)
@@petergajda3732 Can't speak for him, but for me (holding the same opinion) it was a few things: The A350 cabin feels way nicer than the 777's or 787's cabin; it's ceiling is higher (and the cabin is a bit more roomy in general (especially compared to the 787), the air quality is better (higher pressure and humidity) and it's so much more quiet. The lights are quite nice too, but not really the main selling point.
I also dislike the 787's window dimming, since it doesn't really stop all the light from entering and I get headaches from the lighting it generates, but that might just be me personally.
Great video! Just a few points to make:
- 787-10 has range 6345nmi, 777-200er 7065 and A350-900 8100nmi
- A350 is arguably also reactionary to the hugely popular 777 outselling A340 at the time, and the new 787
- 787-9 is indeed most optimised but -10 is also optimised in seat cost just that it takes a hit in range
Thanks for the great video looking forward to more!
I’m team 787 when it comes to looks, team a350 when it comes to comfort
So damn true
cant agreed anymore!
A350 windshield is the sexist thing in engineering. ❤️
@@TomekSw not really, without the black paint it actually looks quite bad lol
Reminds me a little bit of the Sud Caravelle
Team A350 fo’sure ;)
good choice brother
In the end, the 787-9 was intended for flying "long, thin" routes on point-to-point services between smaller cities. For example, it allowed Chinese airlines to operate out of airports besides Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou on long-distance routes.
#teamA350
He protecc
He attacc
But every time 'Sheldon' explanes
I stood back
787! 787! 787!
P.S.: I am a Mcdonnell Douglas lover, but definitely, Boeing is better then Airbus!
The A350 pretty much has sunglasses on but the 787 is just futuristic looking, a true dream. #Team Dreamliner!
It just proves that the A350 was designed to compete with the 787. The blackout of the cockpit window frames was to hide the A350's old look to the 787's newer look. Also they needed to cut down on development time cause the 787 was ahead in it's progressing to deliveries of the type to airlines.
@@johnhenry6762 absolutely... They were really pressed to make the A350 jet look futuristic.... Its a cool look though because I have always disliked the airbus cockpit window design. I'm sad Boeing didn't try something cool on the 777x though.. Would have been dope.
@@chidiivan5125 Perhaps when strong glass like material that is cheap to replace is developed (no blackout required at that point).
@@johnhenry6762 lol,.. Yeah. When it comes down to it, both aircrafts are amazing. Power of competition.
I'm not gonna lie but the A350 looks slick
Yeah because it looks like the 787
Favio Vid nah it looks better
sam it’s easy to copy someone and make improvements.
@@superskullmaster lmao they don’t copy eachother they just use the latest technologies meaning they look similar due to that being a more aerodynamic design
A350 gang
I'm definately team 787 but you probably knew that just from my profile picture
Hopper Me too.
How bout me?!?!!!
Dont forget me !!!!
Dream☽Liner
I'm Team Both. I love the because I’ve been on Lufthansa’s A350 from ORD-MUC and back but I still love the 787 as well. Same with the 777 series I just haven’t been on a 787 or 777 yet. But I’ve seen a Thai 777 at Munich. Overall I love all the planes I named in this list.
Me too
Been on both 777 and 787 . Amazing beautiful aircraft.
Wow this is truly the hard one. Last year I flew on Singapore Airlines that took me on both A350-900 and B787-10. Hands down no comparison. B787-10 was a plane in its own. At 6'3" seats are dreadful and the B787-10 was heaven. When I got on the A350-900 it quickly dawn on me the layout was the same as their B777-300er. However, the A350 was quieter and roomier the the older B777. Thumbs up to both planes!
Team 787 came out in force to show their superiority complex. Team A350 don't have to shout about it being the better aircraft, because everyone knows it is.
Great video. Let me tell you what happened since I was on the 787 Design team. At the time, Airbus was trying to compete with Boeing, and we were so far into the design phase, that we were getting ready to do our final layout design. Airbus waited, and I suspected that they did this on purpose to see what our final design was going to look like. Then Airbus decided to do a little bigger on certain aspect.
