Slog Comments

 

Comments (13) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
The planes will be fine, Boeing's workforce will see to that. But I hope the PR challenge serves the most-excellent purpose of throwing a huge enough scare into Boeing's Chicago tower-of-suits that they treat outsourcing like a hot stove for a few decades to come.
Posted by gloomy gus on January 9, 2013 at 8:47 AM · Report this
Bob Anderton 2
I recently flew the 787 on Japan’s All Nippon Airways from Japan to Seattle. To the best of my recollection we did not crash. Plus it has pretty lights and bigger windows inside.
Posted by Bob Anderton http://www.washingtonbikelaw.com on January 9, 2013 at 8:53 AM · Report this
Asparagus! 3
That's a lot flight. Did you sleep? It might have crashed while you were sleeping.
Posted by Asparagus! on January 9, 2013 at 8:57 AM · Report this
Matt from Denver 4
The 787 is primarily designed for intercontinental flight, isn't it? I know that you go to Europe sometimes, but if I'm correct, you're pretty unlikely to fly one in your regular cross-country travels.
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 9, 2013 at 8:58 AM · Report this
Asparagus! 5
Also, I'd like to add I was on a brand new 737-800 NYC to Seattle this summer, and, man, it was fantastic. Super thin seats means more leg room and 6'3" me was comfy comfy.
Posted by Asparagus! on January 9, 2013 at 8:58 AM · Report this
DOUG. 6
I spent this past weekend in Dayton, Ohio. The Wright Brothers' first gliders sucked, too.
Posted by DOUG. http://www.dougsvotersguide.com on January 9, 2013 at 8:59 AM · Report this
wilbur@work 7
what @1 said, * 1000.
Posted by wilbur@work on January 9, 2013 at 9:17 AM · Report this
Pope Peabrain 8
I just hope hackers can't bring down these new planes.
Posted by Pope Peabrain on January 9, 2013 at 9:22 AM · Report this
Will in Seattle 9
@8 don't give them ideas.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on January 9, 2013 at 9:36 AM · Report this
delirian 10
@4: At one point I thought there was a short range 787 model. It doesn't appear than anybody put in any orders for it, so I guess it was cancelled. The planes that are being delivered are essentially designed for long range. The 787-9 model appears to have a range of around 15,000 km. To put that in context, a great circle on the Earth is 40,000 km, which means that the 787-9 is only 5,000 km short of being able to fly from any point to another on the planet, assuming that you are allowed to fly over water and your route falls within the ETOPS time. Boeing is trying for 330 minutes (how long you can be away from an airport to make an emergency landing).
Posted by delirian on January 9, 2013 at 9:53 AM · Report this
11
ETOPS:

Engines
Turn
Or
Passengers
Swim
Posted by capicola on January 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM · Report this
JonnoN 12
thankyouthankyouthankyou for letting me know Patrick Smith is writing again after salon kicked him off. I just wish he'd put dates on his articles.
Posted by JonnoN http://www.backnine.org/ on January 9, 2013 at 11:22 AM · Report this
13
After the tail cone fell off an American Airlines A300 and the plane crashed into a neighborhood in Queens (killing everyone on board and some on the ground) a decade ago here in NYC, I haven't been too big on composites for airliners. Let's hope they get the bugs out of the 787. The flight path for landing at one of NY's major airports runs right overhead.
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on January 9, 2013 at 1:03 PM · Report this

Add a comment