Qantas Fleet Order Speculation
Explained to me by a type rated CX engineer in MEL handling UA 789, greater range of the 9 over the 8 comes from Aerodynamic Slots on the vertical and hori stabs that improve boundary layer flow over the rudder and elevators respectively and hence aerodynamic efficiency.
Aerodynamic noise...
Further to the above, an anecdotal observation:
When I first flew the (very quiet) A330 I was amazed to discover that we could hear opposite direction aircraft pass 1000' above or below our altitude in exactly the whooshing sound that you'd imagine a cruising airliner would make. That's true of other 330s, 777s and the ever less common 747s. But its very subtle on the 787s that we (horizontally,at least) joust with, to the point that its perhaps more imagined than real. I have no trouble at all believing that a 787s passage is profoundly and audibly less traumatic to the air, and hence less wasteful of energy.
When I first flew the (very quiet) A330 I was amazed to discover that we could hear opposite direction aircraft pass 1000' above or below our altitude in exactly the whooshing sound that you'd imagine a cruising airliner would make. That's true of other 330s, 777s and the ever less common 747s. But its very subtle on the 787s that we (horizontally,at least) joust with, to the point that its perhaps more imagined than real. I have no trouble at all believing that a 787s passage is profoundly and audibly less traumatic to the air, and hence less wasteful of energy.
Regarding the increased range of the 787-9 over the -8, it looks like it has very little to do with the engines.
There is the hybrid laminar flow control system discussed above and some airframe weight savings (although the empty -9 is still heavier than -8), but the biggest enabler of the range increase looks to be the higher MTOW. This is made possible by increasing the gauge and strength of key structural components.
So I guess in theory the max range of the -8 would be greater but with a full load of passengers the higher MTOW of the -9 gives it it's greater range.
There is a great article about it in Flightglobal: ANALYSIS: Why Boeing?s 787-9 is more than just a stretch - 7/10/2014 - Flight Global
And the graphic below shows the different range profile at the different MTOW options:
There is the hybrid laminar flow control system discussed above and some airframe weight savings (although the empty -9 is still heavier than -8), but the biggest enabler of the range increase looks to be the higher MTOW. This is made possible by increasing the gauge and strength of key structural components.
So I guess in theory the max range of the -8 would be greater but with a full load of passengers the higher MTOW of the -9 gives it it's greater range.
There is a great article about it in Flightglobal: ANALYSIS: Why Boeing?s 787-9 is more than just a stretch - 7/10/2014 - Flight Global
And the graphic below shows the different range profile at the different MTOW options:
Management are " reasonably confident" that OQD would be available Monday. My experience of contaminated hydraulic systems is limited to cars. Can someone with some knowledge expand. Would you have to replace all or some of the following? Actuators, pumps and flexible lines? Thanks.
moa999, perhaps you missed this post from B772:
I'd be pretty impressed if you could get 450Nm more range from an extra 133kg of fuel!!
A recent Boeing presentation given to me shows the -9 fuel tank capacity is 133 kgs greater than the -8
Management are " reasonably confident" that OQD would be available Monday. My experience of contaminated hydraulic systems is limited to cars. Can someone with some knowledge expand. Would you have to replace all or some of the following? Actuators, pumps and flexible lines? Thanks.
Current GEnx-1B engines have ~2% better fuel burn than the EIS engines. But the GEnx-1B engines going on the 787-9 are the exact same engines as those going on the 787-8 today (aside from perhaps the rating plug), and PIP improvements made since EIS are a available for retrofit to the original GEnx engines.
Voting closes 19/07
From the SMH
Qantas A380 grounded in Los Angeles after mystery problem with hydraulics
You get what you pay for.
Qantas A380 grounded in Los Angeles after mystery problem with hydraulics
The A380 returned from several weeks of maintenance at Lufthansa Technik's base in Manila in the Philippines on June 20,
You get what you pay for
It is the second time in the past few months that Qantas has had to redeploy Boeing 747-400s to replace A380s on routes to the US. An A380 was out of services for six weeks after it was damaged during maintenance at Qantas' jet base in Sydney in April.
when the flagship fails
Qantas's head of International, Gareth Evans is quoted in the latest Australian Aviation, saying 'that the airline would not buy any more A380s beyond the 12 it has.'