Hi all,
Not long got back from a visit to Seattle/Everett/Renton, meeting various execs and discussing the state of BCA programs.
Managed to capture some new 787 images – some I cant publish because of the detail/prohibition by Boeing, but thought you would like to see the ones that I have published.
There are also a few others on my Flickr page too (which also has a snap of the first 747-8F section 41 too).
Hope you enjoy them and will aim to add more when I get time 🙂
By: steve rowell - 24th February 2009 at 23:22
You puzzle me more with every single post you make. :confused:
Paul
Thanks for saying what everybody else is thinking!!!
By: PMN - 24th February 2009 at 23:21
It is well known that the inside cabin width of 787 is appreciably wider than that of A300.
787 is also appreciably narrower than DC-10, Tristar, Il-86 or 777.
You puzzle me more with every single post you make. :confused:
Paul
By: Grey Area - 24th February 2009 at 22:01
Why should you expect it not to be big, outside or inside?
I’ll bet it’s bigger on the inside than the outside.
No, wait. That’s the TARDIS.
By: chornedsnorkack - 24th February 2009 at 20:36
So?
Why should you expect it not to be big, outside or inside?
By: Bmused55 - 24th February 2009 at 18:51
Yes, this is the colour which should be reserved for the 747-8! :dev2:
How so, it’s being assembled as we speak?
By: rdc1000 - 24th February 2009 at 10:07
As sceptical as I am, I do know that this aircraft is far from being a lemon.
A lemon is something of a failure, something that never made it far off of the starter blocks.
It is still far too early to call the 787 that.
Yes, this is the colour which should be reserved for the 747-8! :dev2:
By: Bmused55 - 24th February 2009 at 10:04
It is well known that the inside cabin width of 787 is appreciably wider than that of A300.
787 is also appreciably narrower than DC-10, Tristar, Il-86 or 777.
So?
By: chornedsnorkack - 24th February 2009 at 10:00
Even inside, the 787 is not a small airplane by any means – its only when you see it in the flesh you appreciate how big it actually is.
It is well known that the inside cabin width of 787 is appreciably wider than that of A300.
787 is also appreciably narrower than DC-10, Tristar, Il-86 or 777.
By: Grey Area - 23rd February 2009 at 20:13
Yes I will, but at present I dont have time to do that (due to other commitments). But rest assured, yes I fully intend to participate hence my joining this site.
I think its one of the best sites for aviation material I an certainly enjoy reading the swathe of threads/details it has 🙂
Good man! 🙂
By: FBEDCOM - 23rd February 2009 at 19:32
Just out of interest, FBEDCOM, do you plan to actually take part in the discussions on this site or do you just intend to post links to your own blog?
GA
Yes I will, but at present I dont have time to do that (due to other commitments). But rest assured, yes I fully intend to participate hence my joining this site.
I think its one of the best sites for aviation material I an certainly enjoy reading the swathe of threads/details it has 🙂
By: FBEDCOM - 23rd February 2009 at 19:30
FBEDCOM, did you happen to see ship number 2? I’m wondering if they are painting it in Northwest’s or Delta’s colors? Thx
ZA002 has the ANA logo on it. (See first post on this thread and the link in that).
ZA003 & ZA004 both rad red rudders for the former Northwest livery, but I’m told that due to Delta buying NWA, they may either be sold on to another 787 customer or delivered in Delta’s colours.
As you may know, Delta and Boeing are still in discussions about the status of the entire 787 order.
I saw ZA005 and the wings for ZA006 are already in Everett too. 🙂
Even inside, the 787 is not a small airplane by any means – its only when you see it in the flesh you appreciate how big it actually is.
By: Ship 741 - 23rd February 2009 at 16:54
FBEDCOM, did you happen to see ship number 2? I’m wondering if they are painting it in Northwest’s or Delta’s colors? Thx
By: Grey Area - 23rd February 2009 at 09:56
Moderator Message
Just out of interest, FBEDCOM, do you plan to actually take part in the discussions on this site or do you just intend to post links to your own blog?
GA
By: FBEDCOM - 23rd February 2009 at 06:39
Thought I’d share this with you all from my trip to Boeing:
By: Bmused55 - 11th February 2009 at 18:24
Sandy, can you elaborate why you are sceptical?
I’m not sceptical of the aircraft itself. I truly believe it will be a record buster once in service and will prove Boeings technique right.
I am, however sceptical when it comes to progress of the project. Once its in the air, flight testing will I believe real progress has been made.
By: Hand87_5 - 11th February 2009 at 12:12
Sandy, can you elaborate why you are sceptical?
By: Bmused55 - 11th February 2009 at 06:05
It would look better painted in it’s true colours “LEMON”
As sceptical as I am, I do know that this aircraft is far from being a lemon.
A lemon is something of a failure, something that never made it far off of the starter blocks.
It is still far too early to call the 787 that.
In 5 years, should the 787 only have 100 or so in service and no orders…. then it can be called a lemon.
By: steve rowell - 10th February 2009 at 22:34
It would look better painted in it’s true colours “LEMON”
By: Grey Area - 10th February 2009 at 20:56
I’ve always said, if Boeing slips up they’ll get the same level of scepticism I give Airbus when they screw up.
He has. ‘Tis true.
By: Bmused55 - 10th February 2009 at 18:30
I’ve always said, if Boeing slips up they’ll get the same level of scepticism I give Airbus when they screw up.
Sign In
February 10, 2009 at 12:07 pm