You have to remember that 777 in “standard” 3-4-3 configuration also offers narrower seats than a350 with 3-3-3 configuration. You just end up getting a slightly more premium product on the Airbus, unless ifs one of few 3-3-3 airlines on 777.
Boeing claims that the wider 777x interior cabin can support full 18" wide economy seats. I'm skeptical of how many airlines will choose to actually do this, but apparently it's at least an option. I'd also still take the A350, it's 3-3-3 layout is very spacious.
Absolutely agree, the A350 feels like you have more space in your seat and it’s a very quiet aircraft. A350 is the best plane I’ve been on so far and I used to go on 777 a lot so I can compare
Interior configurations are entirely up to the airlines purchasing the plane. Tell us you don't know what you're talking about without telling us, you've gone first
@@BChandl13 Interior configuration is up to the airlines, but to stay competitive the economy simply must be as dense as possible. This means that apart from rare exceptions everyone uses the same configuration for any given plane. Boeing/Airbus have some amount of choice in terms of how wide they make the cabin, knowing that airlines will vary their seat widths between 17"-18" to fit the fuselage. Boeing intentionally chooses 17" for this to maximize passenger count to efficiency, while Airbus uses 18" for comfort. This means that if you try to fit an extra seat in most Airbus planes the seats would need to be impractically narrow, as demonstrated by PAL and several other low cost carriers with 3-3-3 A330s using incredibly tight 16" seats.
I love the 777-300 but I just don't trust any new Boeing aircraft after recent events and seeing how the company is managed. They're not the company they used to be.
@@arandomperson920 even if it's true, the harm has already been done. You can't replace all planes that have already been built in the years of mismanagement
They need a new aircraft. Spent too long milking old designs with new wings & engines. Boeing used to have the upper hand but they decided to cut corners in an industry where you absolutely can't do that.
Airbus is also building these at scale and with muscle memory of fine tuning this assembly. Even if the 777x is perfect from day1, it has to ramp up production safely and meet a wary airline
I would hope the 777x is more efficient. It'll be eight years newer by the time it gets certified. The next question will be how long before there's an A350 Neo
I miss flying on old junk. Climbing up a set stairs next to a gnarly lookin 737 with like 25% of its skin covered in patches and about 9,000,000 extra rivets, and going for a two hour ride at 7-800km/h in it 😂
You have probably boarded many 737NGs, 757s , 767s, and 777s wether you wanted to or not they are reliable planes and airlines will buy them to the point there’s no escape
lol, it’s first flight was five years ago in Jan next year… at this rate, you might not have a chance to fly on it until it’s been a decade since its first flight!
The 777 will also have a much higher MTOW over the A350, so one of the points that was not noted was how much more cargo weight can also be carried on the same route.
@@JefReedYT nobody forgot anything. Performance alone is not that relevant when reliability and assembly become questionable. 747, 757 and 767 were superb machines. 777 has been inferior to those three in assembly and reliability but had superb performance.
Seems that is the reason why US airlines are not interested in it. It's too big for their multi spoke ops. They could always do try a combi but i guess it is still not worth it
@@bp900 very true. I would like the see some U.S. airlines order the 777X at some point. Although it will probably be down the road later on in production where they could probably get a better deal again
It really is amazing that airlines make money. The overhead is huge, now they have to fork out tons of money for late or missed flights. I’m really astonished so many stay afloat.
The 777 is a good aircraft. The 777X will be 10 years late into airline service. You also need to do the math between the 779X and the Airbus 351. The778X is not selling.
The 777X's larger number of passengers is also harder to fill up. The A380 still has a very efficient fuel burn per passenger, it's just impossible to fill 853 seats for every flight.
Well this is with a "standard" 2 class config, the A351K seats a higher number in economy as it still has a 10 abreast seating capability whilst also featuring the length of 1 or 2 more rows. Another thing is that most airlines feature a 1-2-1 on all there widebodies in both business and first class. In such a way, how does the 777-8 seat more? after all the same configuration is present and the A350 is longer. Further more like you said its hard to determine the capabilities of both the 777x-8, and -9 we will have to wait and see if the excessive wing size and dramatically oversized engines lead to it being far too fuel inefficient.
