7E7 is now 787...

[ QUOTE ]
Tony brought up the 200 order comment and I was countering by trying to explain that so far, the 787 has sold more frames since it was announced than the 777 did in the same amount of time after it was first announced.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't matter.

When you go out there with the 200 number, you better hit it. Otherwise, you look like an ass.

The launch of the 787 or 7E7 was very successful. But Boeing blew the PR game by saying that they were going to hit 200 orders and falling way short.

Because they fell way short, the perception is that the launch of the 787/7E7 was NOT successful.
 
What's up with people here always making a big fuss about another's comment? Geez, it's not done just to me either.
tongue.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
True, but the 727 is pretty darned dead!

A real man's airplane!

[/ QUOTE ]

The 727 was/is a truly awesome plane. I loved the wing and how it looked to "fall apart" when flaps an slats were extended.
It was one of my favorite planes to fly in and had hopes of one day flying it.

--Matthew
 
I don't see anything wrong with the discussion between me and L1011. Why do you see a problem there, Brian?

He thinks the 7e7 launch was successful, and I agree. However, the perception is that Boeing fell short since they went out there and kept on screaming 200 orders, 200 orders, 200 orders.

Now, what was a tremendously successful launch is being perceived as a failure.
 
I partially agree with Tony, when Boeing missed their target of the magic number of 200 airplanes by the end of 2004, it certainly did not look good & does not matter what the excuses are. But, I do not think that it reflects poorly on the program.


The 787 program is a very successful program, as for naming Boeing was cognizant when naming the aircraft to call it the 7E7 Dreamliner. When Boeing changed the name to the 787, the Dreamliner name remained. On most Boeing promotional material, the name Dreamliner was stressed more than the 7E7. Boeing even had a dedicated Internet site for the 7E7, http://newairplane.com/
knowing full well that the designation of the airplane would change.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I heard a rumot about a 747adv? Is there any truth to it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems true.

[ QUOTE ]
747 Advanced


Boeing is working with customers to develop passenger and freighter versions of the 747 Advanced.

The 747 Advanced will combine even greater capacity with 7E7 engine technology – the most advanced commercial airplane propulsion technology in the world – for quieter airplanes that produce lower emissions, achieve better fuel economy than any competing jetliner, and fly faster – at .86 Mach – than any other jetliner.

The 747 Advanced will be the only jetliner in the 400- to 500-seat market, offering 8,000-nautical-mile ( 14,816 km) range capability and the best economics in the large-airplane class.






[/ QUOTE ]
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see anything wrong with the discussion between me and L1011. Why do you see a problem there, Brian?

[/ QUOTE ]

Tony is one of my favorite people to debate with. I saw nothing wrong with his post. All part of the great debate
smile.gif
 
Is only the 787-8 going to carry pallets and LD3? Looking over the links mpenguin posted it would seem as if only the 787-8 mentions anything bout pallets/LD3?
What bout the 787-3 & 787-9. Any guess or commentary?
Lastly anyone know if the 787 design has been "frozen" yet!?

-Matthew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top