View Full Version : Boeing Unveils 787 Dreamliner Flight Deck
alert5
1st Sep 2005, 00:31
Boeing has revealed the flight deck for the 787.
The new flight deck features much larger display screens with five 12-by-9.1-inch screens offer 546 square inches of display space, twice that of the Boeing 777.
Dual head-up displays (HUDs) and dual electronic flight bag are standard features on the 787.
The 787 offers new information formats including an airport moving map for safer ground taxi operations and a vertical situation display to give a graphic rendering of approaching terrain profiles.
http://www.radarvector.com/2005/09/boeing-unveils-787-dreamliner-flight.html
6000PIC
1st Sep 2005, 01:14
Looks like it`ll make a great freighter.
hmmm, beautiful... that brings the Boeing cockpit almost to the standard of today's Gulfstream cockpit. Except we don't need EFB, cause we can display all charts on the cockpit displays... Well, i guess if you care what happens BEHIND the cockpit door, you could arguably get excited about the 787...
Atlanta-Driver
1st Sep 2005, 03:21
Here a link for a better view of the 787 cockpit:
http://www.newairplane.com/en-US/FunStuff/Pictures.html
AD
hm. Did a quick search and alert5 seems to post nothing but links to radarvector and alert5 websites... is this an advertising wheeze to draw traffic? Radarvector seems to have no content except links to other news websites.
El Peligroso
1st Sep 2005, 04:25
Such a beautifully designed modern cockpit with great big steam driven paddles between the pilot's legs.
Guess the Airbus boys will still be dining while the Boeing boys scavenge off their knees.
:\
alert5
1st Sep 2005, 04:35
hm. Did a quick search and alert5 seems to post nothing but links to radarvector and alert5 websites... is this an advertising wheeze to draw traffic? Radarvector seems to have no content except links to other news websites.
Its my personal blog. I don't post the entire article due to copyright issues.
What I'm trying to do is to provide a summary of the article.
MarkD,
I dont think your the only one to notice. www.alert5.com is his web site, would be getting revenue by posting the link here and getting traffic.
The cockpit picture..well they just seem to be computer generated renderings, not an actual cockpit or simulator photo.
El Peligroso..read that sidesticks are an option for the 787, worked well for the F16. Its an electric aeroplane like the 777.
alert 5,
You could provide a summary in your own words without a link, and without copyright problems.
:ok:
16 blades
1st Sep 2005, 05:03
SWEEEET! Still has a long way to go to beat the giant HUDs and general kit wizardry of the C-130J, though. Airbus? take note - all of your aircraft look the same (think 'Toyota' - reliable, but ultimately BORING!) and seem considerably outdated when held up next to this. At least Boeing seem to still involve pilots in their aircraft, both in design AND in operating them - an Airbus pilot is never truly 'flying' the aircraft, since there is no manual reversion whatsoever. A dangerous concept, if you ask me (an old fashioned pilot who believes in FLYING the damn thing, not just managing it). The 787 'office' looks almost as good as the C-17's.
16B
since there is no manual reversion whatsoever
Bullocks
16 blades
1st Sep 2005, 05:48
And the manual reversion is.........?
16B
Trim, rudder, and engine control, thats how the DHL A300 landed on the runway in Bagdad after it got hit by a missle.
Atlanta-Driver
1st Sep 2005, 06:29
DHL A300 was a "Classic" Bus with hydraulic flight controls, mechanical engine control (CF6-50 if memory serves me correct).
A very different animal for the modern "Electric" FBW, FADEC bus.
AD
too much toulouse
1st Sep 2005, 06:36
I thought the A300 was an old-fashioned plane.
BEagle
1st Sep 2005, 06:47
The C-17 flight deck is rather old compared to what you'll see in a few years time, 16B:
http://www.airbusmilitary.com/gallery/a400mcockpit3500.jpg
Sweet!
Is this Boeing policy of 'unveiling' the 7E7 bit by bit a new idea? Not quite the same as unveiling an entire new aircraft - such as the A380!
A300/A310 aren't exactly state-of-the-art, but are very nice indeed as far as passengers are concerned as they have the same cross-section as the A330/340. And the demand for pre-owned A310s is such that as soon as they appear on the market, they're quickly snapped up by an eager buyer.
Boeing's Plastic Plane is a bold step; just how bold remains to be seen. But the nose looks nice!
eal401
1st Sep 2005, 07:06
Airbus? take note - all of your aircraft look the same
I'll remember that next time I look at an A320 and an A380.
(A bit like looking at a 757, 767 and 777, before any snide comments come back. Oh and the 787 did look radical once. It doesn't anymore, not from the outside.)
300/310/318/319/320/321/330/340 all have the same manual reversion, rudder, stab, and engines.
777 has spoilers, stab, and engines.