Exactly. The huge massive wing is quite heavy, but it gets more efficient the longer the route, and because it's bigger than the A350 wing it's better suited for very long haul.
Yes but there’s other considerations, coat saved at smaller airports which can’t accommodate the wint but when folded can. Also the 777x’s ge9x engines offer insane takeoff performance.
Boeing’s 777X is not certified yet. And their GE Gen9X turbofan engines have not had their technology proven/matured yet. Just like with the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 turbofan engines on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and the PW 1100G geared turbofan engines on the Airbus a320neo, GE’s newest GenX turbofan engines will have teething issues on Boeing’s 777X.
I will pick the one that has the highest cabin pressure. The A350 is the current leader together with the B787. But I desperately hope the 777X will better cabin pressure by another notch. Everything to arrive healthy and fresh when flying long haul ❤
If they manage to keep the trim balance of the original 777 it will outperform the a350 when it comes to payload because the airbus is too nose heavy so of you have a full capacity of passengers you cant really utilise the full capacity of the front hold…
basically, the A350 is in between the 787 and 777X. passenger count doesn't show comparable. Look at wing area to get the approximate aircraft size optimization point. The 787 wing is 4058 sqft, the A350-900/1000 is 4760-4998 and the 777X is 5562.
The elephant lurking in the room is RR's UltraFan. It's almost certain that Airbus will NEO-ise the A350 with UltraFan at some point, probably quite soon. They'll probably choose that moment to cause maximum damage to Boeing - e.g. just before 777X enters service. That'd move the A350 a long way clear of the 777X. And, there's no new engine for the 777X waiting to be fitted; GE haven't built one. So the 777X risks entering service with engines already 1 generation old, outclassed, and no better options going forward. Both GE and Boeing need the 777X to pay back the existing dev costs, including its engines, before they can afford to move on to new engine designs.
The problem is that both of these planes are design to fly way longer mission then what was mention in this video. Also, you don’t calculate fuel consumption by passenger, you measure based on the payload (kg it can carry so fuel burn per kg per km will be a better matrix). With the much longer mission range, the fuel burn penalty will be much higher for the heavy jet plane (which in this case the Boeing 777-8 is way heavier then the A350-1000 despite carry a little more passenger), on a typical 12-15 hours mission, which are what these aircraft are designed to fly, for every 1 ton of extra weight will increase your trip fuel by about 400kg… so the extra fuel burn penalty for an heavier plane means that the real payload between the two aircraft won’t be that different. Which means the 777-8 is likely to burn more fuel per kg per km then the A350-1000
A350 in service reliability has been an issue. If Boeing can come to the table with reliability like the 300ER it will be a great product. The 778 may never see operation based on minimal backlog, everyone is opting for the 9.
People need to realized the difference in MTOW and total number of passengers. Any N.A to Europe, Europe to Asia, or Asia to Europe flight the 777x will dominate (Vice versa). It's when it comes to those ULTRA long range flights, that the a350 ULR will come out on top for those crazy non stop flights.
My wife flew from the UK to India on an A350-1000 last night. I was somewhat relieved when I found out the plane she was on was from Airbus and not Boeing.
Both very competitive this will not be the decisive factor, one bring more capacity and for some routes and very profit able ones that is very important, also I believe a lot of Airlines will go for more business and first class sitting and that is very profitable and better in a larger fuselage.
The 777-8 burns an extra 2,646 pounds of fuel. Not a wild extra amount. That's around 400 gallons of extra fuel burned. Considering that these aircraft can carry thousands of gallons of fuel...the, 777-8 aircraft carrys 52,136 gallons of fuel lol.
No one is buying the 777-8 version, just a tiny number of sales. It can be argued that the A350-1000 can accommodate more passengers, though with a cramped configuration. The engines are getting an upgrade soon and will be more efficient.
