Boeing's Don Quixote to Airbus' Daunting Windmill

[Ankf00]

BA-DAM! (http://www.747.newairplane.com/)

Benefits:
1. no infrastructure construction required, runways or gates
2. baseline design completed decades ago, therefore more budget to be spent on system architecture and mid to lower level systems/sub-systems instead
3. Most manufacturing equipment, dies, forms, etc. probably still exist, and if not, the prints most certainly do
4. Flight deck from the 777/787 family, so less training hours required, will assimilate with the rest of an airline's Boeing fleet without much of a hiccup.
5. It doesn't look like Roseanne :gomer:

[Ankf00]

*grumble*

'reply' is not 'edit'

[RichK]

How are the wings made? Are they composite with that shape?

[KLang]

Yea, what's up with the curved wings?

[dando]

Dats got to be some long landing gear with the engines hanging below the fuselage (kinda like the '07 CCWS mirror comments ;) ). LOOKS very :cool: .

-Kevin

[Ankf00]

early 787 with fish fin stabilizers....

http://www.boarding.dk/images/archive/p200501301323-6844.jpg

final 787 without funky ass wings

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/images/k63304-2.jpg


my guess is that those wings level out a good deal. but you have to believe that Boeing will carry over the tapered wings and bleedless engines from the 87...

[oddlycalm]

How are the wings made? Are they composite with that shape? Don't know what they will be made of, but either CF or aluminum skins would work fine. As far as curve and flex go, all the way back to the 707 the wings had a range of up/down movement of 16ft. as measured at the tip. First time I went through really rough weather on one... :eek: It's still have to believe they can flex that much without work hardinging the aluminum and eventually developing inclusions and failing, but they don't. One reason is that while every other airframe company pressure forms their skin curves Boeing used high pressure shot peening to contract the metal on the back side and curve it to form. Very artisanal and labor intensive, but the resulting parts had a near-infinite service life. :thumbup:

Again, I don't claim to know their plan, but my best guess would be CF, although IIRC none of their 11 axis CF tape layers are currently long enough. Extending the bed on one isn't all that big a deal though if you have a building large enough.

oc

[RichK]

Thanks, oc, very interesting post.

I recall watching a wing failure test on the Discovery Channel. They constrained the fuselage, then pushed up on the wing, slowly, until KABOOM! - a catastrophic failure.

The amazing part was that the wing looked to be ~35 degrees from horizontal before failure.

[coolhand]

Sweet boeing rocks, I hope no one buys an airbus.

about the palne, besides the wings, the fusalage does not look much different from the outside.

Is this basically just and updated 747 with 787 mods?

[indyfan31]

On another note, albeit related, someone did a really nice job on that website. :thumbup:

[nrc]

3. Most manufacturing equipment, dies, forms, etc. probably still exist, and if not, the prints most certainly do

I'd hope so since the /400 is still in production. :confused:

[Mr. Toad]

BA-DAM! (http://www.747.newairplane.com/)

Benefits:
1. no infrastructure construction required, runways or gates
2. baseline design completed decades ago, therefore more budget to be spent on system architecture and mid to lower level systems/sub-systems instead
3. Most manufacturing equipment, dies, forms, etc. probably still exist, and if not, the prints most certainly do
4. Flight deck from the 777/787 family, so less training hours required, will assimilate with the rest of an airline's Boeing fleet without much of a hiccup.
5. It doesn't look like Roseanne :gomer:


And cool tunes to boot. :)

[stroker]

Does anyone know if the aerospace industry is working on some sort of renewable/synthetic/alternative fuels?

I know the B-52 would run on diesel, but I'd hate to see the smoke trails...

[oddlycalm]

Does anyone know if the aerospace industry is working on some sort of renewable/synthetic/alternative fuels?

I know the B-52 would run on diesel, but I'd hate to see the smoke trails... Jet fuel is basically kerosene so it's not all that far from diesel to begin with. No doubt they would run on salad oil (if you had enough) until it goobered up the fuel system with impurities. Turbine engines are basically pretty simple devices and as long as you can spray the fuel and it's combustable you've got thrust.

