E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Harriet Baskas
Economy seats on the first Boeing 787 Dreamliner, presented to All Nippon Airways on Monday, do not recline. Instead, the carrier requested that seat bottoms slide forward three inches at the push of a button, saving valuable leg space for other passengers.
Boeing refers to its 787 Dreamliner as a game changer. Some industry observers call the project a money pit — and sometimes far worse — after the first plane was delivered several years late and billions of dollars over budget.
"For a while there, it looked like waiting for the 787 was like leaving the light on for Jimmy Hoffa," said Mike Boyd, an aviation expert.
On Monday, thousands of Boeing workers stood for more than an hour in a cold, pouring rain outside the aerospace giant's sprawling factory in Everett, Wash., and cheered as Jim Albaugh, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, handed a ceremonial key for the first 787 Dreamliner to Shinichiro Ito, president and CEO of All Nippon Airways (ANA).
Boeing delivered its first 787 aircraft – known as the Dreamliner -- over the weekend, and the company says the new jumbo jet will revolutionize the way we fly. CNBC's Phil LeBeau reports.
ANA will fly the jet to Tokyo on Tuesday and, after a month of special charter flights, offer its first 787 domestic flight between Tokyo and Okayama on November 1. As additional 787s are delivered (the carrier expects 55 by the end 2017), ANA will expand the jets' routes both domestically and internationally.
"The Dreamliner will enable us to offer unrivaled standards of service and comfort to our passengers and will play a key part in ANA's plans for international expansion," ANA’s Ito said at the ceremony.
For passengers, the rewards will be in the ride. The 787 has larger windows, larger overhead bins, more headroom and quieter engines than any commercial airplane. Other features include improved lighting and air purification and a higher humidity level designed to combat the dryness passengers commonly experience on airplanes.
"After a very long wait, passengers are finally getting to taste the service offerings and creature comforts that the very latest in passenger aircraft technology have to offer," said William Swelbar, a research engineer at MIT International Center for Air Transportation. "The triple 7 became a passenger favorite almost immediately ... What remains to be seen is if the 787 will become a game changer within airline networks over the coming decade."
For airlines, the airplane made of 50 percent composite materials promises to be 20 percent more fuel efficient and 10 percent cheaper to operate than similarly sized airplanes in its class.
Harriet Baskas
United Continental Holdings will be the first North American carrier to recieive delivery of a 787 Dreamliner. That jet is currently on the production line at Boeing's plant in Everett, Wash.
Despite the delays and cost overruns, Boeing has about 800 orders for the mid-size jetliner.
United Continental Holdings is the first North American carrier scheduled to receive a 787. That jet is currently on Boeing's production line, and is expected to be delivered early next year.
More stories you might like
- 'Murphy's law of airplanes' finally gets to a customer
- All Nippon Airways gets ceremonial key to first Dreamliner
- Slideshow: See images of the 787
Find more by Harriet Baskas on StuckatTheAirport.com and follow her on Twitter.
Leave a Comment:
I'll wait a long time, thank you. I'll wait to make sure that the plastic plane won't blow up when lightning hits it. I'll wait to make sure that all those fasteners hold it all together and it doesn't fall out of the sky in pieces. Or the elextrical boxes don't catch fire. Or that the flight management system, outsourced to India from Honeywell, doesn't lock up, say when it crosses the International Date Line...
yeah .... exactly. Now I understand the real reason behind the 2008 economic crisis. Indians caused it.
Grumps, Yer stewpid.
It's always risky to buy the low serial number units. Nothing like a few miles on the design to wring out the glitches.
Just as a comment, it has crossed the international date line several times and it has been hit by lightning a few times. The plus to being a flight test engineer is experiencing all of this in person.
Good ideas we do not need A-Holes like you mixed with normal people in the air
It's more dangerous if lightning strikes metal than nonconducting plastic.
I win $10 !!!! Just for @!$%#s and giggles I bet my friend in Jan. 2011 that Boeing would DELIVER its first 787 by the end of the year. He bet me a friendly $10 that, no, they wouldn't. I win and Jeff loses! Thanks Boeing.
It costs a lot more to pay off the lawsuits from mechanical defects leading to loss of life than it does to delay production and get things right.
We are a litigious society after all.