Boeing need to catch up - when 777X starts operation, airbus will soon announce the 350neo... it's already in the talks. And airbus is trying to reduce maintenance cost everywhere - making the plane even better. Boeing will do the same for sure, but usually that comes after enter service - so Airbus is ahead at the moment. And also, the fuel economy for the 777X get worse if you compare longer routes. But even than - lets see when it flies - airline feedback counts the most.
“Airbus is staying in the air” you guys couldn’t even tell the difference between airbus and Boeing until NOW. Grow up and get your facts straight. This plane is far from being rushed, Boeing is actually caring about this planes quality.
@@airplaneboi77wdym? They still can’t lmao, the amount of time I’ve seen people comment “if it’s Boeing, I ain’t going” or something of the sort, on a video about a minor maintenance issue on clearly an airbus aircraft is insane
The A35J is very slightly larger than the 778. Looking at manufacturer seating figures is like comparing apples to oranges. In reality the larger plane here burns less fuel, so it is the more efficient plane, regardless of whether you look at the total fuel burn or per seat.
1. Boeings crash 😂 2. By the time it enters service the 777-8 will be ten years older than the a350-1000 3. The a350-1000 is very versatile and can be used in an annoying 10 abreast layout or the normal 9 abreast is a good size but easy to fill up. 4. The a350 has been in service for a relatively long time mostly issue free except for Qatar which has been solved. 5. The only real thing affecting Airbus deliveries is supply chain for Boeing its safety issues 5. Both are so comfortable except for the 10 abreast a350 but I can forgive it because it’s so uncommon and really not THAT bad. I know which I’m taking (btw the 777X is an amazing plane but still….)
Beacuse boeing haves a secret system... It looses parts which are not needed in order to loose some weight ans save fuel, for example doors, bolts, engine palnels....
In reality they are so similar in cost terms and passenger count that the decision for most airlines will likely be what fleet / manufacturer preferences they already have in place (assuming there are no siginificant other price / operating cost / issues). Not having to retrain a bunch of staff due to differing flight control / systems, etc., is a cost saving and avoids needing extra staff to operate a few others from another company, pay for regular simulation / training time, etc., etc., for a completely different type
The A350 being in service for over 10 years now, is significantly cheaper to obtain than the "new" 777x, significantly cheaper, and looking at how all Airbus planes have cockpit commonality (unlike Boeing), it's a lot cheaper to re-train pilots to a new Airbus model. Takes about 8 hours of training to go from one model to another, something that takes significantly longer for Boeing planes. Boeing is changing that now, but they're not there yet. So all in all, having a Boeing fleet is more expensive than an Airbus fleet of similar sizes. All that being said, Airbus is probably already designing a new model of the A350 to decisively trump the 777x when it finally gets certified, probably a further stretch with NEO.
I already expect a shit ton of airbus fans hating on boeing for NO REASON. Most boeing crashes aren’t even boeings fault. You have NO right to blame everything that happened on Boeing.
We'll see the real numbers when it'll start to fly
Exactly
If it ever enters service. Hope it doesn’t
@@scotlad11 why not? Is it cuz it's Boeing
Airbus cry-fans are hilarious 😅😅
Indeed, all the last Boeing models and versions had better real fuel burn numbers in the end.
You have to remember that 777 in “standard” 3-4-3 configuration also offers narrower seats than a350 with 3-3-3 configuration. You just end up getting a slightly more premium product on the Airbus, unless ifs one of few 3-3-3 airlines on 777.
Boeing claims that the wider 777x interior cabin can support full 18" wide economy seats. I'm skeptical of how many airlines will choose to actually do this, but apparently it's at least an option. I'd also still take the A350, it's 3-3-3 layout is very spacious.
