Hmmm.
Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.
As the previous poster rightly pointed out, a lot more research needs to be done before any definitive conclusion can be drawn.
Originally Posted by
Mac the Knife
As for Boeing's decision not to use bleed-air, it really comes down to a policy decision.
Boeing might choose to disagree, having cited all of the following as reasons for the 787's no-bleed architecture:
Improved fuel consumption, due to a more efficient secondary power extraction, transfer, and usage.
Reduced maintenance costs, due to elimination of the maintenance-intensive bleed system.
Improved reliability due to the use of modern power electronics and fewer components in the engine installation.
Expanded range and reduced fuel consumption due to lower overall weight.