Boeing 777X The New Twin-Engine Jumbo Coming Soon
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 июл 2021
- While the new Boeing 777X took its first flight in early 2020, the aircraft is not expected to enter service until 2023 - at the earliest. However, despite delays, it is one of the most anticipated new models in some time. With high capacity and efficient twin-engine operation, it promises a modern replacement for retiring 747s and serious competition for the A350.
But… What makes the 777X different from its predecessors? And what exactly have been the hold-ups keeping it from the skies?
Article Link: simpleflying.com/boeing-777x-...
With thanks to our video sources: bit.ly/3ecS8Z7
Simple Flying:
Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.com/podcast/
Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.com/simple-flyin...
Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.com/daily-digest/
Check out our main RUclips channel: / @simpleflyingnews
Follow us on social media:
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
Linkedin: / 33222643
#aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek #Flying
It’s amazing how strong the wings are, to be able to hold a 21,000lb engine on each side of the wings.
Technically, the wings are holding the weight of the entire plane!
the wings have to generate lift to keep the weight of the entire plane and offset the negative lift of the tailplane.
Bro. The wing is holding the entire weight of the plane
@@vebastiansettel1173 even when stood on the ground?
Please use metric system
Additional: the delays are not really a surprise. As a derivative of the 777, Boeing expected the X to get easy rubber stamp from FAA like it had done previously for all its derivatives. the MAX forced the FAA to become more vigilant, and now, Boeing has to do a full certification and tests on it almost as if it were a new aircraft. The fact that problems are being found shows how flawed the rubber stamping of derivatives was.
I'm rooting for Boeing to understand they need to be a great engineering company once again - ongoing 737MAX, 787 and 777X certification, manufacturing, re-work, etc., issues are red flags they can and should address and not simply cast "blame" on the FAA, who is finally doing what they should be doing.
A full recertification was always going to be required given the new composite folding wings that are new for a commercial aircraft. It's just going to take a lot longer given intense scrutiny now.
unfortanately the Max made the FAA more vigilant.
@@sportsMike87 That's a good thing they became more vigilant. Previously the FAA was allowing Boeing to a vast majority of the certification. They were essentially self certifying. The was the FAA model for years and they didn't have the staff so they turned over to the manufactures.
Aka FAA suddenly wakes up ans realises it should probably do its own job
We could make a Netflix series with the number of different release dates the 777x had
😂🤣😂🤣😂
Or the opening dates of the BER airport.
By the time Boeing delivers one of these. Star Trek transporter technology will be available.
🤣
@@skyserf Or A380, Stuttgart Hauptbahnhof, CrossRail, Flamanville Nuclear Plant, etc.
Future of Aviation in 3020: no engine only gliding
More like 2035. You will fly to space then come back down cutting travel time .
@@dallasbrat81 wow
@@dallasbrat81
2045 they no longer need aircrafts..
They going to jetpack.
And of course they going to add the "honey tank" with it.
By simply connecting a wire to your bum hole and frontal stuff for more comfort..
2300 they would have federation star ship.
@@user-nl6gj8eg7x The Next superpower will control access to Space 🌌
Since the fuselage is metal I think it would be cool to see airlines do a polished metal retro look, similar to what American Airlines did with their polished aluminum livery.
4:38 still can't get over that image showing the GE9X's monsterous size, especially to the young people to the left of it. The guy in the blue shirt standing in front of the cowling; his chin is just barely high enough to look up to the fan blades!!
It was announced recently that due to certification issues the type wont be introduced until 2023-2024
This was due to a 777x making sudden pitch down moves like the 737max during a test flight late 2020. The FAA will not even consider a refilling until that issue is resolved. Already 5 years late,its another reason to fly Airbus or Embrare especially the new A220 made in the US.
@@eleventy-seven meh Boeing is still good I’m excited for the 777x airbus has cool but boring planes
@@eleventy-seven Indeed. Apparently they also tried to recycle data from the 787 in the certification process. The 222 is an incredible airplane, kinda sad Airbus had to come save the program at the end. Bombardier had done most, if not, all the work by then. Nonetheless the 222 is the plane of the future for a largo portion of routes.
@@scottishtransportvideos264 I am excited for the folding wingtips, a real innovation
@@kol257 Not really. Folding wing tips have been around for decades on military aircraft. It's an evolution to introduce them to a commercial plane.