I've flown with Qatar A350 and with Emirates 777, big difference in comfort. 3-4-3 sucks big time
Absolutely agree, the A350 feels like you have more space in your seat and it’s a very quiet aircraft. A350 is the best plane I’ve been on so far and I used to go on 777 a lot so I can compare
Interior configurations are entirely up to the airlines purchasing the plane. Tell us you don't know what you're talking about without telling us, you've gone first
@@BChandl13 Interior configuration is up to the airlines, but to stay competitive the economy simply must be as dense as possible. This means that apart from rare exceptions everyone uses the same configuration for any given plane. Boeing/Airbus have some amount of choice in terms of how wide they make the cabin, knowing that airlines will vary their seat widths between 17"-18" to fit the fuselage. Boeing intentionally chooses 17" for this to maximize passenger count to efficiency, while Airbus uses 18" for comfort. This means that if you try to fit an extra seat in most Airbus planes the seats would need to be impractically narrow, as demonstrated by PAL and several other low cost carriers with 3-3-3 A330s using incredibly tight 16" seats.
Depends if the Boeing crashes
@DeicschafLPminecraftBoeing still has to get the engineering, training of pilots, and the quality control right though.
Or what falls off??
Purveyors of poorly assembled junk.
depends if the airbus burns
@@TTTGGG-d6l burns fuel?
I love the 777-300 but I just don't trust any new Boeing aircraft after recent events and seeing how the company is managed. They're not the company they used to be.
1000% I also love the older 777 but I don’t want to fly Boeing anymore.
Exactly. My favourite airplane ever is the Boeing 777-300ER. But as time is passing I know in the end Airbus is on top.
I have heard Boeing is starting to fix themselves now. I have also heard it might take a few years to do so as well.
@@arandomperson920 even if it's true, the harm has already been done. You can't replace all planes that have already been built in the years of mismanagement
They need a new aircraft. Spent too long milking old designs with new wings & engines.
Boeing used to have the upper hand but they decided to cut corners in an industry where you absolutely can't do that.
777 has a revolutionary technology that can reduce its weight mid-flight by 50 lbs
soon to be increasing to 6,500 kg with a new feature! automated engine "displacement"!
It can drop the door for weight reduction mid flight
An ejected passenger can weight more than 50kg
@@obamalore 😂😂😂
Ooh I see what you did there
Airbus is also building these at scale and with muscle memory of fine tuning this assembly. Even if the 777x is perfect from day1, it has to ramp up production safely and meet a wary airline
perfect in cracked
I would hope the 777x is more efficient. It'll be eight years newer by the time it gets certified. The next question will be how long before there's an A350 Neo
Not immediately for sure. They need to sort out their pbs with the A220, certify the A350F, ramp production because they have almost a 10yr backlog
Dont forget the 777-X sells at a much higher price than the 350
The 777 is a much bigger jet.
Which is why its better
OEW AIRBUS A350 -1000.. 155 TONS
OEW BOEING B777X -9 180 TONS
@@choco8850 That shit is longer than A350, that's obvious
@@miaflyer2376actually, not by much
Would be a much more practical comparison if you’d looked at the 777-9 numbers, since almost no one has the 777-8 on order.
Yo FanRailer didn’t expect to see you here
Good point
Safety is cultural. I’m already not getting on one until it’s flown for a decade
I miss flying on old junk. Climbing up a set stairs next to a gnarly lookin 737 with like 25% of its skin covered in patches and about 9,000,000 extra rivets, and going for a two hour ride at 7-800km/h in it 😂
I miss flying on the old MD-10 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 L
You have probably boarded many 737NGs, 757s , 767s, and 777s wether you wanted to or not they are reliable planes and airlines will buy them to the point there’s no escape
lol, it’s first flight was five years ago in Jan next year… at this rate, you might not have a chance to fly on it until it’s been a decade since its first flight!
nah, 2-3 years is good enough as the heavy checks start and these will find the factory defects
I think they’re both absolutely incredible engineering marvels that will reshape the aviation industry and its future
Except a typical B777 economy cabin is 3-4-3, and for A350 is 3-3-3, although if you do 3-4-3 the comfort would not be much different from B777.
