483 replies to this topic

[SmartJunco]

The 787's first flight is fast approaching after a two year delay. It's Boeing's first clean sheet designed airplane since the 777, which first flew in 1994.

There have been rumors the first flight will be on 14 December and 22 December. I've heard it from someone on the "inside" that it'll be on the 18th. Regardless, the Boeing Company will give a 48 hour notice before the first flight to allow press to assemble.



Here's what's expected to happen:

- The plane will fly as Boeing 001 Heavy Experimental.
- It's scheduled to depart at 10AM PST on whatever day it flies.
- It's scheduled to depart Paine Field (PAE) and land at Boeing Field (BFI) three to five hours later.
- Boeing's two T-33 chase planes will perform an airborne pick up during the 787's departure roll.
- The plane will rotate off of Paine Field's runway 34L at about 4000.'
- Weather has to be good. A ceiling below 1500' AGL and visibility less than 10 mi will delay first flight.
- The guy writing this post will be there  

Oh, and I don't know where this rumor came from, but the 787 and 747-8 will NOT fly on the same day.

[Leginmat]

Expecting some stunning pics to accompany the launch Drew!

[Prancer]

I find it amusing Boeing uses Lockheed aircraft for chase planes as opposed to their own F/A-18s or F-15s.

Edited by Perriwen, 05 December 2009 - 12:52 AM.

[Chief NWA]

Can't wait to see her fly. Hopefully it actually does fly before the end of the year.

[AmericanAirFan]

I wonder what it looks like when it flies! The sign of the times Can't wait to see this bird fly 2 years is definitely better late than never!!

[wyoairbus]

shes way behind schedule but im glad shes finally getting some air time cant wait to see these sexy beasts enter service

[Mohammad]

Woohoo! The final countdown...

[Mul.]

If first flight were indeed on the 14th, shouldn't 787 #1 be scuttling around Paine Field right now recommencing taxi tests? Has anyone in the area observed any activity?

[Toyuko]

Finally its time to fly.

[bigflyersmallbyer]

I love how shiny the Dreamliner is .

[jetblast787]

 Mul., on Dec 5 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

If first flight were indeed on the 14th, shouldn't 787 #1 be scuttling around Paine Field right now recommencing taxi tests? Has anyone in the area observed any activity?

wow mul, you of all people, didn't expect you to make such a embarrassing comment

They done taxi tests in the past few months while the wing box was being repaired

[Alaska_MD-83]

Should I blow all the money I have saved up for lenses and stuff on a last minute ticket to Seattle?

It's tempting...

[jetblast787]

 Da_KGB, on Dec 5 2009, 06:28 PM, said:

Should I blow all the money I have saved up for lenses and stuff on a last minute ticket to Seattle?

It's tempting...

you can do both. Borrow money off friends and pay them back later on (if you have a job) its a once in a lifetime event and shame I can't be there

[The_Great_North]

 Perriwen, on Dec 5 2009, 12:52 AM, said:

I find it amusing Boeing uses Lockheed aircraft for chase planes as opposed to their own F/A-18s or F-15s.

Woop di doo.

[Alaska_MD-83]

Maybe it's because those are cheaper than getting an FA/18 to chase it. (FA/18s aren't exactly small fuel efficient jets)

[Chief NWA]

I tried asking if I could fly out there for the day nonrev. Both my parents said no and there would be no way for me to get to Seattle from Tampa by 10AM. Plus I'd need cab money!

Wish I could go though.  

Maybe their next plane I'll go see. I'm sure I'll have a job and be over 21 by then.

[Prancer]

 Da_KGB, on Dec 5 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Maybe it's because those are cheaper than getting an FA/18 to chase it. (FA/18s aren't exactly small fuel efficient jets)

More so than the old, gas-guzzling 1950's era T-33.