That's all fine and dandy for ground based stationary turbines in non-critical applications, but turbine engines on commercial passenger planes is the single most mission critical application I can think of, so any alternate fuel is going to be certificated and regulated just like a new airframe design which means mucho testing and regulation of quality.

oc

[chop456]

Singapore Airlines, Qantas Airways Ltd. and Malaysian Airline System Bhd. are seeking compensation from Airbus because deliveries of A380 planes they ordered may delayed as long as a half-year...

...Airbus said on March 9 that the breakeven point on the A380 program had risen to sales of 300 planes from 250 because projected development costs of 12 billion euros ($14 billion) had increased as much as 15 percent on delays and technical issues, such as cutting the plane's weight.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000085&refer=europe&sid=acbmI78Dt_N4

[mapguy]

Singapore Airlines, Qantas Airways Ltd. and Malaysian Airline System Bhd. are seeking compensation from Airbus because deliveries of A380 planes they ordered may delayed as long as a half-year...

...Airbus said on March 9 that the breakeven point on the A380 program had risen to sales of 300 planes from 250 because projected development costs of 12 billion euros ($14 billion) had increased as much as 15 percent on delays and technical issues, such as cutting the plane's weight.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000085&refer=europe&sid=acbmI78Dt_N4

Breakeven point of 300? Last I heard they only have 139 orders.

[mapguy]

Also, British Airways cheif hints that the 747-800, not the A380, are in BA's future.

Linky (http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article327108.ece)

[oddlycalm]

Singapore Airlines, Qantas Airways Ltd. and Malaysian Airline System Bhd. are seeking compensation from Airbus because deliveries of A380 planes they ordered may delayed as long as a half-year...

...Airbus said on March 9 that the breakeven point on the A380 program had risen to sales of 300 planes from 250 because projected development costs of 12 billion euros ($14 billion) had increased as much as 15 percent on delays and technical issues, such as cutting the plane's weight. ] Get ready for more of the same on the late deliveries. As far as the breakeven point, if Airbus wasn't underwritten by governments this pig would have never gotten off the drawing board with a BE of 250, let alone 300. Amazing how being absent the threat of bankruptcy makes a company bold.

Anyone care to guess how many years it took Boeing to sell and build the first 300 747's....? ;) I'll give you a hint; it's taken 37 yrs to sell and build 1406 of them since the first 747-100 rolled out the door in 1968. Another hint; #1000 rolled out the door in 1993, so it's taken 12yrs to build the most recent 406 of them. If everything goes just right (fat chance), Airbus will be doing well to have recouped their 13 billion Euros by 2020. That friends is the definition of a tough business. They could invest that money in government bonds and double it in the time it'll take them to make their first Euro profit. Shows you why the smart money is in stuff people really need like 24hr newstainment TV, talk radio and internet porn... :gomer:

oc

PS - Anyone remember when American's original fleet of 747's had a piano lounge in coach? There were name acts booked to play on some flights and on most there were musicians in back hanging out and jamming. If you could play, you could drink free coast to coast and often meet a new special friend... ;) Comparing that with air travel today is more than a little depressing.

[Ankf00]

I'd hope so since the /400 is still in production. :confused:

heh, didn't know that

anywho, this new 47 will go well with the kind of 87's+77's for Airbusts plane swap deals Boeing's brokered with Air Canuckistan, Air Curry, and Northworst recently...

[Classic Apex]

Thanks, Ank.

Cool stuff.




:cool:

[chop456]

PS - Anyone remember when American's original fleet of 747's had a piano lounge in coach? There were name acts booked to play on some flights and on most there were musicians in back hanging out and jamming. If you could play, you could drink free coast to coast and often meet a new special friend... ;) Comparing that with air travel today is more than a little depressing.

I don't remember that, but I do remember Continental's advertisements for their "SkyPub" in the 747 during the 70's.

More good news for Boeing: $14 Billion in New Orders (http://www.thestreet.com/_googlen/stocks/general/10253769.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA)