Why The Boeing 787-10 Isn’t As Popular As The -8 And -9
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024
- The Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner is the newest and longest member of the 787 family. The aircraft took its first flight on March 31st, 2017, with its first delivery taking place in March 2018 with launch customer Singapore Airlines. But with just 202 orders, the stretched Dreamliner variant comprises just under 11% of total 787 orders. Why isn’t the 787-10 as popular as its shorter siblings?
Article link: simpleflying.c...
Video source links:
787-10 and 737 MAX 9 Boeing • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin...
787-10 Test Flight • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin...
787-10 KLM • Unboxing the new KLM B...
787-10 ANA • 【4Ｋ】全日空 Boeing 787-10...
787-10 United • 【4Ｋ】ユナイテッド航空 Boeing 7...
787-10 Vietnam Airlines • [PlaneSpotting] Boeing...
787 air can • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin... waK24yPGewE
787 Hawaiian • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin... GTv8mHhVqgQ
787 Oman Air • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin... kxn_41_opiI
787 Air New Zealand in the making • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin... YIla0U8UPb8
787 ANA delivery of the first • Boeing 787-10 Dreamlin... iv26cblNZjQ
Photos:
commons.wikime...
Website: simpleflying.com/
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek
![FNAF vs TF2 - Episode 2 [SFM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z5b3V2-VLb0/mqdefault.jpg)
The -10 was made for routes like Trans Atlantic, Inter Asia, and Europe to Asia. If you look at KLM for example the published range is the same as the 777-200. So KLM has being using it as a direct replacement in it system.
The 787-10 will become more popular as more 777-200ERs reach retirement age and its economics become even more clear. Great aircraft for it’s designed application.
The 787-10 is underpowered with GE engines and has less range. The a350-900 replaces the 777-200ER more than the 787-10 does.
@@hodb3906 the A350 doesn’t have better engines, their range is achieved by their larger fuel capacity, Boeing can do the same with an additional 787-10 fuel tank
@@zaijiancelisso a 787-10er
@@zaijiancelisWell, it does, it is both more powerful and more efficient.
why does the audio just change to a guitar with no narration at 2:20
Merry Christmas to the entire simple flying team who make these amazing videos possible
Merry Christmas dude
@@hulklovesaviation7535 you too
It's not exactly an undersold aircraft. I would be tempted to say it's actually more popular than 787-8. If -9 came earlier than -8 it would have sold more than 1500 and -8 would have sold lesser than 300. With the replacement of 777-200 & 200ERs and some 300s coming up. I would say it's will get it's way into mainstream and get more popular. But it's still upto Boeing, with the quality issues resolved this would go long way than 200s, literally and metaphorically.
The actual reason why the 787-10 is not as popular as the -8 and -9 is because 777-200 and er is already being replaced by the Airbus a350-900 and airlines does not need the 787-10
@@tapaschakraborty8534 no not exactly! Type rating is very important. And those who ordered the 777, will go to Boeing and get steep discounts like that of UA, AA, KLM, air newzealand, SQ. And training is also cheaper unlike for A359 (an unbelievable aircraft, no doubt). That's how it'll work. In the coming years the probability of 351 to get more orders is also high than 359 because of replacing older 380s, 333, 343,346 and some older 77Ws. Can't conclude this before the aircraft is flying commercially for minimum of a decade.
@@tapaschakraborty8534 your statement is simply untrue
@@ShiroganeProduction he might have opined that way. No probs in that. Everyone is in this community because they love aviation and travel and it differs with that. Peace out man. And his statement is in one way true because Delta replaced their 777-200LRs with 359
@@tapaschakraborty8534 not true. Singapore Airlines, even though they are one of the biggest A350-900 operators bought the 787-10 specifically as a 777-200/ER replacement
I LOVE SEEING A -10 ON A GATE... ESP W UNITED'S NEW LIVERY
An A-10 on the gate would be amazing!
I have never seen a 787-10 variants before only 787 -8 -9
As the video suggests... just wait for the 772's to get a little older and in need of replacing. Common cockpit commonality with existing 787 operators, plus all the other efficiencies will make the 787-10 a hot one to buy/lease! It's a long game for Boeing IMO.
the WHAT
There is a loss of voice over between 2:22-3:51 where a guitar solo is heard instead.