Simple Flying 3 days ago: The 777X adds yet another delay, the project is questioned by the FAA, and its future is more uncertain than ever
Simple Flying today: The 777X, a game-changer coming soon!
Forget FAA, they are employees of Boeing anyways.
@@kunti_putra the Faa cado what it wants but the regulators in the rest of the world are already looking at the 777X with suspension because of all the delays.
Exactly!
Click Bait.
Boeing Simps
coming "soon"
"2 weeks"
If you ever played the il2 series :-)
to own on video and DVD?
As soon as the end of the 787 problems.
Sooner than the new airport in Berlin…
(Though that’s not much to boast of.)
@@colincopland3665 Or the new main station (Hauptbahnhof) in Stuttgart
With its fuel efficiency and long-range and high passenger capacity it's fairly clear it will be a game changer if they ever get the damn thing in the sky commercially. With all of that engine power it will make a hell of a freighter
Sadly not. Qantas went with the A-350-1000 for the greater range, buying 12 initially for Project Sunrise,non stop Sydney to London Heathrow.
4 inch wider.... Great let's squeeze in another seat to make it a 16inch seating for 14 hours flight. Lol.
This comment is simply stupid...
That's the customer's decision, NOT Boeing's.
thanks to covid, now the most deadly problem is getting infected by your fellow passengers. being cramped is the least of your worries.
@@ndlben7129 But correct. Have you ever swapped 777s on a brief stopover on a 24hr 10,000mile flight, gone from a 9 abreast to a 10 abreast? pure torture for anyone bigger than a small teenager or a cat.
Haa haa haa hee hee hee sums it up quite nicely, maybe they could strap some seats on the outside and and another 4 in the wheel bays, just remind the pilots not to raise the wheels.
The B777-9 is not a game changers but a more fuel efficient and larger variant of the B777 family. To be game changer, it has to be an all new clean sheet airframe design like the B787 and A350.
A350 isn't a game changer. It's just a new clean sheet design. It used traditional manufacturing techniques and technologies. The last Airbus game changer was the a300, a plane that started the twin wide body trend.
@@OnEEmONErD What are you on about dude, the A350 uses composites like the 787, how is that traditional? Have you ever flown one? It's super comfortable. There is no direct competitor to the A350-1000 with like for like features on the market right now.
@@TheEchelon the 787 entire fuselage is a carbon fiber tube. The a350 are sheets put together. I've flown both. Both are comfortable but that has little to do with technology, that has to do with airlines configuring their planes. The 787 is significantly more efficient than the a350 and uses much more advanced technologies and manufacturing techniques than the Airbus.
Recently I have become more interested in the 777X program, and I have been doing more research on it, and it is starting to climb up the list of my favourite planes. So this was absolutely perfect and I soaked up every word mentioned. Thank you.
I just heard the man say A350-100
As a passenger, I never enjoyed the 777.. so I don't see this as a Game Changer from the passenger's point of view. Perhaps the fuel savings might be from the operators point of view.... The trend is smaller longer range, not bigger so it might be a tough sell in the long haul.
The cabin and for example window sizes are better, so it will only be comparable to the 777 in some ways and more to a 787
@@spongebubatz Window size is shit! More legroom and wider seats are better. Let's get the fact straight. Stop using the stupid window as a reason to why any plane is better.
@@nntflow7058 chill, I didn’t say it is better, I was just saying that it comes closer to a 787 than to a first generation 777. In the end the hard product of course comes down to the airline, that’s no surprise and that’s with no doubt the factor that makes your stay onboard comfortable or not
That OK. The things is that BOEING NEEDS TO GET DOWN OF THE PLANET!!. I love all the planes and including both Airbus and Boeing
The 777 is one of the most successful plane ever made. And as I tell you I love it. But if you don't like the 777, you have other options
A game changer is a plane that can bring the joy back to flying
Only if you fly business class. Economy will be squished in like sardines.
@@stephanguitar9778 They said that about the 787 it is a game changer !! It turned out to be the Squeezeliner !!
@@davidhunt3808 you can blame the airlines for that since they hey are the ones that order the seat configurations.
@@davidhunt3808 Depends on what class you fly in.
@@TheNewGreenIsBlue He meant the aircraft type and not the class you are flying in.