Eh, I still remember 3-3-3 on 777--s from major airlines. Not that long ago :(
The 777 will also have a much higher MTOW over the A350, so one of the points that was not noted was how much more cargo weight can also be carried on the same route.
It can carry more cargo but the empty weight is much larger.
Comparing something tangible to something that’s been delayed for years and just on paper with projections… fantasy football 😅
Even more after the 777 got delayed another year. Not going to be commercial until late 2026 if not even making it in 2026.
there are no other large widebodies to compared the A350 to.
There is no practical point, this is just fun information.
Sorry you said Boeing edges airbus???
Yes, by having more parts that self-uninstall.
You forgot how Boeing 747 and 777 outperformed airbus. The only thing airbus is ahead of Boeing is the a320 family
@@JefReedYT nobody forgot anything. Performance alone is not that relevant when reliability and assembly become questionable. 747, 757 and 767 were superb machines. 777 has been inferior to those three in assembly and reliability but had superb performance.
@JefReedYT right. The 767 had 1, 407 , while A330ceo had 1,475 sales. Close enough.
Boeing’s new revolutionary technology ejects parts mid air to make the plane light.
The 777x wingtip is gonna add a lot to the maintenance cost, also just because you have more seats doesn’t mean you can fill the seats up completely
Enough routes have demand for additional ~30-35 seats over the A350-1000.
Seems that is the reason why US airlines are not interested in it. It's too big for their multi spoke ops. They could always do try a combi but i guess it is still not worth it
@@bp900U.S. airlines probably won’t order them for a good number of years. Just look at United and AAL with the 300ER variant
@@Jack3md true and United's order seemed to be driven by a really good deal to help Boeing bridge the production gap (at the time) to the 777x
@@bp900 very true. I would like the see some U.S. airlines order the 777X at some point. Although it will probably be down the road later on in production where they could probably get a better deal again
One is going to lose a door midair and the other isn’t. Have a guess.
Depends if the airline takes care of it
one is gonna get a burnt engine and the other isnt, take a guess 🤭
How tf is the 777X going to have door issues because it’s just Boeing 😭😭
@@airplaneboi77 many boeing whistleblowers have said that boeing has been cutting costs on safety so there is an argument for that
Hopefully the folding wingtips don't fall off
It really is amazing that airlines make money. The overhead is huge, now they have to fork out tons of money for late or missed flights. I’m really astonished so many stay afloat.
more airlines have gone bankrupt than there are operating today
the normal 777 is such a good aircraft I genuinely can’t wait to see the 777X the comments about it crashing are just kids who read a couple articles
346 kids ?
The 777 is a good aircraft. The 777X will be 10 years late into airline service. You also need to do the math between the 779X and the Airbus 351. The778X is not selling.
Yes but those articles were based on real life events
@@pikaawiga763 what real events? has the 777X crashed? no
@ articles on boeing cutting costs and mis management
interesting, let me check when i can book a flight with the 777 oh wait
You can. Right now.
The 777X's larger number of passengers is also harder to fill up.
The A380 still has a very efficient fuel burn per passenger, it's just impossible to fill 853 seats for every flight.
We are talking about only 30-40 seats over the A350-1000, this is not as hard. Enough routes there what support this.
Thank you bro, I could not find it until now
By the time the 777x will be delivered airbus will have something even better than the a350 !
They would have probably released the A460 that cruise at 100000 feet or something
Dream on. The A350 will be there for a long time.
Well this is with a "standard" 2 class config, the A351K seats a higher number in economy as it still has a 10 abreast seating capability whilst also featuring the length of 1 or 2 more rows. Another thing is that most airlines feature a 1-2-1 on all there widebodies in both business and first class. In such a way, how does the 777-8 seat more? after all the same configuration is present and the A350 is longer. Further more like you said its hard to determine the capabilities of both the 777x-8, and -9 we will have to wait and see if the excessive wing size and dramatically oversized engines lead to it being far too fuel inefficient.