Merrry Christmas Everyone! The 787-10 Is Acctually My Favourite Out Of The -9 And -8! I Luckily Flew On It With United From Dublin To Newark In January Right Before The Pandemic Started! Great Video!
Merry Christmas to the other side of the world everyone
You live in Australia??
You also have a merry Christmas
Merry Christmas to you too god bless you
Same to you bro!
Same to you
I signed up ur newsletter it’s awesome stuff especially the quality is beyond awesome thx I’m becoming an aviation enthusiast
Wait what newsletter?
@@Enthai21 go to simple flying.com and sign up to get awesome aviation news at ur email
@@rishiflying6686 ooh nice thx for the info
It overlaps the low end of the triple-7 in seating capacity.
You mentioned at the end of the video a possibility I was going to point out, and that is the 787-10 could in time replace the ageing B777-200 while competing directly with rival aircrafts in the same category and passenger capacity. If Boeing"s reason for building the dash 10 was this, I think its a very brilliant strategy .
2:18 wth!?!?
Merry Christmas to Simple Flying and everyone
It’s important to note the A350-1000 (which has had less deliveries than the 787-10) has an even lower backlog. Perhaps a video could be done for it too as I would that interesting
Merry Christmas!
Thank you👍 Have a good one
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 The 787 program costs 3 times as much as the A350 program....so even if the A350-1000 isn't selling as well as even the 787-10.....Boeing has more to lose due to their massive program cost.....Merry Christmas by the way
@@adityavenkatesh4173 True I’ve not forgotten that point with A350 program costing less. Thanks and have a good Christmas
It's pretty straight forward though. The -1000 is a good replacement for B777-300ER. But many of B777-300ER are actually extremely young. There isn't any demand for it right now.
The 2nd reason would probably because how many airlines now prefer to use smaller aircraft and focus on profitability rather than dumping discounted tickets to gain market shares. Hence why they prefer smaller aircraft now.
I don't think it would make more than 1 minute to explain that. So I'm not sure how it would translate to a video though.
Is it just me or is 1/3rd of the audio is music
I don't know what posses people to add music to their informational videos.
Let’s not forget the 787-10 is in direct competition with the A350-900, a very similar aircraft in term of seating capacity and fuel efficiency that came before the 787-10, and with a longer range.
It's also have similar capacity and range as 10-abreast B777-200, which only sold 88 frames. So it's not like they have a market to begin with.
It is and it isn’t a direct competitor. In terms of capacity the 787-10 can seat more. For example Singapore Airlines operates both types in a two class config. 787-10: 337, A350: 303. Range goes to the A350 with a max of 8200 miles versus the 6400 of the 787-10. An airlines choice comes down to their needs. Do they a super long range aircraft with more seating than a 787-9 but not necessarily the seating of a A350-1000, then A350-900 makes sense. Busier high density routes seem to favor the 787-10 where most of missions fall in line with the need for 3000-5000 miles.
What's about that music at 2:20?
Nothing can beat the Boeing 747. The Queen Of The Skies.
💯
Indeed, and then there’s also the 2nd best the 777, Prince (or Princess) of the Skies as I like to call it
Except for a Piper Cub.
A380 would have, could have , had it taken off in sales. Huge boondoggle. 747 was definitely the more successful of the two.
I feel like the 787-10 is designed to fill a very different role versus the 787-8 and 787-9. While the 787-8 and 787-9 are usually deployed on long-haul routes, including many of the longest nonstop flights in the world, the 787-10 is clearly optimised for regional, short to medium range flights. As of 2023, most of the 787-10s in service are in East Asia, operating regional flights in the Asia-Pacific. It's basically the perfect replacement for the older Boeing 777 variants and potentially the Airbus A330 as well.
2:20 At this time stamp, the music suddenly shows up, and I can't hear your voice or the music for some reason.
same here
@@jonathanb.1215 could be copyright music?
@@SUSSYNEGGOR idk seems odd that they music would cover his voice instead of vice versa
@@jonathanb.1215 that's weird
Merry Christmas world!