It's just another variant IMHO. I'm now retired but I've flown the 747-400 and 747-8 and the 747-8 was pretty much a disaster in the beginning, so I can totally relate to the "...in a state of disarray..." comment by Tim Clark. Boeing couldn't organise a bing-drinking party in a brewery. In the US, everything is a 'quick fix' and this 777-x will be the same: a lot of hype and marketing. Rather than build something new from the ground up as Airbus has done with the A350, Boeing just 'slaps on some new wings and engines' and some software patches 'to 'make it all work' and calls it a day. Now how did that work out for the 747-8 and the 737MAX? 🤔
They did, the 787...
Boeing is a terrible, shitty company. Their safety standards aren't that high either...
@@CicaeMeow Euro jealousy has no bounds. How did the A380 work out? Wrong airplane at the wrong time. If Airbus weren't subsidized the A380 would have buried it.
The MAX is flying with 4500 orders. 787 is a masterpiece and it looks like 777X will be too.
@@CicaeMeow
A340, A380.
Boeing of course has had its share of problems.
Both made bad mistakes.
The 777x and A350 as well as 787 will be great. With such technology and high stakes the successes come hard.
let’s hope they fix their quality control issues
I really hope they do, Boeing need to get their shit together
they just want to kill people, so, no! ain't happening!
@@brkitdwn literally. It will always be money over safety with them. Boeing would already have this plane in the sky if it was up to them. Greedy company but you kind of expect that with an American company
The 777 is the safest aircraft having pretty much no flaws. No crash caused by a flaw. Still though as a Boeing fan I can see what you mean. Just like the 737 Boeing upgraded the 777 so the 777x may have problems.
I'm waiting for a comeback of the DC-3. Now that was a real airplane.
Now there is the moden equivalent for the ultra rich : Ethihad residence First class or equivalent on Emirates !....
High speed trains are faster and more comfortable.
I remember those in the 1950s flying over our farm as they headed north from Perth. Later more fortunate passengers got the Fokker Friendship.
As a pax who has flown in all 3 traditional cabin classes internationally...1st, biz, and coach
...great aircraft for both pax and crew
as a pax who flew economy it was rubbish
@@ant2312 Economy isn't going to be good on any carrier/aircraft. you get or don't get what you pay for.
@@johniii8147 However we used to get a minimum level of acceptable comfort. Not now, not going forward unless you are lucky enough to get the A380s on your route.
I'm grateful to be able to get what I can afford, economy with prepaid luggage and meals. It's only a matter of hours and I can have a few hours' rest to recuperate after arrival. Fun fact: The cheap seats arrive at the destination at the same time as the expensive seats.
The FAA says it's not coming soon. Boeing really needs to get it's act together.
FAA flexing it's muscle 💪
FAA is full of shit and just trying to look like they are doing their job. Always trust a corporation with a profit motive and a reason to please its customers than a Government agency with neither.
@@dwightlooi I don't think that model works at Boeing. They are definitely not making thier Customers happy. 737 Max proves that.
@@kjdinoc Actually, MCAS's existence was to please customers and eliminate the need for retraining. And, with or without the FAA Boeing would have fixed it because it is in their business interest to do so -- because nobody wnts to buy planes with a known safety issue that is uncorrected. Let me ask you a question. What motivation does the FAA have to do a good job? They are guaranteed their customers through legislation. They do not need to be efficient, fair or effective -- when was the last time YOU voted for a Congressman, Senator or President based on this plans for reforming the FAA? Like the DMV, NASA or any other government agency it becomes an unaccountable, inefficient, self-important organization. It should be eliminated and replaced by a private trade group.
@@dwightlooi I agree with you there. Not much good to say about anything run by the Government.
What a beautiful looking aircraft this new 777-9 is
Coming soon:
Meanwhile soon: 2024 or beyond
Looks beautiful, can’t wait to see her gracing the blue skys.
Can we have a video about the exclusive A350-100 that BA have mentioned @10:50
Hahahahaha! Caught that too.
A350 but it’s just as long as a 737
No.
I'd like to see a modern version of a 757 . Bigger engines ,fuselage etc..
It's good to have some time before launch.
Unlike the 737 MAX launch.
haha
Fascinating for all Plane Spotters.