Ignorance...Americans are full of it nowadays.
As a competant engineer I can say the launch will be without 'crashes'. But go on thinking the way you do...makes room for the better informed folks.
Logres: Anyone who spells it "competant" seems rather incompetent to me...
Hey Mark, good call.....
and the scary part?
Logres had to read the design parameters!
As an English teacher, I routinely call people out for spelling errors; however, it's a well-accepted fact that highly intelligent people can (and often do) have poor spelling skills. Misspelling the word "competent" isn't really an accurate barometer of an engineer's ability or intelligence. I used to work with a lot of chemical engineers and many of them were notoriously poor spellers, but in their field, were brilliant.
"Ignorance...Americans are full of it nowadays."
@ Lorges, with that kind of stereotypical blanket statement, who really is the ignorant one here? Think about it.
Never be the first to fly on a new airplane. Always let the early adopters crash and die first (if they're going to crash and die at all).
Good thing the Wright Brothers didn't follow your approach.
As if a new commercial airplane isn't tested extensively before service.
I am curious, how would one measure that kind of logic? The reason I ask is because the 787 has already gone through between 5 and 6 thousand hours of actual flight testing using several airplanes resulting in 0 crashes. And don't forget about how many 1,000's of hours have been spent on ground testing. Oh, I get it, you must be talking about that you don't want to be the first paying customer to fly on this airplane. Now THAT would make complete sense.
With all these "problems", I wonder who is going to be brave enough to take the first run. I think it should be ALL THE CEO'S of all the banks, corporations, who took our tax dollars for bonuses in the bailout and heads of Boeing who made all the decisions that lead to the overruns.
I have a list of people too...they're currently running wild with our hard earned cash.
Sorry, but I'll pass on flying a brand new shiny plane that may very well crash horribly.
*shrug* I've flown on them several times..
Don't forget all the Liberal Democrats too. If the plane went down they would be collateral Damage
I would gladly give up all those LCD screens and electronic bells and whistles for more legroom and more shoulder room.
FiVE seats across? it's bad enough having to crawl over two people. Imagine having to crawl over four if you have the window seat. And that aisle looks even narrower than most other plane designs. I'd really hate to have to ride in one of those with a person who should have bought two seats is crammed into one of those.
Plus did anyone notice how far the overhead bins are away from the aisle? How is anyone other than the window and second seat supposed to put anything in those bins?
anti-trust - Look again. It is a twin aisle aircraft with a 2-4-2 configuration. It is a little hard to see in the picture, but there is definitely another aisle on the far side. Because the seats on the outside are offset a little back from the ones in the center section it makes it difficult to see clearly. You are actually looking at six seats, not five - count the arm rests and you can see it more clearly.
Looking at another photo, I realized that. But the aisles sure do look narrower than most other aircraft. I'd still never want to fly one of those. It might be OK for the smaller oriental body type, but not for the oversized Americans, hehe.
anti-trust - Check out the video and you'll see that the overhead bins are still in line to open over the isle seat.
Wow, too much negative people on here. I think it will be a great plane. Can't be as bad as the DC-10 when it first came out.
This article proudly sponsored by Boeing. yay!
The single most important feature for most flyers is legroom; which is entirely up to the airline. Similar with the width of the seats. More headroom is nice I guess, but really... even on a regional yet, the headroom is not the problem.
I'm also not so sure about the statement that the 777 became a passenger favorite almost immediately. Ask yourself how much attention you pay to the type of aircraft when you make a reservation. Compared to price, scheduling and connections, it almost doesn't matter to most.
Just keep it real, guys....
How often do you have a choice on aircraft type when scheduling a flight? You need to get from point A to point B and you have to take whatever they force upon you.
"The triple 7 became a passenger favorite almost immediately..."
Yea. Especially for those who like to sit in the middle of a row of six.
It is ok for overhead bins - especially useful for trying to keep the good stuff away from the gorillas.
There isn't an airline in existence flying the 777 with a middle group of six seats. Most 777s have a 3-3-3 configuration with some adopting 3-4-3 (or even 2-5-2, but that's typically for domestic use, not long-haul). Even China Southern, an airline I've personally flown and can assure everyone has no concern with passenger comfort, uses a 3-4-3 configuration in their 777s.
