Safe to fly on 787?

[scroggins]

As a rule I avoid the 787, due to all the rumors of production flaws and poor quality control. Unfortunately, I have to fly from Mexico City to Tokyo, then Tokyo to Bangkok next week on 787s with ANA. I booked before perusing old threads here, and I was shocked to learn about structural concerns that have emerged over the last two years.

I'm tempted to spend an extra few thousand dollars to fly with KLM instead (cancellation fees + fare differences) , but financially that's a hard pill to swallow.

What's the consensus? Are the concerns about the 787 overblown, or should I avoid it at all cost?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

[tdracer]

The 787 has been flying around in commercial service for over 10 years, with over a thousand delivered and millions of hours of operation. Zero accidents, zero hull loss events, zero fatalities.

Yes, the 787 has had issues - most new aircraft do. But most of what you read on here is overblown and unknowledgeable.

[scroggins]

Thank you. I appreciate the perspective.

The 787 has been flying around in commercial service for over 10 years, with over a thousand delivered and millions of hours of operation. Zero accidents, zero hull loss events, zero fatalities.

Yes, the 787 has had issues - most new aircraft do. But most of what you read on here is overblown and unknowledgeable.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Merely as an SLF, I've had pleasant experiences on the 787 of various airlines. I have my reservations about carbon fibre fuselages compared to good ol' aluminium, but like most people I honestly don't know enough to make an informed judgement. As tdracer said the numbers stack up in favour of the 787's safety and reliability and even the A350 seems to have had some issues of late.

[DaveReidUK]

As a rule I avoid the 787, due to all the rumors of production flaws and poor quality control. Unfortunately, I have to fly from Mexico City to Tokyo, then Tokyo to Bangkok next week on 787s with ANA. I booked before perusing old threads here, and I was shocked to learn about structural concerns that have emerged over the last two years.

I'm tempted to spend an extra few thousand dollars to fly with KLM instead (cancellation fees + fare differences) , but financially that's a hard pill to swallow.

What's the consensus? Are the concerns about the 787 overblown, or should I avoid it at all cost?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

Didn't you believe what you were told in 2019, when you asked an identical question?

Have these issues been overblown, or is it generally a good idea to avoid the 787 at all costs?

[Union Jack]

Didn't you believe what you were told in 2019, when you asked an identical question?
I can't help wondering if the OP is aware of the the ancient expression "Collapse of stout party", which somehow comes to mind....:ok:

Jack

[scroggins]

You know, I almost mentioned that thread. I took the flight in 2019 without any issues, and until now had been under the impression that the 787 was ok, even though I do avoid it myself. I was unaware of the structural concerns that emerged in 2020 and 2021, so in my mind it seemed fair to ask again.

As an SLF said on another thread about 787s, I have to reassess the safety of the aircraft every time I'm forced to fly on it.

I also used to have a crippling fear of flying, which still rears its head from time to time. Since you were browsing my post history, you probably know this.

Didn't you believe what you were told in 2019, when you asked an identical question?

[scroggins]

Didn't you believe what you were told in 2019, when you asked an identical question?
It is startling how eerily similar the wording is though 😅

[S.o.S.]

It is a perfectly reasonable question to ask, even repeated as information has changed.

I hope that posters, old and new, will continue to ask questions.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Fear of flying is at best irrational the way it pops it's head up now and then. Triggers personal to the person, based on something, based on nothing depending. I had it some years back for a year or so where I was flying as much as pilots do and whilst most flights were ok, there were a few episodes that were so awful, full on panic attacks and a trip in an ambulance from the air-stairs to hospital so bad was the feeling.

As to repeating a question, if you're anything like me you might forget something you typed in a while back, and there's been a bit going on in the world since 2019 for most people! Sometimes an old thread will be restarted and I realise that I had already made several posts in the thread, but completely forgotten about them.

[GROUNDHOG]

Flown three long haul sectors on the 787 in last couple of weeks, for no rational reason I am an Airbus fan but really found the 787 extremely comfortable and had no fears of flying on it any more than any other aeroplane. Not sure what it is like if you turn right at the top of the stairs though.:)

[Mr Mac]

I tried the 787, ironically with ANA, when they were the launch customer, and to be honest I am not a fan. There is no real reason, but somehow I was expecting more after all the hype, and ironically for somebody who likes looking out of the window when the geography is interesting, those windows were not as impressive as I thought they would be. As for flying in it, my favourite A/C is A380 and that I do try to use as much as possible, as I do like it very much, but I also spend a lot of time on A350 and smaller members of the Airbus family, but also spend a lot of time on other Boeing products . I would not worry about flying on a 787 but it does not feel that great in my SLF opinion. ANA service is good though, and I would say KLM not so much, but the houses are quite neat, my wife who used them to Vancouver has quite a street in her study !

Cheers
Mr Mac

[DIBO]

from Mexico City to Tokyomy biggests fears would certainly be over by the time I reach the carbon fibre

[25F]

My usual observation on this is that you are more likely to get in an accident on the way to the airport (if driving) than on the aircraft.
Or at any rate, that is my belief. The stats are out there but generally published in "deaths-per-passenger-mile" which is utterly useless.
What someone needs to know is - 30-ish mile journey to the airport - chances of a crash?
[FWIW - get the train, it's very very safe]
Then a flight. Doesn't matter how long, most things go wrong on takeoff and particularly on landing.
And then your journey at the other end. In some destinations, *definitely* the dangerous part of the trip.