I was kinda hoping that Qantas would go with the 777X for its Project Sunrise, but it looks to be going with a modified A350 instead. It'd be interesting to see how a 777X could be modified for ultra long range, though.
Good ... this 777x appears to be a real cattle-car ...
I was hoping too.
But let's BA get that deal and launch nonstop flight from London to Sydney as direct competition against Qantas 😅🔥
A350 is more comfortable as the cabin width is wider for a 9 abreast seating compare to Boeing 10 abreast seating. Somehow Boeing planes are narrower compare to Airbus.
Well, it looks like the 777-8 can be made in to a HGW variant which will allow them to have more range, so if other airlines wanted to open up ulh routes with that, it might be a thing
@@truthful3777what about now that the a350 new 10 across seating
Lol, as I watch this video one of the 777-9 flew over my house on a test flight.
Just landed at Paine Field, Everett where the runways are lined with 777Xs waiting for GE engines. Maybe the disarray is with GE in its effort to become three separate companies.
8:08 My favourite song!
Oh my, what a beautiful jetliner the 777X is. Thank you for sharing.
Everything is a Game Changer. So sick of that term
And rarely is anything a game changer. Not even the sad RUclips channels that overuse it.
Not game changer for most average people that fly in 16 inch seatings in coach.
the only 'game changer' imo is the A380 but seems airlines don't want to play that game anymore
gamer changer at present time , like a380 was a big game changer back in 2009-2010
@@karann4335 a380 was a failure from the start.
I loved the B747 as I travelled far and wide on it. the B777 -200/300 is a marvelous jet too on long haul, looking forward to the X version.
Those 777’s with 9-across coach seating were nice. When some airlines converted them to 10-across, they made it miserable.
They’re saying this 777x will feature 10-across seating ... NO THANKS ...
@@sking2173 The last time that I was on the B777 was a seat on a British Airways Club world. Flight ( like at the front ) and it was not even 9 across more like 4 ( BA had upgraded my ticket ) and I really enjoyed the comforts, the heated napkins to clean my sweaty face, etc Lol !
@@sking2173 It has the option for 10 abreast, but that's up to the airlines, who normally do 9...
@@TheEchelon - The industry-standard coach seating configuration for the 777 is 10-across - sadly.
The few airlines that still use the 9-across configuration are for me, preferred.
If it's same fuselage, it's another variant. Either way, I love the 777x more than the 777-300er, which was my favorite.
The 777-300ER seems better than the 777X. The extra capacity is what is affecting the 747 and A380. We do not need the more capacity, or it will just be another faliure
I do like Sir Tim Clarke....... he's not scared of speaking his mind on matters concerning aviation.
He is 100 times better than Albar Al Baker.
The 787 is the first aircraft after Boeing merged with mcdonald Douglas since then all aircraft have issues
the 787 also has problems
So true. The original 777 had a program manager (Alan Mullaly) who had responsibility for the overall program. The 787 was designed by a committee. Endless meetings, no single authority to break a tie or make decisions. The 787 intro to service was a disaster compared to that of the 777. There are many reasons for that, one of which is they tried to put too many unproven technological ideas into one package. But it also seems that Douglas management was involved in the whole thing and screwed up a lot of it.
Why Douglas? O my
Oh yes, the original 777 was the last good aircraft from Boeing.
EXACTLY!
Seems “improved” passenger comfort is overlooked! Yet, again!
Yes 10 across seating killed the 777 for long distance flight.
@@stephanguitar9778 Even at nine abreast the 777 is the most uncomfortable widebody I've flown.
My son flew from Melbourne to LA some years ago on a Virgin Australia 777. He said it was very comfortable.
That is never part of the equation.
@@rais1953 Virgin Australia is 9 across seating and 1'' more legroom than Qantas. Non of the new ones will have this configuration and many are converting their old 777s to skinny seats. Also depends how big or old you are. Teenagers and cats can sleep anywhere and not suffer.
Another puff piece for Boeing courtesy of Simple Flying.
At 1:18 - the airlines will just cram another seat into each row in steerage class. I far prefer the A350, fewer seats per row and a very beautiful airplane. And if you're in business class in the A350, each seat has direct aisle access, meaning easy access to rest rooms without having to disturb someone or be disturbed. Each airline can of course lay out the cabin as they prefer, but the illustration at 12:15 shows a business class arrangement where the window seat does not appear to have direct aisle access.