So yeah, the 787 was the first to enter the market, it was the first to gain a lot of orders. We originally had 4 design variants. 787-3, -8,-9 and -10. The -3 was smaller and it was going to have metal wings. The marketing team has found that we would never make money on the -3, so it was scrapped. We started producing the -8. First flight took place December 2009. A350 First flight took place in June 2013. That's nearly 4 years gap.
So, it was originally going to be competitors, but Airbus cheated by delaying the project. I was on the program for 7 years.
But I can tell you this...787 Dreamliner is way ahead of A350, not by design advantage, but ahead in design knowledge. Boeing is ready for 797 with 787 background.
The B787 was born to replace another Boeing product: B767. The A350 was later born to compite with the B787 and to replace the A330 but Airbus decided to upgrade the last to Neo. Airbus never expected that the life of the A340 will that short same with the A380. Now, the B777X was born to replace the old B777 versions and the B747, but will be the plane to replace also the A340 and A380. At the end, the only wide body planes flying for the following 30+ years will be the B747-8, B787, B777, and the A350.
A350 ALL THE WAYYYYY
good choice brother
@@holdensv2000 thx
@@arnulfonapoleonhernandez-g1995 nah man, 787 carries less, less range, and less time capability with 1 engine. Also the most fuel efficient plane for its size. I would like to hear you again
Both great in their own way. Can't wait to fly on them someday
@@rajnirvan3336 same
I flew on A350-900on singapore airlines and 787 -10 on anz but I have to say the air quality is more than just talk in the a350 and the cabin was top class! Definately team A350 on this one but I am a great admirirer of boeing too :)
I love flying on the 787 🥰
As.a 787 pilot I will say excellent video Corby ! Keep up the good work.,
At first I was all about the 787, especially that wing but the A350 is winning me over.
why would the wing on the a350 be better than the 787. it just folds at the tip. the 787's wing actually flexes. much more useful.
They are competitors in the replacement cycles, 777-200s and even 777-300s will be primarily replaced by these two aircraft. Airbus is marketing the a350-900 against the 787 in the 200 campaigns and Boeing is marketing the 787 against the a350 in 300 campaigns. The a350-900 and the 787-10 are both less optimized than their siblings.
Team a350 here
good choice brother
A350 is the superior aircraft hands down
good choice brother far better
Nah
The 787 is more efficient and advanced
I think the 787 is the better choice
787 is far better than the A350. Its materials and engineering alone make it better
5:01 A350
Brick Life Thanks.
Cabin width;
A350; 5.61m
787; 5.49m
Cabin length;
A350-900; 51m
A350-1000; 58m
787-8; 42m
787-9; 48m
787-10; 53m
Empty weight
A350-900; 135t
A350-1000; 155t
787-8; 120t
787-9; 129t
787-10; 135t
Surely both type of widebody doesn't compete each other although there's some close number between them
😎🛫👍🏻
The key capacity indicator here is the length of the cabin.
Due to some turns of events and decisions, the B787 which was originally designed for 8 abreast configuration ended up with a majority of 9 abreast economy layout. This indirectly resulted in the B787 stepping into the A350-900 market segment and somewhat competes with it indirectly.
Definitely A350. Worked on the A380 for almost 10 years and pax loved to fly on it!
Team 350 .
good choice brother
787 is my favorite. i flew one to france and back and it was better than any other plane experience i had. it was nice and quiet and did quiet well in the massive amounts of turbulence we had on the trip.
I’ve flown on both planes many times with several different airlines. Dreamliner any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Every time I’ve flown on the A350 I notice a ton of exhaust getting into the cabin when firing up the engines. The 787 is quieter and I love the adjustable tint windows.
I am hands-down a 350 supporter, but I have noticed that kerosene smell on startup, and it is unpleasant. I've also noticed it on the 330's.
I believe that the 350 is quieter, though I haven't used a meter on either of them.
Those 787 tinted windows? Both good and bad. They won't completely block the sun like the shades, BUT, the FA's are able to override the one idiot on the entire plane that wants to open his shade when everyone else on the aircraft has theirs closed and are trying to sleep.
Never knew there was a Boeing A350 until I saw the thumbnail😆
i love both the 787 and a350
Team a350 bro, hands down in Range and pax yet fuel efficient, modern and quiet. 787 is great but it’s a slightly smaller plane.
