Boeing 787-8 Specs

[hankrausch]

Hello we just flew to and back from Morocco on a Morocco Airlines Boeing 787, and I wonder if any one has any specs or a place to point me to get more info--

(1) we cruised at 41,000 feet on the way there which seems higher than most transatlantic flights--wondering if it does in fact fly higher than other airliners.

(2) Sitting immediately aft of the wing it sure looked like the wingtip was 20 feet above my head! Wondering if anyone can confirm the wing droop.

(3) the control surfaces were fantastically complex, first off there does not seem to be a straight line anywhere on that wing and second it sure looked like there were 3 ailerons operating.

I had read that the windows were bigger and they were and I suppose it is pressurized to a lower altitude but did not notice it, it was comfortable though.

All in all what a remarkable plane!

 

[denverpilot]

The wing does flex an impressive number of feet. Someone I know who flies them told me the exact number at takeoff, and your number is close to that, but they’re not that far flexed in cruise.

As far as cruising altitude, fly at whatever you’re certified for that saves the most fuel and stays above the most weather, on a long flight like those are.

Number 3 doesn’t seem like a question, just a statement of fact.

 

[Stickman]

The flex in flight could very well be 10-12 feet, though a little more at takeoff. They told us in B-777 school that it's wing flexes 21' at takeoff.

All modern jetliners have high and low speed ailerons, typically the low speed (outboard) ailerons lock out above a certain speed or configuration. This is most often after flap/slats are up/retracted. Most modern jets use flight spoilers for roll in cruise with the inboard ailerons only coming into play when a higher roll rate is required. This creates less drag and adverse yaw.

 

[Pilawt]

Flew from Melbourne to LAX on a Qantas 787-9 a month ago. I was hoping to see the wing flex in action, but we were in center section coach seats, and I couldn't see anything out the windows. The airplane was appointed nicely inside, but the seats were narrow and exceptionally firm. After almost 14 hours in those seats we would have been glad to have "standing room only" tickets on our connecting flight back to PHX. We had bulkhead row seats in the 787-9, so legroom was not an issue. None of this is to detract from Qantas' service, which is excellent.

We were cruising at 39,000' for the first twelve hours across the Pacific, then went up to 41,000 for the home stretch into LAX.

And according to Flightradar 24, our beacon code out of Melbourne was 1313.

 

[Rex Kramer]

The 787 has a hell of a wing on it. Coming out of NRT we're heading back to the states in a 777-300 slogging it out at 320. Our cohorts in the 787 climb right on up to 390 and above most of the norpac turbulence.

And yeah that wing.. it flexes, a lot.

 

[NJP_MAN]

It still has a yoke and from a pilots point of view it's a disappointment. Fly by wire without auto trim is silly too. It's halfway to being a very advanced airplane. I would definitely Like to ride in the back of one though. Wouldn't want to be up in the front .

 

[GRG55]

It still has a yoke and from a pilots point of view it's a disappointment. Fly by wire without auto trim is silly too. It's halfway to being a very advanced airplane. I would definitely Like to ride in the back of one though. Wouldn't want to be up in the front .

My brother flies the -8 and -9 models for a living, and from all I've heard from him it is anything BUT a disappointment. He's an ex-military Hornet pilot and fighter instructor. But I should mention he's never been a fan of the Airbus computers either, so a little bit of Boeing bias there, no doubt.

As a passenger the lower cabin altitude (typically 5000 ft vs 8000 ft) and the ability to increase the humidity makes a huge difference in long haul passenger comfort. I deliberately try to book seats on a 787 whenever I can for my trans-Atlantic flights; it makes a big difference in fatigue.

 

[denverpilot]

The person I know flying them is also far from being disappointed in any way by it. He calls it jokingly “Sparky the Electric Jet” and has nothing but good things to say about the HUD when the weather goes to crap.

He also really likes the integration of the ATC clearances via data link and the FMS for oceanic work. Push button, accept clearance change, push another button, the airplane does it. Kinda hard to hate that. It’s not uncommon for a number of types these days, but he regularly mentions how nice it is compared to the old days.

 

[rocketflyer84]

He's an ex-military Hornet pilot and fighter instructor. But I should mention he's never been a fan of the Airbus computers either, so a little bit of Boeing bias there, no doubt.

Well there is that old saying:

“Boeing designs it’s commercial planes for ex-military pilots. Airbus designs its planes so the nephews of politicians can fly it and have a reasonable chance of not killing anyone.”

 

[kayoh190]

It still has a yoke and from a pilots point of view it's a disappointment. Fly by wire without auto trim is silly too. It's halfway to being a very advanced airplane. I would definitely Like to ride in the back of one though. Wouldn't want to be up in the front .

LOL - do you get paid by Dessault to run your mouth every time someone says something nice about an airplane other than a Falcon 7X?

You’re like a broken record man. It’d carry more weight if you actually had *any* experience in airplanes beyond the handful of hours you have in the Falcon.

 

[Landing Fees]

So my R182 flies by bendy wires and non bendy wires, got some wing-flex too!

 

[NJP_MAN]

As a passenger the lower cabin altitude (typically 5000 ft vs 8000 ft) and the ability to increase the humidity makes a huge difference in long haul passenger comfort. I deliberately try to book seats on a 787 whenever I can for my trans-Atlantic flights; it makes a big difference in fatigue.

usually when I fly transatlantic it's a cabin altitudes around 4,000 feet so I know the lower the better. From a working point of view I would prefer a tray table.