The 777X does not fit 11 abreast. 10 abreast on the 777X will be just as wide as 9 abreast on the A350 -- which can fit an extremely uncomfortable 10 abreast by the way.
Not true in this case. It will be 10 abreast in economy just like a majority of 777-300 ER are now configured. He misspoke a wider fuselage. It's the exact same. They were just able to create more interior space by 4 inches
Nothing can compare with the beauty of the queen of the sky ✈️🌈
@Alex Fracyon ??
Queen Anderson Cooper?
Cant wait to it in service
This plane is so gorgeous 😍
Being a engineering company forgot it’s roots and has to work hard to match A321 XLR from Airbus. With all the problems of 787 and 737, this plane will be even more delayed as market is looking for a 757 replacement announcement first.
"Matching" the competition is not a good idea.....either you exceed them or do something else.
A question: Why Boeing doesn't try to put two of these huge engines on a 747-8 body?
Probably the engines would be mounted too low on that frame. Or they just don't want to show up the GEnx engines lol at more than 50% extra thrust per engine 😅
Because the engines on 747-8 are actually ge9x engines
@@roshannellore9793 GEnx.
@@roshannellore9793 GEnx-2B (essentially 787 engines)
Four inches wider? Wow, you guys! A whole four inches. With ten abreast seating whatever will we do with all that luxury?!
Relax and spread your elbows an extra 0.4 of an inch. Why, that's a whole centimetre!
Aren’t the A350 and 777X in slightly different passenger classes? With only slight overlap between the A350-1000 and 777-8? Doesn’t the A350 compete more with the 787?
1) yes, if u meant 'size' or 'seat count'.
2) yes, usable cabin total floor area for seats of 35K and 778 are practically identical if in similar cabin config/seat density.
3) Depends on which of the 2 specific 350 variants u are talking about. In terms of seat count in a comparable cabin config, the 359 sits right in between the 789 and 78J but obviously larger than the 788. Therefore, a more accurate description is that the 350 family competes against BOTH the 787 AND 77X families if u are disregarding specific variants in your original question and simply mentioned '350' and '787' which refer to their entire aircraft families.
A359 competes well with the 787, the A351 nips on the tail of the small base 778, but cant touch the 779, A351 already has no shot with the 779, if Boeing makes a 771 forget about it
4:40 "pound foot" haha, thats hilarious ^^ Wonder if that was intended knock againg imperial units or just the speakers struggle with non-SI units ^^
I’m thinking just a mistake- perhaps never having heard of pounds force, or not realizing that pound-feet is lb-ft, pounds mass is lbm, and pounds force is lbf.
'In Metric', as Jeremy Clarkson once said, "In Roman Catholic".
4:47 please provide international standard units for thrust as well. Thanks.
467000 Newtons.
Gorgeous design
Thank you for sharing.
I'll wait for the first few patches to the mcas
I agree Bryan. It was a fiasco.
My favorite plane 777, the dual main landing gear are (3) axles, on dual wheels. Fully loaded (including fuel) can return to airport & land safely
most aircraft can...not unique
Happy birthday Boeing!
What do Boeing intend doing about the passenger mantra - "if it's a Boeing I ain't going".
10:47 ah yes the A350-100
baby a350
Boeing 777X The New Twin-Engine Jumbo Coming Soon - or Not.
Do we still have to worry about MCAS? (may crash any second)
Your A340-600 is the exit limit and is not it's typical capacity. It's 3 class configuration is in the range of 320-370. This is per Airbus website.
It's not a game changer, only another variant. Also I am not eagerly awaiting it.
Beautiful aircraft though
It's another variant but if it succeeds in bridging the gap between smaller twin engined aircraft and the 747 and A380 it could actually make a difference to flying at the larger end of the industry as the A220 seems to be doing at the smaller end.
With the benefit of hindsight, and the growth of long-range single aisle aircraft for routes that eliminate some of the need for hubs, might this aircraft be no longer needed?
The airlines that ordered huge amounts of 777x such as emirates Qatar and Singapore all still rely heavily on the hub and spoke model. In fact that is their whole strategy because they are in ideal locations to connect flights from around the world.
routes from western Europe to SE asia cannot be catered by narrow bodies, even the long range ones.
