Dreamliner also works well because it handles so many long routes that might involve passengers sleeping… sort of implies you’ll get a good rest onboard. (Though with modern economy seat pitch and width, who can say…)
@@StevoE7 so it basicly got an extra row, and still is super spacious. I love the 787-9 Dreamliner. Been on it for an 11 hour straight flight, I'll compare it to a straight 9 hour flight on an a330-300
@@Kayshots the 2-4-2 configuration would mean you would never be more than one seat from an aisle. That plan was never likely to survive contact with the airlines though.
@@dmrr7739 On the flip side when holidaying with my parents, my mother insisted that all 3 of us sit together, hence when we flew on a plane with a 2-4-2 layout, none of us could have a window seat (unlike with a 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 layout)
Someone who travelled with one also complained about that. The mechanical blinds on other planes are more convenient but it might be a problem with the big windows. You open one to watch or take photos and the whole plane is lit like you switched on a searchlight.
Yep, this was my only complaint when I had to travel with this plane, 13h from Warsaw to Tokyo. I wanted to take some pictures of the beautiful landscape of Mongolia, but there was no way of controlling the dimming
It's a dream more on Japan Airlines than other airlines operating the 787....because JAL is literally the only one operating 8-across in economy, the others squeeze in one more seat, making the configuration tight and uncomfortable for most people. And it looks like Airbus is making it possible to do 10-across in the A350, also making a comfortable plane into a sardine can. *sigh.....
@@tristanhnl Please cite the data supporting your claim of most people finding the 787 uncomfortable. Anecdotes are not a source. In my anecdotal experience the overwhelming majority of people I know who have flown the 787 love it.
I flew the JAL 787 couple of times and holyshit….i am blown away every single time at how spacious the economy class seats are. I’m 5’10 and still had so much extra legroom to really relax. Seriously amazing
@@thanuk5778 , yes!!!!! That's how Boeing intended the 787 to be....very spacious and comfortable. But of course the airlines only see dollar signs, so they turn the 787 into a sardine can *sigh ....
Boeing probably wanted the "Global Cruiser" name because they were developing the Sonic Cruiser simultaneously. Two "Cruisers" that were supposed to carry the future of the company with both speed and efficiency. However rising oil prices and the Dreamliner's own ballooning budget made Boeing shelved the Sonic Cruiser project early on.
Dreamliner is much the superior name to Global Cruiser. Others have said that it sounds like a freight company, to me that's being generous; I think it sounds like a friggin minivan.
I am glad Dreamliner won. Such a wonderful name and it would also give the variant of the Queen a fitting name as well, Dreamlifter. Imagine it being called Global Lifter.
Dreamliner has an emotional and aspirational charm to it. People will be materialising dreams on them, flying to their dream destinations for either holidays, exciting job opportunities or long anticipated reencounters. Like honestly all planes, the 787 is a machine of dreams ✨
I’ve flown on many Dreamliners from Manchester to Jeddah by saudi airlines. I really liked their dimmed windows (you can adjust their brightness with a button underneath the window).
We mechanics have a different nickname for the B787. We call it "Plastic Princess", because it likes the princess treatment and is a chore to work maintenance on in comparison to past Boeing fleets.
"Dreamliner" is one hell of a name for marketing your jet. When I was little and knew nothing about airplanes, I assumed it'd be some A380 sized luxury jet.
Dream Liner kind of harks back to when flying was a grand full-service experience. Stewardesses, nice meals, pillows, blankets, hot washcloths, smoking and free drinks.
The other planes I’ve flown in are nice too but I’ve always wanted to fly in the 787 at night. But every time I got to fly in a 787 it was during the daytime. I would love to have that overnight flight experience in the “Dreamliner” when they dim the cabin lights, and everyone goes to sleep, you’re on a window seat, it’s dark outside and the starry sky, moonlight shining through the window. It’s absolutely amazing. But I bet it would feel even more beautiful if I were in an aircraft called “Dreamliner”.
The only problem for me, as wide complexity build and at 5,11" is the 9 abreast economy. Had most airliners gone with an 8 abreast, it would've been a true dream. on does narrow seats my shoulders are extending beyond the seat back rubbing with my neighbor's. Overall, as a claustrophobic person, the lower height cabin, the overall quietness and the huge windows help a lot.
I flew at 787-10 Dreamliner from LA to New York. It was the smoothest nicest ride I've ever had on a plane. And I've flown on a lot of different planes commercially.
My only long haul flight was done on the Dreamliner , the airline + seats didn’t make the flight too comfy , but the plane itself felt lovely + very stable. Often I forgot I was even 40,000ft in the air
I was an apprentice at Rolls-Royce when the 787 was released. They did a fly over the D Site where I was at, we saw a bit of a wing and that was it. Good old British overcast weather.
Dreamliner is more catchy from a layman point of view. And I think it fits the unique characteristics of the Dreamliner as a lot of planes can be global cruisers but the Dreamliner has those extra comfort aspects that set it apart whilst still being smaller than models such as the 747 or a380
I was watching an old Concorde documentary at the weekend and it was so old that they actually referred to the Dreamliner as the E787, which gives Merritt to 4th option on your list.
Nightmare liner was more apt given its development history. To minimize risk, Boeing outsourced production of major parts to other countries. Management of that was monumental task, with parts that didn’t fit or were substandard.