I think the B787-10 still has a future and judging its popularity in such a short timespan is not fare. How many B787-9 were sold in 3 years? Also, remember the pandemic...airlines are rethinking their business models and when things go back to normal they might consider the 787-10 for shorter range/high capacity routes.
Yes the pandemic has caused many to cancel or hold their orders of not only B787-10 but also other planes
You're absolutely spot on, the pandemic has changed the landscape of the business model of aircraft purchases
2:19 whatever the hell happened there
That Hawaiian Airlines livery though 👌🏽🤙🏽
Yup very unique.👍
I love the look of the Hawai'ian 787
I agree: The older short 777's and the newer (but few) long-range 767's still work, but will need a replacement before long. This is what it's for.
For me, the -10 is what the 787 should be. Such a nice airplane.
It will get popular in the next few years I think .
Nice Vid , Liked
So the narrator just died mid recording or something
Do a comparison between 787-10 and 777-200
Merry Christmas 🎅
Because of the short range. Air New Zealand purchase 10 I believe 787- 10 with extra fuel tanks for the extended range. Boeing was worried that the 787 would interfere with the 777 Dash nine and 777 Dash eight sales, and this is why they did not add extra fuel tanks to any of the 787‘s. Peoples Forget that the 787 Dash nine flew from Tahiti to Paris that was 9,765 NM with a 130 passengers and without extra fuel tanks So Boeing knows and will not announce the true flight range of the 787.
Let be honest, you are true. A 787-10 with a long-range would be enough for dominating the market, but some things as this are something companies should think about and make decisions because as you say, it would interfere with the 777x orders.
Merry Christmas ⛄⛄⛄⛄ to all..... Great video Loved it much ❤️
aircraft rarely operate on routes near max range. in that case, any extra fuel capacity is dead weight, so the 787-10 will ultimately make sense. For now, airlines are probably just happy to operate fully depreciated 777-200's at higher fuel consumption versus a new 787-10 with depreciate cost though lower fuel. I imagine the 350-1000 will also do well in high density
Unlike 787-10, A350-1000 is more capable and can do 14-15 hour flights, such as a Transpacific or a Trans-Siberian route.
@@antonh1709 787-10 competes with A350-9 not the1000.
@@Tampa0123456789 A350-100 competes more with the 777 family
It's not that simple. ER aircraft with higher fuel capacities also typically come with higher MTOW's.
That translates to them being able to carry more payload when the tanks aren't full (which they seldom are in any commercial aircraft).
That's part of why the 767-300ER and 777-200ER/300ER were vastly more popular than their non-ER equivalents. It's just more flexible. The 767-200ER and 300ER were transatlantic work horses, but were also quite happily used in the European leisure market where they would be half-fuelled or less.
@@BrySkye one thing to note tho is that 777 300ER not only features a slight mtow bump but almost 100k kg more which is an extreme jump, includes aerodynamic improvements like wing extensions, fuselage changes and more, landing gear modifications and most importantly new generation engines. It isn't as simple of a modification as the 767ER or 772ER variants and isn't something that's possible anytime soon with the 787 family.
Try doing a little research before actually posting a video that is completely incorrect. The -10 has has only been delivering for 3 years. The 787 started with the -8 but the -10 has far outsold the -8 since the -10 intro. Yes the -9 is more popular, but try doing some real research beyond looking at the total deliveries by minor model.
Even though it is one of the reason. The main reason for the lack luster order would be due to it's size and range capability. For regional jet, it's too big, and for long-haul flights, it doesn't have enough range.
B787-10 have similar range and capacity to 10-abreast B777-200 (88 frames), which doesn't actually sell as well as the other model. So it's not like they are replacing aging model like B787-8 and B787-9 did.
Operation in high and humid airport became a problem too for them. Covid certainly doesn't help.
hey, could u make a vid on the green 747 at Heathrow pls?
Merry Christmas to everyone at Simply Flying!
Simple*
That might have been a new 747!
Yes, Boeing was planning on making a 747 trijet
@@what_should_i_call_myself4382 It's used for fire training and is a Frankenstein plane, not a new 747 trijet (unfortunately)
Oh ok
Merry Christmas and happy new year
I think you hit the nail on the head. The -10 is too comparable to older 777 in range and capacity so what's then the point of getting it unless you're already planning on moving on from your 777
It’s fascinating how the airlines know what routes they have, how many people they carry, how much freight they carry and the distances they might need to cover in regards to what planes they buy. Ryan air and easyJet’s model of all one make, makes it easy for pilot training, spare parts and across the board knowledge but then say BA with a mixture means if either make is grounded, at least they can continue operations.