Also 777x would most likely be deployed on routes that are 10plus hours considering it’s designed to fly long hours.
Exactly. The huge massive wing is quite heavy, but it gets more efficient the longer the route, and because it's bigger than the A350 wing it's better suited for very long haul.
@@widget787 The A350 has more range tho.
@@Infiltator2 and still true bigger wing of the 777X is better suited for longer flights.
A350 IS BEAUTIFUL TO FLY IN.
Yes I agree Phil.
The 9 ain’t even certified yet and we’re going over -8 specs🤭 I’m here for it🙏
Yes but there’s other considerations, coat saved at smaller airports which can’t accommodate the wint but when folded can. Also the 777x’s ge9x engines offer insane takeoff performance.
Difficult to compete when you haven't joined the race yet
Boeing’s 777X is not certified yet. And their GE Gen9X turbofan engines have not had their technology proven/matured yet. Just like with the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 turbofan engines on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and the PW 1100G geared turbofan engines on the Airbus a320neo, GE’s newest GenX turbofan engines will have teething issues on Boeing’s 777X.
If it’s boeing I’m not going
Good, more room for passengers.
@@JefReedYT you’ll have even more room when the side of the plane tears open and people get ejected
@@august2936your the type of person who grabs their bag as soon as the plane lands
@@gjp373 good one
@@august2936bro you’re taking one incident and trying to say it’s gonna happen to every plane that made by Boeing💀
It will be the bigger 777 that has the biggest edge I think. The -8 will be more supplimentary for existing 777-9 fleets
I will pick the one that has the highest cabin pressure. The A350 is the current leader together with the B787. But I desperately hope the 777X will better cabin pressure by another notch. Everything to arrive healthy and fresh when flying long haul ❤
If they manage to keep the trim balance of the original 777 it will outperform the a350 when it comes to payload because the airbus is too nose heavy so of you have a full capacity of passengers you cant really utilise the full capacity of the front hold…
Check the dents out in the aluminium where the Boeing employees stomped them into place. 😂😂
Remember the Boeing employee taping the dent on a plane 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
basically, the A350 is in between the 787 and 777X. passenger count doesn't show comparable. Look at wing area to get the approximate aircraft size optimization point. The 787 wing is 4058 sqft, the A350-900/1000 is 4760-4998 and the 777X is 5562.
There will be spare bolts & hinges under the seats
A350 all day long. Sexy beast of a machine.
The elephant lurking in the room is RR's UltraFan. It's almost certain that Airbus will NEO-ise the A350 with UltraFan at some point, probably quite soon. They'll probably choose that moment to cause maximum damage to Boeing - e.g. just before 777X enters service. That'd move the A350 a long way clear of the 777X. And, there's no new engine for the 777X waiting to be fitted; GE haven't built one.
So the 777X risks entering service with engines already 1 generation old, outclassed, and no better options going forward. Both GE and Boeing need the 777X to pay back the existing dev costs, including its engines, before they can afford to move on to new engine designs.
Who would now choose Boeing over Airbus? Basic A320 is so much more comfortable in comparison with 737.
The problem is that both of these planes are design to fly way longer mission then what was mention in this video.
Also, you don’t calculate fuel consumption by passenger, you measure based on the payload (kg it can carry so fuel burn per kg per km will be a better matrix).
With the much longer mission range, the fuel burn penalty will be much higher for the heavy jet plane (which in this case the Boeing 777-8 is way heavier then the A350-1000 despite carry a little more passenger), on a typical 12-15 hours mission, which are what these aircraft are designed to fly, for every 1 ton of extra weight will increase your trip fuel by about 400kg… so the extra fuel burn penalty for an heavier plane means that the real payload between the two aircraft won’t be that different. Which means the 777-8 is likely to burn more fuel per kg per km then the A350-1000
Worth mentioning that the A350-1000 will be 10 years old by the time the 777x enters service
What? Fly in a new Boeing? No way, José!
In freedom units: approx. 6.6lbs or 44.5gal per passenger for this flight.