Personally, its quite hard to choose which aircraft should operate if i have an airline, regardless of cost, given that i do love all four of the twinjet widebody (A330, A350, 777 and 787).
But i'll make it short for my personal likes, at least for airliner in the 2020s, regardless of the cost to operate:
On narrowbody, the A220 will be the overall workhorse. This operate along with 737ng (-800 and -900er) that delivered in early 2010s, and the A320neo and A321neo.
The A330neo have always become one of my favourite aircraft, even all the way to its first Airbus, the A300. This aircraft will do work as the workhorse widebody on mid-to-long haul. Probably replacing the A330ceo.
The 777-200, both ER and non-ER, while a lovely aircraft, needed to be replaced as it aged. Not concerning the cost, it would be replaced by the 787-10 and A350-900, for mid-haul and long-haul respectively.
In mixture of the A340-600, 777-300 and some 747-400, it will be replaced by 777-300er on earlier retired model, and A350-1000 on later retired model.
Last but not the least, the remaining 747-400 will be replaced by the 747-8i. The A380 would be nice, but rather in small quantity in second-hand (and later refurbished) from airline that are having trouble on getting rid of it.
Also, the thumbnail looks like an idea for fictional widebody twinjets in games, like GTA.
I have flown both A350 and 787. I think A350 does better than 787. Again this is just my opinion and it could be because one was Egypt Air and the other was Qatar. I think 350 feels bigger, better and more comfortable than 787. Plus I hated that window dimming feature because I felt like I had no control if I want to look outside when feeling claustrophobic. Lastly, I think in coming years, 350 will compete with 777X more than anything else. 787 will be there but will fall out of the competition and let’s see what Airbus has to offer as an alternative.
Sorry, but your analysis is wrong. Aircraft don't compete by size alone; they compete by cost per passenger for the target route. Usually the largest plane you can put on the route has the lowest cost per passenger, but the 787 upended that by using new technologies that substantially reduced the cost per passenger. This is why the original A350 was doomed: it had substantially higher costs per passenger than the 787 without any compensating advantages. Likely the original A350 concept would have gained not a single order.
Airbus was under the gun for the A350xwb design, so they didn't have time to build a fully composite jet like the 787. Instead, they had to resort to making the plane larger in order to drive down the per passenger costs to match the 787. The resultant plane competes directly with the 787 on the per passenger measure, and drove 787 orders off a cliff for several years after it was announced. That wouldn't have happened if the planes didn't compete.
As for Delta's replacements of older, out of date 777s, the fact that they were replaced by A350s doesn't mean the A350 competes with current 777s. If the A350 hadn't been available, it's likely Delta would have replaced many of them with 787s, the plane the A350 really competes with.
Knowing that the A350 carries DNA from A380 gives me goose bumps. In a good way.
If I were an airline replacing 777-200s I would go for the 787-10 over a350 because then I could have commonality with smaller variants of the 787. These smaller variants would be a lot more useful than a350-1000s. And for where the lower 787-10 range becomes an issue, just use a 787-9 with more frequencies.
United, Air New Zealand, and British Airways have all likely ordered the 787-10 for this reason!
A350-900 is the competitor of B787-9 & B787-10.
A350-1000 is the competitor to the B777 aircraft.
Wow, it’s almost like you didn’t pay any attention to either of Coby’s videos! 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
@@KasabianFan44 actually marquis is not wrong. In terms of the length of cabin, the A350-900 is right in between the 2 B787 variant. The B787-9 was originally designed for a smaller market, to replace the B767-300ER, but most airlines opted for a higher density layout and that lead it to indirectly compete with the A350-900.
The A350-1000 on the other hand was designed to directly replace the B777-300ER. It's has almost the same exact cabin dimensions in terms of length, only few inches different. The only substantial difference between the two is the A350-1000 has 4 doors while the B777-300ER has 5 doors.
Ching Wei Xion
“In terms of the length of cabin, the A350-900 is right between the 2 787 variants” - wow, not only is this completely not true at all, but clearly you didn’t pay attention either.