I’m still to travel in an A350 (I was booked on one for next May in the new suite but BA changed it to an A380) and the 787 10 that BA are having delivered.
Just like the 777-300, the 787-10 won't be popular until a ER version comes by. The "vanilla" -10 came late, thus lost many sales to the -8 and -9 that could be delivered earlier. Eventually the -10 will pickup sales and become the most sold version of the 787.
Agree, a 787-10ER or 10lr would be very exelent.
Kinda agree. Boeing ought to redo the research on the feasibilities on the creation of 787-10ER or 787-10LR unless 777-8 is realized.
@@talesfromunderthemoon I would hardly believe that the 777-8 would be worthy over a long range 787-10. The 777 is optimized for higher weight, thus it would be less efficient in a smaller size. And chances are that most long range airliner operators shopping for an aircraft of that size already have 787s, so they would likely prefer to stay within their type.
That what I said , the 777-8X is actually much larger than the -10 but , it could better compete with the a350-900 which is the more popular varient of the 350 family.
I said myself that a 10er could eventually become the 787's best seller and could give the a350-900 some troubles with its better economics . Hope it is released soon
The Rival Airbus 350XWB-1000 is also longer and has wider cabin too.
The -10 isn't made in Seattle and only built at the newer Boeing plant in Charleston.
The Charleston plant has a higher frequency of issues with completed aircraft and a number of airlines have said they don't want aircraft built at that plant.
Well, that was my explanation, the economics. They may have to develop an ER or LR version of it one day to increase the range.
Like you said, it's cutting into the triple seven segment.
The B787-10 can be viewed as the B777-200 replacement as the B777-8 is the B777-200ER/LR replacement. The B787-8, -9 and -10 give airlines that operated an all B787 fleet good 'mix & match' capability to suit passenger and flight operation demands. Air NZ is replacing their B777-200ER's with the B787-10 as the type meets the airline's medium to long haul flight requirements.
To succeed, the 787-10 has to beat the A330 because outside the US, the A330 dominates this medium-haul, mid-to-high capacity market, or NMA, so to speak. I do not actually think Air New Zealand will use the 787-10s on long-haul flights actually... they have the 787-9 and 777-300ER for that. They will however, need them for Auckland and Christchurch to Australian cities because I don't think Australian airports are being expanded in any significant manner. A lot of talk, not a lot actually being done.
@@ddarkdomz - The B787-10 is replacing the B777-200ERs on the medium to long haul routes like NZ to Asia, NZ to Perth (Australia) and Adelaide, NZ to Honolulu, NZ to Los Angeles, NZ to Tahiti and back up the A321neo on the short haul international services like to NZ to east coast Australia, NZ to Fiji and NZ to Rarotonga. The B777-300ER's are currently in short term storage and those who are stored in NZ are some times used for the occasional freight only flights to keep their hours up. The airline has been reduce a domestic carrier passenger due to NZ boarders being closed, leaving the B787-9's are the main stay for the medium to long haul international fleet mainly for freight and occasional passenger flights. The airline has written off the B777-200ER's and are currently in long storage and may not return to service with the airline. The fate of the B777-300ERs is unclear but there is strong speculation they may be withdrawn once the final delivery of the B787-10's has been completed, leaving the airline as a B787 only fleet for future medium to ultra long haul operations.
Short Answer : A350.
Along with all the reasons mentioned in the video, it’s also because of the A350XWB, which was made as a competitor to the 777 series
The original 787 was to fulfill huge pent up demand to replace 767s. Turns out its finances weren't great so Boeing fixed than by selling the 787 with 9 across seating and sales took off, but it still initially replaced pent up demand to replace 767s, just as the 777 was to replace the DC-10/L1011/MD11 aircraft
the 787-10 is just filling natural demand. There is no pent up demand for it, and as you mentioned, competes against the 777. Some airlines may prefere to grow their 777 fleet, some prefer to grow then 787 fleet (pilots, spare parts, maintenance facilities etc).