Load factors not factored in. Time slots also makes the seats harder to fill.
A350 in service reliability has been an issue. If Boeing can come to the table with reliability like the 300ER it will be a great product. The 778 may never see operation based on minimal backlog, everyone is opting for the 9.
i want to see a successor to the a380, hope they make one
People need to realized the difference in MTOW and total number of passengers. Any N.A to Europe, Europe to Asia, or Asia to Europe flight the 777x will dominate (Vice versa). It's when it comes to those ULTRA long range flights, that the a350 ULR will come out on top for those crazy non stop flights.
Depends....how many door bolts is the Boeing missing?
Bot
Are the 777X and 777-8 the same thing? You started out saying 777X but switched to 777-8
There is no such thing as a 777X. The 777X is the term to describe the 777-8 and 777-9.
My wife flew from the UK to India on an A350-1000 last night. I was somewhat relieved when I found out the plane she was on was from Airbus and not Boeing.
The standard configuration on the A350 is 3 classes actually.
Missing bolts may affect the weight as well
Not funny
Boeing 777x will soon be adding weights to reinforce cracks found in the thrust links of its 777X test jets.
Both very competitive this will not be the decisive factor, one bring more capacity and for some routes and very profit able ones that is very important, also I believe a lot of Airlines will go for more business and first class sitting and that is very profitable and better in a larger fuselage.
Factoring in costs of it being grounded as another issue will come to surface shortly after its operating.
Very good calculation.
Singapore 🇸🇬 Airlines expecting the First Boeing 777-9 to be delivered in mid 2025.
The 787 is a closer comparison imho, both all new composite airframes.
Lets see the fuel numbers from boeing when a door fell off
Airbus fans are stupidly hilarious 😂
Let’s wait t’il it flies and see how much airlines have to pay for the numerous problems that will appear…
Face off. One is certified one is a big dream at the moment.
747 was the beast
The 777-8 burns an extra 2,646 pounds of fuel. Not a wild extra amount. That's around 400 gallons of extra fuel burned. Considering that these aircraft can carry thousands of gallons of fuel...the, 777-8 aircraft carrys 52,136 gallons of fuel lol.
the fuck is a gallon
@@randomwaffler 3757.4 milliliters
No one is buying the 777-8 version, just a tiny number of sales. It can be argued that the A350-1000 can accommodate more passengers, though with a cramped configuration. The engines are getting an upgrade soon and will be more efficient.
You're comparing actual numbers to theoretical numbers.
Invalid result.
The a 350 has the capacity for a 10 passenger abreast configuration but no airlines does it i think
i actually wanna try flying on 777x just to experience the folded wings
Its theoretical at this point?
I think a more accurate and fair comparison would be a350-900 to 787-9 🤔
Boeing need to catch up - when 777X starts operation, airbus will soon announce the 350neo... it's already in the talks. And airbus is trying to reduce maintenance cost everywhere - making the plane even better. Boeing will do the same for sure, but usually that comes after enter service - so Airbus is ahead at the moment. And also, the fuel economy for the 777X get worse if you compare longer routes. But even than - lets see when it flies - airline feedback counts the most.
Depends if the door is gone or not
It’s only on the max
Boeing can also jettison some bolts and parts to make the plane lighter and save more fuel...
it does not matter, as airbus is the one staying in the air 😂
“Airbus is staying in the air” you guys couldn’t even tell the difference between airbus and Boeing until NOW. Grow up and get your facts straight. This plane is far from being rushed, Boeing is actually caring about this planes quality.
@@airplaneboi77They should. People are starting to lose trust
@@airplaneboi77wdym? They still can’t lmao, the amount of time I’ve seen people comment “if it’s Boeing, I ain’t going” or something of the sort, on a video about a minor maintenance issue on clearly an airbus aircraft is insane
@@theamazingspy3179 My gosh the Media and Public are stupid. Boeing is safe. McDonell Douglas Isn’t.