[Asturias56]

I prefer the A380 when it's available but I'd take 787 over a 777 or A330/340 any day - it's quieter for a start .

Safety? As long as you stay with major airlines you're as safe as you can be. Problems arise with small airlines in the sticks - but then there often is no other choice. And even in PNG or C Africa you're far safer in the aircraft than you are on the roads or on a boat - probably an even greater comparative advantage than in say W Europe.

[crewmeal]

As a rule I avoid the 787, due to all the rumors of production flaws and poor quality control.

I guess you won't want to fly the B777X when it comes into service next year??

[ShyTorque]

Fear of flying is at best irrational the way it pops it's head up now and then. Triggers personal to the person, based on something, based on nothing depending. I had it some years back for a year or so where I was flying as much as pilots do and whilst most flights were ok, there were a few episodes that were so awful, full on panic attacks and a trip in an ambulance from the air-stairs to hospital so bad was the feeling.

As to repeating a question, if you're anything like me you might forget something you typed in a while back, and there's been a bit going on in the world since 2019 for most people! Sometimes an old thread will be restarted and I realise that I had already made several posts in the thread, but completely forgotten about them.

I think the fear is to do with crashing, rather than flying!

After a 45 year career as a pilot, I still try to minimise risk in whatever way I can because I have no intention of flying directly to my final resting place. If I had the choice of choosing aircraft type, I’d take it.

[oceancrosser]

I guess you won't want to fly the B777X when it comes into service next year??

You know something we don´t?

[SpringHeeledJack]

probably saw this video ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi3CWoLgQlI

[DaveReidUK]

It's certainly very quiet. :O

[SimonPaddo]

It is very quiet, quieter than the usual Farnborough biz jets, even directly overhead chez moi, which the biz jets don't do. A350 and E190 equally impressive

[oceancrosser]

probably saw this video ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi3CWoLgQlI

Ah, me see. It´s the Boeing XLLL! Or did they turn in the wrong direction? :}

[PAXboy]

Given the opportunty, most airliners can do that but it always looks good in the press release.

[DaveReidUK]

Given the opportunty, most airliners can do that but it always looks good in the press release.

And in the media, where a FPA of 30-ish degrees miraculously becomes "near-vertical". :O

[Uplinker]

Many moons ago, not long after the Airbus crash at that airshow, where instead of a touch and go, they ploughed into trees beyond the runway, and following a documentary about the crash involving supposedly unresponsive elevators; Mrs Uplinker and I vowed never to set foot on an Airbus.

Fast forward 13 years and I am now a pilot, doing a type rating on the A320. Learning about the FBW and other systems, I realise what a well designed and well engineered machine it is. and that the test pilots who crashed that Airbus had not done their class room studies very diligently.

Being a passenger at the rear of an A330; the fuselage flexing one can see on a turbulent approach is very alarming, but one has to trust that the structural people have done their due diligence. I hope the same is true of the 787.

[DaveReidUK]

Many moons ago, not long after the Airbus crash at that airshow, where instead of a touch and go, they ploughed into trees beyond the runway, and following a documentary about the crash involving supposedly unresponsive elevators; Mrs Uplinker and I vowed never to set foot on an Airbus.

Fast forward 13 years and I am now a pilot, doing a type rating on the A320. Learning about the FBW and other systems, I realise what a well designed and well engineered machine it is. and that the test pilots who crashed that Airbus had not done their class room studies very diligently.

If you mean the Habsheim crash, the the flyby was performed by two Air France training captains rather than test pilots (with 130 charter passengers on board).

[Smudge's Lot]

What "Structural problems" do you mean?
Do you mean the production problems that Boeing have had at Charleston?

Flown the 787 for over 8 years now and never had any problems at all!

[G SXTY]

I’ve been flying it for a while & have been in and out of Mexico City many times.

The trickiest bit of the 787 is getting it set up to go flying - once we start moving it all gets a lot easier. :ok: It’s a very friendly aircraft that looks after me, with cabin air quality that’s in a different league to previous generations of Boeings. It has very few ‘gotchas’ and comes with more safety related kit and toys than anything else I’ve ever flown.

And as for flying out of MEX - I’d suggest that aircraft type should be the least of your worries…

[James 1077]

Flown in the 787 a few times now. Nice aircraft as a passenger: good sized windows, reasonably quiet, roomy even in economy (although much of this is down to operator). It isn't as good as the A380 or A350 but would choose it over a 777 every day of the week.

Only plane that you'll struggle to get me on is the 737-Max. Will be a good few years before I book a flight on one, and most likely will need me to have an aircraft change after booking, and a flight I have to take so can't refuse to board, before I get onboard one.

[RevBod]

It's certainly very quiet. :O
Did not sound that quiet when doing a steep bank a few hundred feet above me during validation week. In fact the screeching noise on bank was a bit disturbing as somebody standing underneath it.