Can you make a video on Air India's bidding
at least that Boeing makes an upgrade to the 787-10 with more range and some details to fix, I think it would be very popular.
Nobody wants to fly empty planes, the A380 has already taught this painful lesson. Shorter ranger meaning less flexibility, with increased passenger capacity that you can no longer guarantee, even during pre-COVID travel.
Travel isn't what it was 10 or so years ago, travel destinations are no longer predefined to the typical countries or continents (20 years ago the West: London, Paris, New York, etc; the East: Tokyo, Hong Kong, Sydney, etc) . You can't guarantee to pack a plane to a destination anymore because the world has opened up and a lot of people want to go elsewhere. Hence why the Hub & Spoke model is working mostly for the giant airlines with huge, expansive networks. But since the majority of airlines are not in this category, most can't support it, and will rely on point-to-point where travel capacity will be inconsistent.
Boeing should Develop the 787-10ER, to directly replace the 777-200ER by adding additional fuel tanks.
I think the reason 787-10 isn’t selling is:
Shorter range
More passengers
Higher chance of tail strike
There isn't much demand for it. Similar aircraft like B777-200 and A350-900 Regional only sold at small number.
Haha
Higher chance of tail strike ? Have you seen the 777-300er ? How many tail strkes has it had?
It's all about the range!!
It’s the range (which should be corrected soon because in the Air NewZealand deal over a year ago Boeing promised to up the MTOW) and takeoff performance in hot weather. Whilst Boeing lists the takeoff performance as 100 meters shorter than the -9, this is only the case in the optimal conditions. I think another factor is it’s only built at SC unlike the other 2 variants (until next year)
Boeing only added 6 tons to the MTOW, that’s maximum 1 hours of extra flight time, so its still lack a lot of range compared to the -8/-9 and the A350. But they can’t do much with engine performance in hot weather at MTOW. The engines to the 787 is optimised for the -8 and -9, the -10 program was not finished with its design before 2015.
@@12345anton6789 They need to get GE and RR to offer high thrust then when they can. What might help as well is a slight wing extension
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 Maybe a new engine built on the latest GE9X technology is the solution. Higher thrust in the existing engine can only be solved by injecting more fuel into the engine. This is how they solved the thrust increase that the 787-10 required, but then you get a “hotter” engine which limits its performance in hot climate. Another problem is the weight limitations, the -9/-10 was constructed as a 254 ton aircraft at MTOW. To change this significantly they have to redesign more or less the whole wingbox making it a heavier aircraft and loose its commonality with the 787-9..
I think the 787 family of aircraft is perfect as they are now, they where intended to compete/replace the similar sized A330 which it has done very well.
Merry Christmas! 🌲
I would imagine it's because a lot of airlines who wanted a 777 replacement went for the Airbus A350 (Air France, Alitalia/ITA, Asiana, Delta, JAL, Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines, Thai Airways and probably United in the future). Some airlines (American, Aeromexico, Kenya Airways, Scoot, Royal Brunei) went for the either the 787-9 the 787-8 or both.
If you look at other Boeing aircraft, when multiple stretches of an aircraft are offered, it is usually the middle variant which sells the best, in the 767 it was the -300/300ER which sold the most aircraft (followed by the 200/200ER) and with the 737NG it was the -800 (followed by the -700). With the 787 it is the -9 which has sold the most (followed by the -8).
No it is actually the ER version that sells the best . A 787-10 ER could be a banger for Boeing .
Look how many more orders the 767-300ER got more than the 300 and how the 777-300ER sold better than the 777-300.
an ER version of the -10 could give airbus some troubles
@@mmm0404 Where two variants are offered then yes it is the ER version like with the 777 but a long range 787-10 would be heavier and would need a new wing, engine and landing gear. Whereas the 787-9 still has a long range while still using the same wing, engines and landing gear. the 787-8 and 9 also have a higher cruise altitude than the -10.
You forgot to mention that Airbus made an alternative with the A330 neo
range and competetionplays a role so 9 is best 8 is needed for next 8 years if you count a 15 years for normal airplane cycle version
Range is the problem. It has nothing to do with the aircraft flying only for a few years. Its main problem is its shorter range comparing it to its brothers in the 787 series.