This video literally says that the only planes of comparable sizes are the largest 787 (-10) and the smallest A350 (-900). And even then, this video explicitly says that the A350-900 is over 20 seats bigger (NOT smaller!) than the 787. These are facts that you can very easily look up yourself; it will take you about 2 minutes, and you will save yourself the time you’d otherwise spend on pointless arguing.
For the last time: there exists NO variant of the A350 that is smaller than any 787. There would have been, had the A350-800 been built as originally planned, but that was cancelled soon after the -900’s first flight.
@@KasabianFan44 I'm sorry to say this but coby has got his fact wrong on this. You can spend 10 mins to compare the dimensions provided on the airport planning and characteristics document available from both airbus and boeing websites. Take the distance from the first door to the last and you will see that what I mentioned was right. With both aircraft having the same seating configuration of 9 abreast in economy and 1-2-1 in business, there is no way the A350-900 can seat more people with the same standard/specification.
Ching Wei Xion
Wrong, you say? Considering that on their official websites the companies state that its three-class A350-900 can seat about as many passengers as a two-class (!) 787-10, I’ll have to go with Coby’s word on this. Annoyingly Boeing doesn’t give maximum capacity in its spec but I can assure you it’s nowhere near the 440 mark that Airbus claims for its -900.
www.airbus.com/aircraft/passenger-aircraft/a350xwb-family/a350-900.html#details
www.boeing.com/commercial/787/#/technical-specs
I would go with the 787, however, I believe that Airbus is better suited for passenger planes while Boeing is better at making cargo planes.
Ferrari is good at making cars but Ford makes a mean van :)
John Garrett Is there a cargo variant of the 787?
@@grahamturner2640 From my quick 60 seconds of research, it doesnt look like there is a truly cargo 787, however Boeing has ones such as the 757, 767, 777, and of course the 747 as all excellent freighters.
Graham Turner In 30 years from now.
Well the A340 vs 777 proved Boeing is a leader in innovation.
Boeing’s philosophy of stretching Engineering to meet Market needs. Maybe you could do a video on this. When I learned that the 737 has the highest landing speed? ,tail strike concerns and generally a more primitive approach than its competitor, I wondered now much of a handicap this is for Boeing.
The 737 MAX also has that delightful MCAS system ...
Boeing 787 and Airbus A350 both are so cool in their on places... Its so difficult to choose one... I will go with the Boeing 787 😊🙏 cuz its name is a Dreamliner and A350 named it XWB (eXtra WideBody) damn both look so beautiful though but again in their own ways... 😅
As your video says, it’s absurd to ask which one I prefer because they are different, it is like asking: which plane you prefer, the a340 or the 767? Makes little sense even though some variant might compete against each other
737 MAX vs A320?
More like
737 MAX vs A320neo
No matter what, even if Boeing releases new super hot jet, the A350 will always be my favorite. Mainly because Philippines Airlines operates it and I like them.
Totally agree. Its comfortable af, plus the expert pilots (with the smooth landings), its all-out comfort.
Zedric Louis Bores Same here. I’ve not flown on the Philippines Airlines version but I have flown in the Qatar Airways 900 and 1000 variants. I also got to fly on the 787, and I can say, I think I prefer the A350. It’s technology is slightly more advanced.
Team a350!
Excellent video! A350 fan here.
Go Team 787! I flew the 787, and it was my best ever flying opportunity! Cant say the same about the A350
see i love both but personally i have to go with the 787 because i love the look more
Am a boeing fan and surely like the Dreamliner especially the b787-10 but the a350 family is also cool especially the a350-1000
and also cant wait for the B777x-9 & 8 to enter into service
The 787 is as much a competitor to the a350, as it is a competitor to the 777....and as the a350 is a competitor with the a330...i.e. if you ignore route requirements (i.e. demand, distance, airport size restrictions, etc.), in perfect conditions the 787 competes with the a330neo AND the 777 competes with the a350....when you start adding requirements, you may have cases where a330/787 is a better option than a a350/777....
I cannot really understand where people struggle with this....
Team A350 here.