@@derjenigewelcheAha! So why was my flight from YVR to YUL on a 777-300ER full?
How it compares? In short it doesn’t...the a350 has been for nearly 10 years...the 777x has been delayed further...
The A35J is very slightly larger than the 778. Looking at manufacturer seating figures is like comparing apples to oranges. In reality the larger plane here burns less fuel, so it is the more efficient plane, regardless of whether you look at the total fuel burn or per seat.
If it’s Boeing, we ain’t going!
Bot
1. Boeings crash 😂
2. By the time it enters service the 777-8 will be ten years older than the a350-1000
3. The a350-1000 is very versatile and can be used in an annoying 10 abreast layout or the normal 9 abreast is a good size but easy to fill up.
4. The a350 has been in service for a relatively long time mostly issue free except for Qatar which has been solved.
5. The only real thing affecting Airbus deliveries is supply chain for Boeing its safety issues
5. Both are so comfortable except for the 10 abreast a350 but I can forgive it because it’s so uncommon and really not THAT bad.
I know which I’m taking (btw the 777X is an amazing plane but still….)
B777 can fit 10 abreast seats
You have to consider cargo capacity, that’s also part of payload.
You can run the A350 in the same cramped 3-4-3 layout....
Compare it with the B779, as nobody ordered the -8.
I have two remarks. 1. One of those aircraft is in service. 2. New York to London is not long haul.
Sure but once it becomes commercial you need to make sure that it can keep flying…
The 350 seats 3-3-3. The 777X seats 3-4-3. The 350 gets the passengers' nod.
Including passengers numbers then assumes a full capacity flight - How often does that happen ?
We will first see a 350NEO before the 777X
Beacuse boeing haves a secret system... It looses parts which are not needed in order to loose some weight ans save fuel, for example doors, bolts, engine palnels....
not to mention they have a built in Theme song. the lyrics of the song is "Whoop Whoop. Pull up"
@@Rayan-yw2xdpft that got me
Not funny👎🏻
In reality they are so similar in cost terms and passenger count that the decision for most airlines will likely be what fleet / manufacturer preferences they already have in place (assuming there are no siginificant other price / operating cost / issues).
Not having to retrain a bunch of staff due to differing flight control / systems, etc., is a cost saving and avoids needing extra staff to operate a few others from another company, pay for regular simulation / training time, etc., etc., for a completely different type
The A350 being in service for over 10 years now, is significantly cheaper to obtain than the "new" 777x, significantly cheaper, and looking at how all Airbus planes have cockpit commonality (unlike Boeing), it's a lot cheaper to re-train pilots to a new Airbus model. Takes about 8 hours of training to go from one model to another, something that takes significantly longer for Boeing planes. Boeing is changing that now, but they're not there yet.
So all in all, having a Boeing fleet is more expensive than an Airbus fleet of similar sizes.
All that being said, Airbus is probably already designing a new model of the A350 to decisively trump the 777x when it finally gets certified, probably a further stretch with NEO.
is it just me or does the cockpit window of the 787 and the A350 look similar
A crashed plane burns 0 fuel per passenger!
the airbus is also 100 percent less likely to break apart mid air or randomly crash into the ground
Who is crazy enough to fly boeing
Millions of people each year
We gotta do the safety stats😂
Dumbass
The 777 GE engines are also bigger then the RR from airbus
783/1000 subscribing to aviation RUclipsrs 😊
Was it really loading on the starboard side?
This assumes the FAA allows the Boeing to fly. If it's Boeing, I ain't going on ANYTHING they throw together and call a plane.
Bot
If it aint Boeing we aint going 💀
Bot
@@Spookycatface123 im a bot 100% 🤖
A350-1000 Ultra Long Range (A350-1000 ULR) Fan here
I already expect a shit ton of airbus fans hating on boeing for NO REASON.
Most boeing crashes aren’t even boeings fault. You have NO right to blame everything that happened on Boeing.
Not sure who will be brave enough to fly on the 777x when it enters service