Why can't Boeing sell the 787-10? Since its introduction, its direct rival has outsold it by a count of nearly 4:1, so what's going on? Let me explain... #boeing #787 #a350 #aviation #avgeek #planespotting #aerospace #airplane #dreamliner
3/5 stars for this comment. It’d be absurd for an engineer to speak with media, have you ever tried talking to one? Marketing dept. would handle all things PR related, excluding announcements.
@@RaoulDuke3030Well if you think about it there are lots of professional engineers that can actually manage to make a somewhat interesting if not enthralling YT video. There are many that come to mind, such as um......... there _has_ to be a few...... oh l know! That guy with the pony tail...what's his name..... Oh. Um. Does an electrical engineer count?
Quality control starts at the very top. But the top administration is just greedy and not Quality. The nest major failure that kills or injuries anyone is the last of Boeing. No airline will purchase Boeing. They have become so corrupt from the administration.
Boeing has actually fixed this wing shudder problem by uploading a software patch that senses the vibration and then flies the plane directly into the ground.
Lower development costs to line some paper pusher’s pockets.Boeing has lists its reputation by cutting corners.Or as the crooked executives say cost cutting.
The 787 itself does not directly rival the A350. The 787-10 to be exact was not designed to have the range of the A350-900 or -1000 for that fact. It was designed more for shorter legs with the ability to carry more people. It wasn’t EVER designed to go head up with the A350-900.
@@letsgotoe2toe that’s where you’d be wrong. I like Boeing and Airbus, equally but facts are facts. The A350 has a role as does the 787. They are not the same🤷🏾♂️
Buying anything from Boeing is a gamble the engineers had 1% pay rises over the last 10 years the management cares about accounting numbers only “just ship it” is the motto no matter the build quality
They're done. They've built a reputation for junk since the early 2000s. My grandfather was an engineer for Boeing and was proud to be one. I'm not sure if he'd feel the same today...
Yeah, the airlines soon will understand the abysmal state of Boeing. It has a reason why they already start to distance themselves from Boeing. In order to prepare for the next issues and problems popping up with Boeing.
Calhoun is gone! Within a month of your comment. So yeah. Hopefully they put an engineer in charge and not a Private Equity a-hole with solid experience in PowerPoint.
That could have been the 757. The 737MAX has the same passenger capacity as the 757-200. They should bring it back with a higher use of composites in a NG variant.
In the year 2080 Boeing will be manufacturing bastardised 787s, while Airbus has a launch customer for a fully autonomous airliner. Airline companies will love not having to employ pesky prima-donna pilots and the industry will take another step change in safety. Of course in an alternate reality human population has collapsed and the remnants of civilisation will be using airliner hulls to keep livestock in.
@@UnitedAviation7472the max problem was solved , everyone know about the MCAS and how it was responsible for two hull losses . But Boeing is been cutting corners and doing shoddy work for a long time know . Gone are the days we could say “if it ain’t boing I ain’t going” ..when we had the old 737s, 747s, 767s, first generations of the triple 7 … those were flying tanks . Airbus also had incredible good planes back then , the A300 was a marvel of engineering, as was the first generations of the A320 and A330, before the composite rubbish was introduced , as happened to Boeing . The A380 is ugly and a failure , wasn’t from emirates it would have been retired . The A321 neo is a good plane , the A350 is beautiful but I still prefer the old ones . I have flown DC10 and MD11 , first A340s, old 747-200/400 and many others that are already gone , how I miss those planes .
What is it with your fixation on Airbus? There are very reliable planes from Embraer, Bombardier, Comac or Gulfstream too. Just Boeings unsafety culture makes its outdated 737 design extremely dangerous.
@@jantjarks7946 What is it with you and the worry of the "outdated 737 design being extremely dangerous"? How bad is it that you think that is what it is? There are reliable planes from Boeing too you know Just airbus's unsafety culture also makes it outdated a320 design prone to going wrong too
Who in the heck is running Boeing these days? Their bean-counter approach to design is going to be the death of the company. Their unwillingness to do clean sheet designs messes them up over and over again
You spoke to a McDonnell Douglas marketing VP. I don’t know where this Boeing nonsense comes from, that engineering-run, quality focused company died years ago.
The advantage of the 787-10 is its phenomenal seat mile fuel burn. The base 787 is smaller and lighter than the a350, so the stretch is able to meet the same size without all the extra structural weight to support the extra fuel. There are a lot of medium and shorter end of long haul routes the 787-10 has more than enough range to cover and does so very economically. If you need more range, Boeing has the 777-8 coming soon. But again, the operating economics aren’t quite as good.
@@jradishA350 against the 787? That's a fair matchup. The 330Neo? While the upfront cost and Maintenance of the -900 is lower than that of the 787, I'd say it's lopsided in favor of the Dreamliner in terms of Cruise and seat per mile but Maintenance. So pick your Rifle LOL.
I wonder if Boeings plan is to not fit all the necessary parts so the planes will use less fuel assuming they don’t crash before reaching their destination 😂😂😂
@@jradish well Michael o’Leary thinks it’s a great idea to purchase planes from Boeing or is there something the Irish know that no one else knows ? To be sure to be sure 😂😂😂😂
I would suggest that Boeing should start making more long range planes like the 777-200LR and they should Make more improvements with the 787-10 like the wing as you mentioned that the whole 787 family uses the same wings.
777-9-10 is the direct rival to the A350-900 and -1000. Both of the Boeings easily outrange the Airbus’ and can also carry much more of both passenger and cargo. Both will inevitably be bought the most for cargo duties of course.