Singapore Airlines had ordered 30 Boeing 787-10 besides the smaller 787-8 and 787-9 to Subsidiary Airlines Scoot Airlines.
Might help understand things better if you add in prices for each plane both new and used. Also comparison prices for Airbus equivalents. Then the popularity or lack of the 787-10 might be more obvious?
Merry Christmas
Large passenger aircraft orders have been falling since 2015 .The Airbus A350, A330 have also given more choice and the 787-10 has a far higher price that the 787-8 and -9.
like you say in the video (more or less), there is really no point in comparing the total numbers bough, since one has had years more time on the market. You would need to make a graph showing monthly or yearly sales, and compare them both over a similar period of time.
Perfect for high capacity medium-haul flights, which is exactly what Singapore Airlines is intending to use them for, but for many airlines wanting point-to-point long haul flights, the 787-10 doesn't have the range, although 7400 miles is still a lot, LAX to Shanghai, no problem. (I think) Also, I'm sure some airlines are considering buying the -10 to replace older aircraft of similar capacity and performance, but COVID means that seats can't be filled, so they are holding back on their commitment for now.
Merry Christmas everyone!
The fact that is solely build at Charleston, where quality control is virtually non-existent, might also be a reason...
Note all 787 production is moving there next year
#Trude
It's sad. Boeing is crumbling before our eyes.
Agreed.....
Also Boeings record on stretched aircraft is marred by the 737 Max debacle.
I think the B787-10 was built as the ideal B777-200ER replacement within this decade. But the A350 has a slight advantage with better range and MTOW. But current -200er & 787 operators, like American Airlines, could buy the -10 in the future.
Pandemic, A321XRL is the lower plane for the medium market segment, and 787-10 is the high plane (140 passengers more; and 1500nm more) both planes really didn't compete, but the companies don't know now which demand they will have or which routes will be profitable.
A321XLR?
@@Kayroeee Sorry I didn't explain correctly, there a gap between single-aisle and double-aisle planes. At this moment no company is making a Midsize Airplane, the market share is too low, the lower position is for the A321XLR, and the higher position is for the 787-10 those planes are in borders of the gap. Could you fill a 330seats between two cities, 8000km apart? 787-10 is your option, if you only could fill 200 seats A321XLR is your option... The real problem is, at this moment there are not making planes in Midsize Airplane, and also the market is very low. There is a market for single-aisle planes in Europe, the USA, and Asia. And for the twin Aisle to connect those 3 markets... But A321XRL could mix those areas and also the 787-10... But the problem is the efficiency of that plane for distances lower than 8000km. The necessity of Midsize Airplane will increase only if Sud America and Africa increase their value in the economic market. so at this moment, I expect sales of A321XLR around 200 aircraft and 787-10 around 500 aircraft. With those numbers, I don't expect to see a new Midsize Airplane.
@@loodwich I also apologize for not pointing it right but it's A321XLR not A321XRL. I just wanted to let you know that there was a typo in your comment. And don't worry bro ur explanation is 💯
@@Kayroeee sorry, that was my dyslexia, thanks.
@@loodwich understood, merry Christmas! 🎄☃️❄
The shorter range of the 787-10 has limited its sales. It will be used to replace the 777-200ER on routes up to 6,000 nautical miles in range, and that means longer flights in eastern Asia and transatlantic routes (for now). There are plans for an higher MTOW variant with more fuel capacity that can fly up to 7,200 nautical miles, and then the plane really does become a 777-200ER replacement.
obviously success will come to the -10 when additional fuel tanks are added to make it the commercial success it deserves
it will lose efficiency then
The best replacement for a 777-200 or -200ER right now is the 777-200LR. This plane is in the same size category as the 787-10. However, the -200LR has A LOT more range. Meaning that it gives airlines a lot more versatility if they want to fly longer routes that the -10 just can’t fly.
Yeah but the 77L passenger version is already out of production. It was a great 772 replacement tho as it has way more pay load, range and efficiency.
@@aseem7w9 are you sure it’s out already?
@@strikersix2838 Yes, all planes of 777NG series except 777F (derived of 777 200LR) won't be produced anymore and Boeing won't take any new orders. There's still some 777 300ER left to be delivered but the last one already has been built and went to Aeroflot. The last 777 200LR was delivered less than a year back to Turkmenistan Airlines.