I do find myself wondering, though, after the F-22 debate, is why is Boeing even wasting time and money building this plane, and the 747-8? What's wrong with the current 757s, 747s, and 767s, and just upgrading them? Seriously, this whole project is just an effort by Boeing to get media attention after getting jealous of the press Airbus got with the A380. They made it clear in needing to 'make sure the press is notified 48 hours in advance.'

Edited by Perriwen, 05 December 2009 - 03:34 PM.

[MattGarner]

 Perriwen, on Dec 5 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

 Da_KGB, on Dec 5 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Maybe it's because those are cheaper than getting an FA/18 to chase it. (FA/18s aren't exactly small fuel efficient jets)

More so than the old, gas-guzzling 1950's era T-33.

I do find myself wondering, though, after the F-22 debate, is why is Boeing even wasting time and money building this plane, and the 747-8? What's wrong with the current 757s, 747s, and 767s, and just upgrading them? Seriously, this whole project is just an effort by Boeing to get media attention after getting jealous of the press Airbus got with the A380. They made it clear in needing to 'make sure the press is notified 48 hours in advance.'

What the :S. You could say that about Airbus! The planes you have mentioned don't use the new technology the 787/747-8 will be using.

If your saying they could just "upgrade" them, then Airbus didn't need the A380 and could of just upgraded the A340. Same with the A350. So don't start making silly comments like that.

Edited by MattGarner, 05 December 2009 - 03:56 PM.

[wyoairbus]

 Perriwen, on Dec 5 2009, 04:26 PM, said:

 Da_KGB, on Dec 5 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Maybe it's because those are cheaper than getting an FA/18 to chase it. (FA/18s aren't exactly small fuel efficient jets)

More so than the old, gas-guzzling 1950's era T-33.

I do find myself wondering, though, after the F-22 debate, is why is Boeing even wasting time and money building this plane, and the 747-8? What's wrong with the current 757s, 747s, and 767s, and just upgrading them? Seriously, this whole project is just an effort by Boeing to get media attention after getting jealous of the press Airbus got with the A380. They made it clear in needing to 'make sure the press is notified 48 hours in advance.'

i agree with matt, what you just said here doesnt really make much sense at all, esp after boeing has had so many troubles and delays with the 787.

they cant just keep updating old planes forever

[Prancer]

 MattGarner, on Dec 5 2009, 04:53 PM, said:

 Perriwen, on Dec 5 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

 Da_KGB, on Dec 5 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Maybe it's because those are cheaper than getting an FA/18 to chase it. (FA/18s aren't exactly small fuel efficient jets)

More so than the old, gas-guzzling 1950's era T-33.

I do find myself wondering, though, after the F-22 debate, is why is Boeing even wasting time and money building this plane, and the 747-8? What's wrong with the current 757s, 747s, and 767s, and just upgrading them? Seriously, this whole project is just an effort by Boeing to get media attention after getting jealous of the press Airbus got with the A380. They made it clear in needing to 'make sure the press is notified 48 hours in advance.'

What the :S. You could say that about Airbus! The planes you have mentioned don't have use the new technology the 787/747-8 will be using.

So integrate the tech into them if it's that important. It'd be a heck of a lot cheaper. But why fix what isn't broken? The DC-3 was designed in the 1930s, and upgrades have been keeping it flying faithfully for nearly 70 years. You telling me we can't do that with current airliners? The B-52 was designed in the 1950s, and upgrades are projected to keep it flying for another 50 years. And how could this not be a cry for attention? Boeing is even airing cable TV commercials for the thing like they expect people to A.) just pick up the phone and order one, or B.) notice them which they are clearly begging people to do. Is Lockheed airing TV commercials for their aircraft? Cessna? Northrop Grumman? Learjet? Gulfstream? No. But Boeing is, for no other likely reason that they're begging for attention, which is evident in these delays that they slapped this thing together so fast to have something to present that they made a load of errors along the way.

Edited by Perriwen, 05 December 2009 - 04:01 PM.