Your point being ?
:hmm:
no manual reversion whatsoever
Standing to be corrected, but as far as I remember manual reversion is the option to fly the aircraft manually during a loss of all hydraulic systems. The only heavy (commercial) jet I know using that procedure is the B737.
But with a B757/767 e.g. you don't have that option - with a loss of all hydraulics you have only asymmetric thrust, not even the option to use rudder or stabilizer, since they're controlled via hydraulic actuators.
Dangerous? Judge for yourself...
Farrell
1st Sep 2005, 10:22
That's one hell of a crosswind landing in the first picture on the Boeing site! :E
http://www.newairplane.com/en-US/FunStuff/Pictures.html
Saint-Ex
1st Sep 2005, 13:19
swh , the DHL boys has no rudder and no trim, engines only!
eal401,
Outside of the aircraft doesn't sell. Of course if you're filthy rich and buying a business jet outside might give some impact (see Global vs. GV fighting for customers).
What is inside (and mostly hidden) is what sells.
Believe me when the job is done on 787 it will be quite a leap. Airbus will be in position to jump through some hoops to match the technology challenge.
It will be interesting to observe.
As I mentioned before far more impact will lie in the next step i.e. when a barrel section (cylindrical part of the fuselage between the flight deck and the empennage) is ready and TESTED OK.
That would be far more important then presenting the deck. Without barrel tested positive I do not see further succsefull progress on the 787 program.
Phoenix_X
2nd Sep 2005, 06:10
At least Boeing seem to still involve pilots in their aircraft, both in design AND in operating them - an Airbus pilot is never truly 'flying' the aircraft, since there is no manual reversion whatsoever.
You have an interesting view of 'flying' the aircraft. You must be doing barrel rolls or stalls all the time when you're flying. Otherwise I don't really see (nor noticed) any difference in my control of the aircraft when manually flying.
Neither have I seen many other (even conventional) large aircraft perform very well without hydraulics, so where's the difference? You can fly both the bus or the boeing without any flight computer (rudder & trim).
NG_Kaptain
3rd Sep 2005, 02:26
A side stick would be nice though!!! Flown Boeings and Buses and do love the side stick.
Dan Winterland
4th Sep 2005, 03:36
And don't forget the table!
alert5
4th Sep 2005, 05:39
I dont think your the only one to notice. www.alert5.com is his web site, would be getting revenue by posting the link here and getting traffic.
I don't get any money from people who visit the website. The ads generate money when people click on them and not every single person who read the articles clicks on an ad.
I do try to write in my own words if possible but in reality, I have a full time job. This is only a hobby of mine. So I just summarise what the article says. Anyone who wants to read the full article can click the link to do so.
Newspapers around the world also just copy word for word from Reuters or AFP rite.
We do have our own original content. Our photo gallery contains alot of exclusive photos from the U.S. Navy.
http://www.alert5.com/gallery/
If you were to browse around, you can view comments left by the pilots and ground crew.
I try to get original content too, here are some articles contributed by people
http://www.alert5.com/reviews/viraat.htm
http://www.alert5.com/2005/04/vf-213-blacklions-hone-bombing-skills.html
http://www.alert5.com/2005/06/vf-213-blacklions-return-from-last.html
To summarise, I'm doing this as a hobby, my objective is to share these information with everyone. If you are offended by it, I'm sorry for the inconvience caused.
The FMC will be display based effectively on what is now the lower EICAS, the INIT, LEGS, HOLD, etc, keys will be accessed from the mouse pad, just like the flight sim's.
The two FMC's will be displayed side by side and one can be replaced by a ND display for route modifications, anything that is "click able" on this ND will appear in the scratchpad and then can be executed.
Just have to put a dog in the cockpit, have a wireless feed to a laptop in the crew rest or anywhere for that matter and we'll just have to turn up for the landing and feed the dog.
SMOC
Frederic
5th Sep 2005, 20:41
Here's a big huge Airbus fan speaking...
I think Boeing have done a marvelous job at regaining their credibility and market position with this aircraft. Good job there.
I think it will be a fantastic aircraft and look forward to flying it some time in the future! (I never thought I would say that about a Boeing, mind you... I feel so dirty... )
I understand why they haven't used sidesticks on it. The answer is dead simple: the 777 doesn't have them. Boeing has realised that the aircraft family concept Airbus has come up with is a great selling point. If the 777 would have had them, so would the 787.
So here's my question to Boeing:
Whyyyy, oh whyyyyy:ugh: :ugh: have you not used sidesticks on the 777
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASEEEE give us side sticks!
We want them!
We need em!
We love em!
Otherwise: great plane, can't wait to get a rating!
For all of you that keep thinking FBW & Sidesticks don't allow you to really fly the aircraft,... ask any F-16 Pilot, hèhè