I used to prefer all Boeing. However, after flying on competing Airbus planes, even within the same carrier, I have since shifted to prefer Airbus. They are just much more comfortable as a passenger. Now I actively look for what plane is on a route before booking and will often choose an Airbus option over a Boeing option if there are choices within my timeframe and preferred carriers.
To me, the 787 has fantastic marketing, and is a great plane on it's own, but it just doesn't quite measure up to passenger comfort on the A350. I think the marketing is why so many "prefer" the 787.
Let's go team A220/A320Neo/A350!
How about this, to compete with the A350-900 for way more range than the 787-10, they should modify the 777-200ER variant with the same engine and wings used in 777x, and create the 777-7x, if they can't come up with the 787-10ER.
Le 787-10ER serait vraiment une masterclass
i just love the look of the 787, I mean the a350 too but 787 more so. So I am probably team 787
I think the B787 wing is beautiful, but I prefer riding in the A350 ...
I haven't had a chance to fly on either the 787 or the A350 yet, but hopefully we'll be flying again soon and I'll get to.
I think the Airbus did a very clever thing switching the A350 from a 787 competitor to a (mainly) 777 competitor. The A330NEO is still somewhat competitive with the 787, and I think there's still scope for at least one more generation of that airframe. However, it was clear that airlines were moving away from 4-engine jets, and the only thing Airbus had that was in the same league as the 777 was the 4-engined A340. Clearly they needed a new aircraft in that sector, and the fact it came out around the time airlines were replacing their 777s (and when Boeing's 777-8 isn't ready) puts the A350 in a very good place.
I'd love to experience both the 787 and the A350, but if I had to pick one to experience first, I think I'd have to go with the A350.
Team A350 here for sure. And yes we were quietly confident in your other video 😁
I'm mostly an Airbus guy, but I got to say: Since it launched, for me, the 787 Dreamliner is the most beautiful plane ever created. And although the A350 is the pretty boy of Airbus (alongside the acquired A220), they can't match the beauty of the Dreamliner, specially the wings.
However, I'm still biased. #TeamA350 FTW!!
With that statement getting you into a tight space, l'll get an original Bell JetRanger 206 (beautiful) helicopter to pull you out of the spot you're in!
Exactly ! Im totally agree with you
Oops Rolls Royce engine fan blades cracking just this week.
But at least it's still flying... How is the max doing? 😂
A new video? But...but...it’s not Saturday?! 🤪
Team A350
Actually I'm team Airbus.
Guys that are passionate about something are so loveable
a350 is stunning but ever only flown on 787 and loved it still.
A350 don’t have engine problems :)
neither does the 787,just avoid the Trent and you are fine
Airbus and Boeing don't build the engines. So your point is worthless.
Because of the 787-10's shorter range, it's still not direct to the A350-900. You see, before Boeing made the 777-300, 777-200LR, and 777-300ER, Boeing sold 2 versions of the 777: 777-200 and 777-200ER. One example airline that has operated both the 200 and 200ER as well as operating both the 787-10 and A350-900 is Singapore Airlines. Technically, all their 777-200s were the ER versions, but some of their 777-200s had de-rated engines, so some of those 777s were meant for shorter flights. Now, SIA retired both the 777-200ERs and their de-rated counterparts in favor of the 787-10 and A350. The 787-10s replaced the de-rated 777-200s while the A350s replaced the 777-200s that were not de-rated.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is no competition between any one of these two airplanes. They both are equally amazing. There's just simply not one better then the other. They both were great clean sheet designs.
So you talked about variants of the different aircraft family which competes with one another, yet you’re saying that they aren’t competitors. Mind you, the A350-900 might be designed for a different purpose from 787-10, but that doesn’t stop airlines from operating it in the same missions as the 787-10 are. Heck, there’s even an A350-900 Regional which is restricted on paper to allow it to compete with the 787-10 for that exact Regional/Medium haul routes.
"direct" here is the keyword
Haven’t flown on an A350, as my transatlantic flights have been on A330/A340 or 747 for the last 15 years. I did fly on a 787 once on a short flight from LAX to MEX and found the seats to be cramped and narrow so I am team A350 without even having stepped a foot on it.