@@AlohaBiatch ME3 and SQ each have 1 hub only, so without upgauging they have nothing to do other than sitting and waiting for airport expansions. But for US, Chinese or European carriers they have more choices.
While IAG still purchases 777x for BA, their recent stregagy is clearly diverting passengers out of LHR - Latin America to Iberia/MAD, low-paying customers to Aer Lingus/DUB, and domestic leisure travellers to LGW. All mitigate the need for a VLA without compromising growth.
There is no way on earth that I would sit for 14 hours from SFO to TPE in a single aisle aircraft, even if they could strap on enough gas cans.
Hubs aren't really going anywhere. What the smaller aircraft allow is more spokes from the hub in most cases. There is little movement away from the major international hubs.
Time will tell how the 777x plays out in the market place. Game changer at this point in time.
badass aircraft.....keep em coming
“Let’s forget about domani, for, domani never comes.”
The Yellow Rolls-Royce!
I don't think this will change the world. It's more of an evolutionary change. Sure, an 11% saving in fuel is great, but lets face it it's a drop in the ocean compared to what's actually needed. I feel like they'd have been better off just upgrading the existing 777 while simultaneously working on something more radical - hydrogen, hybrid, electric etc.
No other source of energy is as efficient, safe, or lightweight as jet fuel. It has far less weight, complexity and danger than hydrogen, far more range and economy than electric, far more safety than nuclear. There simply is no other option that comes close.
Maybe someday we’ll have Mr Fusion from the Delorean in back to the future, but until then jet fuel efficiency is key.
The new 777 has been flying over Seattle for some time now. It is an incredible machine. It will offer new efficiencies to carriers unmatched by any current product.
That's cool, but it's delayed till 2025, if it actually is on time for that new timeframe that is.
105,000 Pounds Force of thrust not pound ft. Pound Ft is a measurement of torque.
One way or another
I am excited for its first flight and release
Pretty sure it already had it's first flight...
@@aerofiles5044 I meant first commercial flight, like the inaugural flight.
Personally I think more time is better. The more time the more issues are weeded out and gotten rid of.
‘lbf’ stands for ‘pounds-force’ (not: ‘pounds-foot’).
Thrust is a force, not energy (or torque).
It stands for leg before wicket.
Yes a big game changer, major airlines are ordering the A350 instead.
It won't be the gamechanger, by the very fact that Boeing themselves believe 787, not VLA, would be the future. Hopefully it'd be a nice side-project to keep 777 aflot though. But wait, what if Airbus stretch A350 again?
It's pretty much at it limits without major structural redesign.
@@johniii8147 Understandable. Airbus tend not to overbuild, so -2000 would require bigger changes. Seems 777X niche is not big enough for the trouble at the moment.
Plus, given UltraFan is on the way, it's easier for them to take advantage of the fuel savings instead, just like what they did for A321LR/XLR vs 757.
But if there's significant demand I just don't see they'd sit and wait. And don't forget even the compromised 78J successfully steal some orders by its lower CASM over 359. I just don't see how 777X can compete head on......
What is gonna release first: the 777x or Half Life 3?
Somehow I bet on half-life
Half life 3 and GTA 6 will come out first
😆
Overall, a nice presentation. One comment, and a correction: At 4:00 there isn't a slowdown in air traffic demand. International government mandates by specific nations are causing the disruption. Most people with vaccinations, and some without, would gladly travel as they did before, for business or personal reasons. At 4:24 the engines are the largest (biggest diameter fans) but they are not the most powerful. They are set to produce 105,000 pounds thrust, while the current -300ER and -200LR are powered by 115,000-lbs thrust engines.
Correction, GE9X have been tested to produce 134,300 pounds of thrust which is a world record
Nit picking. There is infact a huge decline in international demand with the borders closed. There is no demand if you can't go there. And yes the engines are the most powerful. They will just be derated not use all the thrust given the efficient wing, at least initially. They may well increase the thrust to the engines capabilities if they develop a HGW version, freighter for the 777-10 in the future.
Can’t wait to see this beauty
I still can't get over the fact that the engine diameter is larger than the fuselage of the 737.
It would be great if Boeing could put some thought into seat comfort rather than maximum profit using seat configuration. If you're over 6' tall flying any long haul flights is torturous with these new seats and configurations! Even business class is too small!!
