Boeing 787 Launch Customers
Being the first airline to take delivery of a brand new aircraft design is always a calculated risk. The aircraft builder will generally negotiate an attractive deal with a launch airline as it is accepted that there will be teething problems, delays on delivery etc.
The rewards, however, can be great. The aircraft maker, in this case, Boeing, and the airline, in this case, ANA Airlines of Japan, worked very closely together and many of ANAs’ requirements ended up being included in the finished Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft. There were, of course, many delays as whole new technologies were applied. The reward was to be able to boast that ANA was flying the newest most technologically advanced aircraft in the world. This was a flying billboard for ANA and airlines that came next, saying we are investing in the future. We are flying cutting-edge technology. It suddenly made other aircraft fleets start to look tired.
First Seven Boeing 787 Customers
Here are those first cutting edge airlines taking possession of their new baby.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boeing 787 Dreamliner Order Book
787 Model Summary as at April 2020.
| Model Series | Orders | Deliveries | Unfilled |
|---|---|---|---|
| Boeing 787 9 | 877 | 542 | 335 |
| Boeing 787 8 | 422 | 374 | 48 |
| Boeing 787 10 | 211 | 56 | 155 |
| 787 Total | 1,510 | 972 | 538 |
If there is more you want to learn about this airliner, please visit Boeing 787 Home, Boeing 787 Interior, Boeing 787 Specs, Boeing 787 Assembly and Boeing 787 History,
We welcome your comments below, is there more we could be showing or are there topics you would like to see? Thank you.
Easy access table to engine type fitted to each 787/9 aircraft
Boeing spent millions and billions of dollars producing the 787. This airliner is not much different compared to their 777. Did Boeing make a mistake introducing a design which is very similar to their 777?
Hi John,
thank you for stopping by.
At first glance it seems that there could be a some cross over between the Boeing 787 and the Boeing 777. They are, however, quite a different class of airliner. Where the 787 can be seen as a replacement of the once popular Boeing 767 in the lower end of the twin aisle market, the Boeing 777 is now the replacement for the Boeing 747. As we enter the age of the giant twins, the 777 is at the upper end of that class. To confuse the matter further, Boeing is investigating a 797 which would sit between the 737 and the 787.
Different tools for different jobs.
Cheers Peter
Pisquali-
Thanks for the information. Now I am waiting to see the final design of the MOM airliner. I believe that it will be somewhat similar to the 767 with twin aisle and 2-3-2 seating. It will be a winner.
I think you’re right John. It is always exciting to have a new airliner on the drawing board.
Is there a table or chart showing which airframes were assembled in NC and WA?
Hi Michael,
we have looked and are unable to locate such a table. The South Carolina factory is responsible for the aft fuselage sections 47 and 48 of the 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10. Those of the 787-8 and 787-9 are flown by cargo plane to the Everett factory for assembly there, whilst those of the 787-10 are assembled in the South Carolina factory. They are simply too big to be transported. There has been some media coverage about possible sub-standard production at South Carolina and Qatar Airways has refused to take any products originating in that facility. We wait with interest to see what the truth is. Boeing needs to get this right as they are having enough headaches already.
Cheers Peter
Hey there, is there anything really interesting about controlling the complex systems on the Boeing 747?
Hi Mikael,
You could say it is all interesting, but that depends on your area of interest I guess.
Cheers Peter
Could you give some examples please? Thanks
Can you name any 3 environmental impacts that the Boeing 747 may cause?
Hi Jack,
maybe we won’t say that out loud next time we fly, right?
Three environmental impacts?
1. The early 747 engines weren’t as efficient as today, so certainly pollution was a factor.
2. Staying with the above engines, noise was certainly a factor that affected those living near airports.
3. A positive was that by carrying more passengers fewer aircraft were needed to complete that same task. So in effect, there were fewer flights creating noise and pollution.
Does that help?
Cheers Peter