 

[NJP_MAN]

LOL - do you get paid by Dessault to run your mouth every time someone says something nice about an airplane other than a Falcon 7X?

You’re like a broken record man. It’d carry more weight if you actually had *any* experience in airplanes beyond the handful of hours you have in the Falcon.

It's not a Dassault thing. It's really an aviation thing as a whole. Every manufacturer that I can think of has gone with sidesticks. I have time in 2000s,50s,900s as well and I prefer to fly the 7x/8x for their comfort.

I don't only have good stuff to say about the Falcon line either. Like why would they put an AP disconnect switch on the bottom/side of the yoke where my knee will accidentally disconnect the switch every time I barely move my legs.

 

[SCCutler]

It's not a Dassault thing. It's really an aviation thing as a whole. Every manufacturer that I can think of has gone with sidesticks. I have time in 2000s,50s,900s as well and I prefer to fly the 7x/8x for their comfort.

I don't only have good stuff to say about the Falcon line either. Like why would they put an AP disconnect switch on the bottom/side of the yoke where my knee will accidentally disconnect the switch every time I barely move my legs.

So far as I know, in airliners, the sidesticks are pretty much an Airbus-only thing. There are plenty of reasons to like 'em - and plenty of reasons to differ.

Human factors are a big deal - odds are, if Air France 447 had been a 777 instead of an A330, it would have been a non-event.

Of course, had AF447 had a reasonably well-trained crew, they'd have flown the airplane, rather than abdicating that task, all the way to the ocean and ultimate doom. Still, it was the Swiss-cheese holes lining up unfortunately.

 

[Larry in TN]

So far as I know, in airliners, the sidesticks are pretty much an Airbus-only thing.

The new Bombardier C-Series also has side-sticks.

 

[NJP_MAN]

The new Bombardier C-Series also has side-sticks.

Correct. Embraer also has embraced the stick so should they make a new airliner, odds are its going to be a stick.

 

[NJP_MAN]

.

It looks like Boeing will be the only one with yokes on new planes from here on out. Cessna, embraer, bombardier, gulfstream all have sticks in development. It just makes more sense to go that way. With FBW there really isn't a need for a column and wheel anymore.

 

[Shepherd]

So, Boeing is the only manufacturer who is still building airplanes.
Everyone else is building simulators into the cockpit.
Hmmmmmm. My ex-military prejudices are showing.

 

[GRG55]

It looks like Boeing will be the only one with yokes on new planes from here on out. Cessna, embraer, bombardier, gulfstream all have sticks in development. It just makes more sense to go that way. With FBW there really isn't a need for a column and wheel anymore.

Why does it make more sense? Or is it really just another fad. Or maybe it's just a lot cheaper to build in a game controller?

Someone else already mentioned AF 447. Enough said.

 

[Rex Kramer]

Human factors are a big deal - odds are, if Air France 447 had been a 777 instead of an A330, it would have been a non-event.

Oddly enough, if the Asiana 777 in SFO a few years ago had been an A330, it would have also been a non-event.

Both design philosophies have their merits and downsides. You just have to understand what they are.

 

[GRG55]

Oddly enough, if the Asiana 777 in SFO a few years ago had been an A330, it would have also been a non-event...

Tell us more please. I'd like to understand.

 

[SCCutler]

Oddly enough, if the Asiana 777 in SFO a few years ago had been an A330, it would have also been a non-event.

Both design philosophies have their merits and downsides. You just have to understand what they are.

It always comes down to the competence of the pilots. If they tell the airplane to do stupid stuff, it is ultimately going to fail.

 

[NJP_MAN]

Oddly enough, if the Asiana 777 in SFO a few years ago had been an A330, it would have also been a non-event.

Both design philosophies have their merits and downsides. You just have to understand what they are.

I always say the same thing but didn't want to bring it into the conversation.

 

[NJP_MAN]

Tell us more please. I'd like to understand.

Airbus flys in path mode. Point it at the end of the runway and that's where it will go. All you have to do is manage airspeed. It's not pitch and speed.

 

[NJP_MAN]

Mak

Why does it make more sense? Or is it really just another fad. Or maybe it's just a lot cheaper to build in a game controller?

Someone else already mentioned AF 447. Enough said.

I think it makes more sense because all you need is a stick. You don't need a big column to give leverage in the event of manual reversion any more. Most of being an airline pilot is managing the systems and having a tray table and more room to work with has to be the better design. Air France is the only incident where people talk about a stick being a bad design and I agree it was a really bad deal but how many previous incidents could have been prevented with today's newer tech that we will never know about. Yes a yoke and column works fine but apparently the manufacturers in general have seen the benefit of a newer design.

 

[Clark1961]

Airbus flys in path mode. Point it at the end of the runway and that's where it will go. All you have to do is manage airspeed. It's not pitch and speed.

Managing the airspeed is the one thing the pilot and check pilot did not do. As I understand it the incorrect autopilot mode was selected so the autothrottles were off. If they had managed airspeed the excessive sink rate and landing short would not have happened.

 

[Rex Kramer]

Tell us more please. I'd like to understand.

In the 777 the crew was flying in FLCH mode which provides no stall protections via the auto throttle system. Once it went into HOLD mode it wasn’t going to move unless the pilots did something.

Had they been in an A330 they would have had those stall protections as that is how the plane is designed. Even in an open descent at idle thrust the auto thrust will “wake up” and automatically provide full power if the airspeed gets too slow.