I don't think this is Boeing's fault, airlines want to make things as cost effective as possible
@@oShinobu The airlines purchase the seats and recommended configurations from Boeing. It's nice to have better air quality and quieter cabins, but it's too bad they couldn't maximize seat comfort and profits as well.
@@taconomad1862 Don't other plane manufacturers do this as well? They need to stay competitive in that case. Of course it sucks for the passengers though
When 777X begin on delivery....A350 would launched on next gen more fuel efficient engine (if not NEO) 🛫🤓
The A350-1000 is pretty much maxed out, a further stretch would lack range and especially lack the payload capabilites of the 777X.
@@widget787 in terms of capacity & rsnge A350-1000 is a mixed out segment between 777-9 & 777-8, so once there's next gen of Trent-XWB ultra long rsnge widebody market will be massed out by one type of aircraft🛫🤓
No that won't be until post 2025 as the engines won't be available. And neither Airbus nor RR are in a big rush given the big slow down in widebody sales.
@@johniii8147 indeed....when 777X delivered to major airlines in 2025...the UltraFan would ready to power next gen of aircraft🛫🤓
that the only customers are non-US might say the extreme-range + high capacity does not fit US, which might need either extreme range for 787/A350. I imagine the US high-capacity routes are NY-Europe or SFO-Tokyo? do these fit the existing 777, assuming much lower cost of a new aircraft? I would like to see cost-seat-mile vs range for each of the wide body aircraft. The max range seat-cost values only may not be a good representation if the majority of routes are intermediate range
Is there any reason why the Boeing livery is Burgundy on some planes, and Blue on others?
As yes my favourite a350 the a350-100
When these things finally get off the ground, I won’t be booking on one ... I know the hell that is a 10-across 777, and the fuselage diameter of this new plane is unchanged from the old, and they’re saying it will be 10-across.
No thanks.
Try the business class cabin. I think you will find it more comfortable. But I agree with your view of economy travel on today’s aircraft.
@@artstewart1894 - You’re right, of course, but I travel a lot, and I’m too cheap to buy business.
I do shop for the most comfortable coach seating !! Most recently, it’s mainly been Japan Airlines and Emirates (A380 only).
@@sking2173 On all my routes Business is 3.5 to 4 times the cost of economy. Enhanced economy is 2.5x
That´s no change. There are also 10-across 777 in nowadays version. For example lauda air had a mixture of 9-across and 10-across in one and the same plane during the 2000s.
@@hannes7348 - What’s your point?
Korean Air and Japan Airlines equip all of their 777’s with 9- across in coach. Many of 777’s at Cathay are still 9-across.
I fly those. I refuse to book on a 10-across 777 ... That’s not going to change for me.
Coming soon you mean two years from now
Update: launch now expected in late 2024 early 2025 but it has stacked up more orders due to some good Air Show showings with the current order book for 363 firm orders as of February 2023. Rn Boeing is focusing on getting the 737 Max7 and Max 10 certified.
That's one beautiful flying machine!
yeah with that really dated cockpit window layout
The a350 is still more efficient.the airframe is from the old derivative 777.
Someone tell me if I am wrong. Boeing 'capacities' are just that, Boeing's. I think individual airlines decide how many rows, how many seats across, the split between two or three classes of flying. Let's be real, coach sucks. I love business class, (I wish everyone could afford it, several times I couldn't afford it, and most of those, I did it anyway.) And all the weeks after I have secured my seat, I have an excited feeling about my upcoming flight. (almost all of my flying since 2014, have been flights from NY to Manila, most with one stop, depending on the airline ... Flights of Many Hours ... Close to 20 trips, 777, A340, A380, A350 .... and I LOVED it, as long as I was in Business class. Which airline it was, almost is un-memorable, as Business class is just so attractive, comfortable, unlimited food and drink, room, privacy, ... just great. I am 74. )
Why would u want to use aluminum for the feusalgue when we have composite materials?
Maybe so that they can reuse tools they already had for the first gen 777 and there weren’t any changes to the production itself needed
Boeing trying to economise yet again
Several reasons. They get to use existing infrastructure to assemble which lowers cost. Also most of the efficiency gains come from the new engine and new composite wing. Any additional savings from an entire new feusalgue would have generated marginal gains not worth the investment.
The 787's composite fuselage delayed its development and entry into service, causing Boeing to take a page out of McDonald Douglas's book and cut costs from and/or rush the rest of the development and roll out to keep the type competitive.