I agree with the article. Do a bit of research on "the google" and you'll see that the 777 indeed IS a passenger favorite. It's definitely my airplane of choice when I fly.
I would not fly on any new plane for free. I have noticed however that several airbus planes have plunged out of the sky.
More headroom is OK, but how big is the crapper?
And can you wrap the smoke detector in a Ziploc bag so you can smoke a cig in there?
Take your crap at the airport—don't smell up the nice new plane.
@igloo,
They removed it entirely because taking a crap on an airplane is a suspicious activity /sarc
In the promotional material I've seen from Boeing concerning this aircraft, most of the photos show the Business and First Class sections; however, the few photos of the Coach Class section suggests the usual too many seats in too small of a space which guarantees not enough comfort for the majority of passengers who fly on it. And written material on Coach Class says very little as well. Due to the many hassles of modern air travel, my wife and I fly as absolutely little as we can but when we do fly we use Southwest Airlines whose coach seats are a bit more comfortable than other airlines we've flown (using the word comfortable loosely).
Most domestic Japanese flights are very short, so they don't need a lot of creature comforts. Also, they are smaller than the average overweight American, so they don't need a lot of legroom. This is why the Japanese airlines can cram 500 people into a 747, say.
Seat arrangement is up to the individual airlines, not Boeing, which is probably why you haven't seen too many.
I'm all for the filtration system to keep the air from being so dry. I'd rather not hop on one for a while yet. I don't have that guinea pig, adverturer gene.
Its the same old story. Boeing, fattened over the decades on military contracts now has a nice big plane to offer us a seat on. A plane whose research was paid most likely during the company's military contract heyday years when were were in Vietnam.
So, here is a modern wonder of metal and fiberglass. And, if it goes down, 400 people go with it.
No thank you.
How is that any different from a normal plane? Besides the increased passenger space.
None, people like Karen just like to complain.
It's amazing how much ignorance a person can display. The Vietnam war ended almost 4 decades ago and you bring up military spending from that era!
Wow! Don't watch NBC because GE had goverment contracts during the Vietnam War era too and they own 49% of NBC/Universal.
Looks like you are packed in like sardines----sorry I don't want any part of this death trap---give us the older planes any day. Is there 10 inches of foot room? We won't fly on this big boy.
Obviously, the vast majority of "Green Carbon Footprint Counters" will fly on this "aeroplane" to spread the word of its destruction towards the planet.
Fly on!
I'd rather 2 more inches legroom than 2 more feet of headroom.
Are you kidding me? That is like buying a Concord to fly from Miami to Tampa. What a waste of an airplane.
The photos make the interior look like a sardine can with passengers packed in as tight as possible. I guess the airlines think they need to squeeze even more out of us. Getting on and off the plane will likely be a horrible experience. There couldn't possibly be enough overhead bins for all those seats. I hope I never have to fly on that monstrosity. The Dreamliner should have been called the Nightmareliner.
The industry analyst quoted in one story had it right. Paraphrasing: "People will love the big windows, the calming blue interior, and the feeling of space when they enter, but in the end, they'll realize they're still sitting in a seventeen-and-a-half inch wide seat."
Dunno what all the grumbilng's about. That's very nearly two inches wider than a typical primary school seat.
Those of you that are complaining about Boeing not giving you enough leg room, please understand that they have nothing to do with that part. Each airline that purchases any plane built by any company tells the manufacturer how they want it configured. So if your flying and your knees are up by your ears, complain to the airline, they're the ones who choose the number of seats to put inside.
We're not complaining about Boeing, but about the silly article on here. People don't give a damn about headroom. People don't give a damn about larger windows. We care about legroom. Wider seats.
Whether flying the 787 is enjoyable or not has very little to do with the plane per se. It's all about what an airline makes of it.
Yes, let's hear it for wider seats—all the better to accommodate the morbidly obese person sitting next to me.
I don't work for Boeing, but I did stumble into there design center in Renton, WA where the airlines come to place their orders, The have actual mock ups of all the planes that Boeing builds to scale. I got to go inside the Dreamliner and it really is like no other plane out there. The seats all have to be made for this aircraft, where usually an airline will order a 737, 777, A340, A320, etc. they will take the seats from an old aircraft re upholster them and install them. Because the Dreamliner is made primarily of composites, all the seats have to be made from the ground up due to the extra weight of older seats. As far as the head room, you can stand up even if you're sitting next to the window.