@@Optimaloptimus yes IK but the current A350 competitor is the 777-200LR when the 777X family is going to enter service then the A350 will have a new competitor and the 777-9 has less range than the 777-8. But still the A350-900 has way more range than the 777-8 and it's a potential that there will be a 777-10 it's not been confirmed yet.
Boeing used to be the king in the widebody segment. But today Airbus is coming closer and closer due to uncompromised technical choices. Especially with the A350....
@@PlaneHigh Boeing has only one modern plane with the B787. They are the challenger while Airbus is leading the way with the A220/320/321 Neo. Not to mention the horrific B737 Max crash....things changed my dear
@@PlaneHigh Don't say stupid things if you ignore things. How the 777 is not a modern aircraft as much as the A320 and A330 ? All are EICAS-Fly-By-Wire aircrafts and the 777--X will have the largest composite wing ever built. Please shut up when you don't know. Thks
First thing first, tighten all bolts, replace all the cheap inferior parts to those good quality parts and stop using those cheap unskilled labor workers (some are drug users) to assemble the planes.
The 777 is more of a fight for the a350 than the 787. The 787 is more of a fight for the a330neo, even though they make the bigger 787-10, which airbus doesn’t have a direct match for, the 787 series is still more of a match for the a330. It’s hard to compare the 787 with the a350.
I don’t think they care that much about the sales of the 787-10. The development costs were so cheap as it’s just an extended body, they’ve probably already made a profit off of the ones they’ve already sold
The rounding of the range values presented makes it sound as if it only has a 1.000 miles difference, when in reality is almost 2.000 miles and the difference would be about 30% of the 787 range, a huge difference.
So many comments seem to think this is a critique of the 787 in general when it's not. It's specifically about the -10 variant. The -10 doesn't fulfill any use case that another plane doesn't do better, that's why barely anyone is buying it. That's the point of the video.
Whatever Airbus is doing with their aeroplanes, they are doing it right, eg. Airbus 350- 360 and the King of the skies Airbus 380. Boeing got a lot of catching up to do.
As a consumer: hearing “newest and most advanced “ is now a huge turnoff.. manufacturing quality has gone down significantly since the turn of the century.. tech has encroached on every aspect of machinery now while build quality has tanked..
As an Airbus fan I must agree with you, the dash 10 is a bit of an orphan but fundamentally Boeing make great planes they just need to get the public's confidence back by getting the quality where it should be. Let's not forget with the latest 'max' incident - at a later stage in the flight somebody would have been sucked out the hole.....
The 787-10 is a hidden gem, and soon, there will be performance enhancements that’ll make it even better yet. With so much more fuselage length, airlines can be a bit more creative with how they use that space.
@@Op37373 It doesn’t until you look at how many Boeing planes there are. Over 10,000 are in service, a few have had none-fatal incidents, and now the internet is treating them like death traps
I just flew KLM 787-10 from SFO to Amsterdam and a problem I found was the lav design. I was in 11K, premium comfort yet there are no lavs nearby. They don't allow you to use the ones at the front of business and there aren't any at the L2 door position or between premium and regular economy. You have you go through the first economy cabin where there are 6 lavs that were always full and one become into at some point. That's terrible design and the 787-10 is a big plane. I was sprinting for the rest rooms when I got to Amsterdam. I recently flew United 787-9 from Singapore to SFO and this was not a problem. Lavs in front of and behind premium, same with Vietnam airlines A350-900. I'll avoid the 787-10 in the future.
Riiiight. Because “diverse” engineers are in charge of safety at the corporate level, and it has nothing to do with greedy shareholders and executives. Why do you feel the need to come up with fanciful theories when there’s an obvious explanation that is supported by the facts? Maybe you’re just a loser who wants to blame their failures in life on the success of other people who had it harder than you yet still managed to outperform you. 😂
@@c.r.broken_human if me having to risk my life on an airplane because the best engineers are not employed at Boeing makes me a racist, so fvcking be it.
From the procurement team at Delta Air Lines. The decision was made to go with the A350-900 initially rather than the 787 which was the choice of Northwest which was the U.S. launch customer. Personally I’d much rather be flying the 78 vs the 350 but that was the decision of management.
Someone needs to go back in time and basically lock the entire board and management of McDonnell Douglas in a cupboard in the years leading up to the disastrous merger with Boeing.
Boeing needs to fire a lot of bean counters and replace them with engineers. Boeing needs to hire a CEO who has actual recent and extensive engineering experience.
I have an idea. Boeing can take a page from stockton rush. have passengers sign a waiver to acknowledge they know they are getting a ride on a death trap.
But that wouldn’t solve anything if they did that they would have free rein to do whatever and just be able to get away with any plane crash and not be held liable.
This is misleading. There is also significant overlap between the 787-9 and a350-900 market. The 787-9 has almost as many orders as the entire a350 program. The 787-10 does compromise range for capacity, but that isn't some uncommon and ungodly business move. The extra range of a widened wing I am sure would improve sales, but that does not mean this is a failure.
Cost cutting is an inherent problem for Boeing that has reached a point for them running out of business if there is another commercial airline manufacturer
@@nickolliver3021 I said iI will never fly Boeing or United. I will fly on other types of planes or airline. But if I don't have a choice, then I'll take greyhound.
@@nickolliver3021Boeing planes just suck hard. They are uncomfortable and extra cramped. Plus you know there will be a delay due to unexpected “maintenance.” Cheap cheap cheap.