Just hope will not keep falling from the sky as other Boeings do. :)
Are you talking about two airplanes of 737 MAX in contrast of ten thoudands of Boeing aircraft in the air?
I think he means the thousands of Boeing's that gradually reduce their lift in order to land
"Boeing's." So, name another Boeing airplane that fell out of the sky like the MAX.
@@aerofiles5044 if you use my definition of "falling out of the sky", then all of them
I can believe all this started with the 737. Look what is happening now
It's a variant. They've added space, cut weight to make it more fuel efficient and gave it some cabin upgrades (though one of the business class seating configurations horribly looked like office cubicles.) It's not fundamentally changing aviation as we know it. That said, I welcome it.
We will keep in touch after the door of crossing fly open and will need to discuss about the deal
I think I watched this same video 2 years ago as well.
Coming soon: summer 2030 - lol
Soon, in 2029 lol.
Anyway, it probably wont be a huge seller for boing. The industry is trendi g towards smaller planes and thinner routes.
@@ianchristianvalentino9837 Agreed, especially as this plane seems to have no direct competition...
@@ianchristianvalentino9837 sure, for the really big routes these make sense.
Boing themselves have lowered fheir projected sales numbers to 350 in total.
All these resources over a decade spent on a plane that will make a marginal return over many many years. Resources that should have been spent on developing a new 737, a 757 replacement and a a220 competitor. Boing could have sold heaps of any of those and use those profits to fund new plane development.
Now they still need to develop all those planes, the 777x isn't gonna fund any of that development and meanwhile they basicly gifted the 757 and regional market to airbus for free.
This is going to a bigger millstone around boings neck then the a380 ever was for airbus.
Strategicly the 777x already is a failure before they even delivered a single one of them.
@@ianchristianvalentino9837 the trend of switcthing from huge planes on main routes (hub and spike model) to smaller planes on varied routes (point to point model), together with the rise of low-cost airlines, has been consistent through the last 20 years, much earlier that the pandemic. By the time that Airbus released the A380 this was already a foreseeable thing. So no, things don't change in an instant in the aviation industry, and the 777X is going against this trend.
Is everyone here just gonna forget that cargo carriers exist?
@@aerofiles5044 boing themselves project 350 of the type in total. That includes freighters.
Can't wait 🙂😄
i feel like boeing needs to make a freighter out of this to make it sucessful, in a way with the 747-8, but just with more passenger aircraft flying. But then a 787f could be better as the 767f is getting on a bit for sure
A 777-8F seems more than likely, Qatar has expressed interest in that aircraft
@@spongebubatz oh yeah definitely, considering there’s also the 777f already. But a replacement for the 767f surely will be needed too as the 767 is 40 years old this year, and something tells me Boeing isn’t really in a state to re-engine the 767, keep fixing 737s and finish the 777x whilst dealing with 787 issues too
It's in trouble with FAA because of software issues like 737 MAX, but they won't tell you that.
That's what there testing most heavily now and it's been no secret. It had a pitch issue uncommonaded by the pilots.
As with any new Boeing aircraft (787, 737 Max), it's best to wait a couple of years to make sure that the aircraft isn't a fire or crash hazard because the bean counting management wanted to save a few bucks by cutting corners. If it's a new Boeing, I am not going!
777's is basically just a 747 without a hump, with only 2 engines & near 3/4 of the toilets removed. Better to have a 3 engined version of the 747, with an extended hump, with a engine layout like the Lockheed Tristar, but with the mid engine in the tail mounted within a aerodynamic shroud that after takeoff & climbing to altitude, can be turnoff & closed off to minimise drag. Because once cruising only 2 engines are necessary. Problem is, unlike feathered turboprops, high bypass turbofans have the aerodynamics of a brick when switched off. This can only be resolved by something like a fuselage mounted central engine enclosed in an aerodynamic shroud that can be open & closed when the mid-engine is switch on or off.
Of course it won't happen now we can remove the hump from a Jumbo & remove 2 of the engines, plus most of the toilets, to maximise profits (the 777 has the same fuselage cross section as a 747 with it's hump removed)
Better to leave aircraft design to aircraft designers.
I need to take a trip on a 777X. I'll have to keep an eye out as the world rebounds from Covid.