There is a story about the engine tech used in the 787 that Airbus didn't know was available and that's why they went with the A380. Sounds like an interesting story
Is there a possibility that Boeing might consider an Extended Range variant ?
They could/will , it would be interesting how it fares with the a350 since it's seats a little more passengers and is more efficient.
An increase in range to about 14K(km ) could give airbus some problems
So how many hours 787.10 maksimum can fly without non stop?
That’s 1872 orders, not 1882 according to the graph you displayed
With the 777 relevant still, there’s no need for the 787-10. Like he said, once the 777 is fazed out the 787-10 will slid on in along with the new 777x.
Merry christmas
There is too much overlap between range and capacity between Boeing products.
nah.None of the planes Boeing currently sells over laps in any way.
Glad my countries flag carrier operates the 787-9 and the 787-10! Greetings from Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦
As a RUclips channel with globnnal viewership, you should mention the distances in miles as well as kms as standard practice.
Another reason is the A350-900. The 787-10 competes almost directly with the A350-900. The A350-900 entered service 18 months after the 787-10 and 6x as many Airbus planes have been delivered. The 787-9 competes with the a330-900neo an older plane and has done well against it.
The first A350-900 was delivered in December 2014, the first 787-10 in March 2018, that’s -39 months
If I could, I would surely buy it...
It’s possible that airlines aren’t ordering as many aircraft in the last several years as prior to that time? When the 777er’s retire there should be a big market for the -10.
For the -200ER it’s an ideal replacement despite the range shortage. Not the larger and more popular (and also newer) -300ER though as that what’s Boeing markets 777X for
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 Due to the pandemic, the need for business class has fallen and for business travel and many experts have confirmed that a world post-COVID will not see business demand return to normal levels, which means less seats being sold and smaller aircraft being purchased.
I’ve tried it on MSGS 2020, and it can’t even get to Sydney from Lax or San Fransisco, A 787-9 route by United and was by Qantas and American.
whats MSGS 2020?
@@mgsaviation9292 Is that Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020?
@@Sacto1654 maybe
My bad, meant MSFS 2020 or Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
You forgot to mention that the 787-10 competes with the A350-900, which is a more efficient aircraft with a similar passenger capacity. The 787-10 has a 101 t fuel tank and a range of 11,910 km while the A350-900 has a 110 t fuel tank and a range of 15,000 km - a 25.9% greater range using 8.9% more fuel. So, the 787-10 is only going to be interesting for customers that already have 787s in their fleet and can live with the 787-10's lower range.
The -9 is everyone’s fav due to its long range
Was hoping the 787-10 would be the vehicle to revive short range, high demand intra-continental widebody services. It isn't turning out that way 😢
Nothing is selling right now. It’s well position for the future but no wide bodies are selling right now. Everyone is trying to get out of the current orders let alone ordering new ones
Well,the Boeing B787-10 have a lower range than Boeing B787-9 and Boeing B787-8.The -10 range was only 12,964 km.The -9 range was 14,800 km while the -8 range was 14,200 km.Plus,I'm quite worried about the low ground proximity on Boeing B787-10.The rival of this aircraft,the Airbus A350-1000 has a higher range than the Boeing B787-10.The Airbus A350-1000 range was 16,100 km.Plus,compare than the B787-10,the Airbus A350-1000 have a higher range than the shorter version,the Airbus A350-900.The Airbus A350-900 range was 15,000 km.Airbus really nailed the Airbus A350-1000 by increased range at the same time,increased the aircraft capacity.
The 787-10s should have more wheels on the main landing gears like 777 series. Don't know why in such long body (223' lenth longer than 777-200's ) only equipped with total four wheels on the landing gears.
787 is a gigachad aircraft
They need to extend the range... If the have to sacrifice car space for a fuel pod that what would be need to sell it..
Once fuel prices rise some more, the 787-10 looks a lot more attractive.
Nice
If the 787-8 is shorter and lighter. Why doesn't it have the longest range?
Bcz it has low power engine that's why is efficient the other 787 model.
I have flown on a Singapore airlines 787-10 once
Can you put it in kilometers too?