The beard looks definitely better! Also the video was really interesting
I totally love both of them my only issue with the a350 is the design I like the Dreamliner better in that category
I don't think I have a preference anymore. I used to think the a350's snub-nose looked a little awkward, but I'm over it and I think both are absolutely gorgeous airframes. I would love to get a chance to fly on both types, either as a passenger or in the front!!!
Team a350 here I love the a350 the design and sound is just so beautiful. I actually want to fly the aircraft one day.
Suggestion for future topic: given that B787 and A350 are the newest, most-advanced widebodies, how do they differ / which is better or worse in passenger in-flight experience, irrespective of the furnishings chosen by a specific airline.
A good reference would be Singapore Airlines that have both 787-10 and A350-900 being used for different missions 😀 in fact the 787-10 replaces their A330-300 and 777-200 whereas A350-900 is replacing their 777-200ER and 777-300. They have ordered the 777-9 to replace their A380s and eventually their 777-300ERs.
The only other airline that operates the B787-10 and A350-900 is Vietnam Airlines.
Hi, Where are you getting the astronomical range figures for these aircraft ? B787-10 has a max range of 6430 Nmi, B777-200ER has a range of 7510 Nmi & the A350-900 has a range of 8100Nmi. Now the A340-500 has a range of 9000Nmi the B777-200R has a range of 8555Nmi and A350-900ULR has a range of 9700 Nmi
How about make the 787-10 a HYBRID aircraft, to use both the jet turbine fuel and electric motors with a battery to turn the engine turbofan, to extend the range
Team 787 for me, the 787 should have some titles, and the titles are: First Airliner to be a Carbon Composite airframe, and last is that it was the first jet to adopt Chevrons on its engine.
I am team 787 because it look cool, and also Don't criticize and i like your video coby
Both are awesome planes but I am in team A350 because it is quiet and it makes you feel you are on the ground compared to other planes
Team 787 here (co-pilot), both planes are incredible, but 787 uses substantially less fuel, has more ease in cruising altitudes and we have Cabin air Compressors in stead of Air conditioning packs which are absolutely incredible !
1. I agree that both aircraft are incredible tech marvels.
2. The 787-10 uses about 0.7L/100km less fuel than the A350-900, but, the A350-900 has a 54 ton higher payload capacity or MTOW. Ergo, we can't really compare the fuel efficiency of these aircraft.
3. The Cabin air compressors are a part of every air conditioning system. The a/c system as a whole is called an Air conditioning Pack and a cabin air compressor is a component of it.
4. Please don't take this reply the wrong way. Just a random stranger on the internet spreading some knowledge...hope you point out the same in the future to somebody else...:)
Hi Colby that's another EXCELLENT video - thank you!
Wikipedia has a very good page on this general topic which is well worth a read - "Competition between Boeing and Airbus". The articles main point is that GENERALLY speaking the product range of Airbus and Boeing COMPLIMENT each other rather than compete with each other
The points that you make in your two videos is consistent with Wikipedias
787 got more votes because of the American fans on this channel who are proudly Boeing lovers no matter. Europeans don’t need to show out for support because they know deep inside Americans prefer European design. I mean Americans would choose Mercedes or BMW over any American car or Chanel and Dior over any American fashion label. When it comes to aviation airbus has caught on and has surpassed Boeing and that’s facts !!!
Coby this should help on the topic "A350 vs B787 Origin". Bear in mind that in time the A350 XWB came out as the A350-900 version after the A350-"800" was rejected by certain interested parties in purchasing the type (-800 version that is) that was AIRBUS's answer to the 787-8, by which time Boeing was introducing the 787-9 and airlines went for it instead of the A350-800 AIRBUS was planning to come out with. "Google" "Why did AIRBUS design the A350 to begin with?" Then scroll down to the page BBC.com
BBC News June 14, 2013
A350: THE AIRCRAFT THAT AIRBUS DID NOT WANT TO BUILD. Again the emphasis is the -800 version of the A350 to go against the 787-8! IN THE BEGINNING!!! After, AIRBUS went after the 777 series with the A350-1000 but not before going after the 787-9 with the A350-900XWB.
787 as I work on them day in and day out….love the dimmable windows