I do live in the glide path near the Everett facility and so I've seen the Dreamliner fly in and out of Paine Field quite a lot. This plane is quiet. I mean really quiet.
This really is an amazing piece of engineering and I for one, can't wait to fly in one someday.
Their test take-offs and landings are taking place at Pain(e) field?
Sounds rather ominous, but hopefully not appropriate....
"... seat bottoms slide forward three inches at the push of a button, saving valuable leg space for other passengers."
But, then where do I put my legs when I slide the seat forward? I find the leg room already cramped in planes now, and I'm only 5'4" tall. I can't wait to take a long trip in one of these planes with my knees up my nostrils.
Better you knees up your nostrils than you head in my face! The space it is saving for other passengers is when you have not reclined into THEIR space. Get it now?
If US airlines choose to not have reclining seats, I would not want to fly on this plane. Especially if its a long haul flight. If the seat moves forward 3" that would mean you would be crouched down in an unnatural sleeping position and probably wake up with a soar neck. Flying in coach no one should expect generous legroom.
The Japs don't give a rats ass about your comfort. Its all about getting the little Business guy to the land of tinker dolls. He'll sleep rolled up on a mat on the floor with er.
It's best to cruse Cunnard if you want comfort.
Scott,
fly, wake up with a soar neck...uh huh.....
papa tiger you sound like a grumpy old man stuck in the past. Nobody today refers to them as Japs. And comfort on a plane has nothing to do with cruise ships.
I've flown on airlines using the "shell" seat like this article describes. Cathay Pacific employs these seats on their newer airplanes, and it's interesting. The bottom cushion slides forward and the back cushion slides down. It's like artificial recline. I didn't hate it, but I didn't really love it, either. However, it WAS nice not having the seatback in front of me recline into my lap. I guess it's mixed bag. Ultimately, there's no replacement for increasing the space between rows of seats. Tricks aren't going to make a 31" pitch seem or feel like 40", no matter how hard you try.
The seats recline the same way many sofa's do, on a sofa it is so they can be put beside the wall, here it is so you don't spoil the guy behind you's space.
Continental airlines is reviewing the features of the dreamliner that can be termed as value added and have come up with something along these lines
1) Seat with more headroom $10
2) Larger windows $8
3) Oversized overhead luggage $12
4) Purified air $6, stale air um... well free
5) Light which allows you to see $3
6) Handrest and seat cushions are complimentary
I can tell you on good authority that I would not pay that sort of money for any of those features. And I'm sure most others wouldn't either...
Sorry if that sounded realistic. I made up what's to come! Don't go researching yet.
Sweet. Kids in Somalia are dying of starvation, NYC is in chaos, EU is about to crash and we're marveling over seats in a plane we will never ride....
There's always a few of you in the comments sections. Take your doom and gloom life view somewhere else, it has nothing to do with the article. Just because some things are wrong in the world doesn't mean we should all stop living comfortably and stop all technological development...it's just a new plane for god's sake. I swear some people just like to complain about EVERYTHING.
At least I'm not an ignorant fool.
You people would bitch if you were hung with a new rope.
Boeing missed the ONE thing that all travelers want....a bigger seat with more leg and shoulder room. Anything else they add is pointless, and the average traveler could care less. It is amazing that the airline industry continues to turn a deaf ear to what all travelers are complaining about. As far as I am concerned this is just another sardine can with nothing worthwhile to offer.
It is up to the owner to specify the amount of creature comforts. More room means less seats. You can't have a hundred people on a bus with only 50 seats. A wet bar, a hot tub take away profit from an airline. The plane is all about bucks of profit, nothing else.
Boeing doesn't place the seats, the airline specifies the seat configuration. It's been mentioned over and over here in these comments, but I guess people love to remain ignorant.
By the way, there are bigger seats with plenty of legroom and shoulder room. It's called business class. You want a cheap flight? Sit in coach like I do most of the time.
So this is the new aircraft that doesn't meet the FAA fuel tank explosion safety recommendations?? Here you go, as reported in the Seattle Times: