Talk:Boeing 787 Dreamliner

Hail damage caused 787 to return to airport.

Hail damage leaves big dent on American Airlines Dreamliner http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2015/07/28/american-airlines-dreamliner-dinged--hail-returns--beijing/30774143/

Primary/more users in infobox

I'm sort of confused why UA wouldn't be listed as one of the primary/more users in the infobox. Of course NH should be top, but UA is second in deliveries and third in orders (not counting ILFC). I'm replacing AI (fifth in deliveries, 11th in orders) with UA. Riphamilton (talk) 22:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the Operators order is based on the 2015 World Airliner Census (July), where the totals were: All Nippon Airways (38), Japan Airlines (23), Qatar Airways (22), Air India (21), United Airlines (18), Ethiopian Airlines (13), LAN Airlines (13), etc... There are no new reliable sources quoted since the WAC which take a snapshot of all B787 operators totals, so normally we have to wait for the next annual census to update these figures. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 01:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Speed in kph removed

The fact that on July 19 an edit has been done that removes the speed of the aircraft type in kph, only to leave knots and mach, is conflicting with the understandability of information on Wikipedia, as most people cannot relate to knots and mach (only scientists, aviation and nautical people/fanatics understand). Please add the km/h back to make it easier to understand for the layman. --OPolkruikenz (talk) 19:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

The edit in question did not remove the unit conversions on purpose. It was simply a formatting issue with the template. This has been fixed and I added the mph conversion too. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

National origin

The article currently describes the Boeing 787 as an "American" airliner. This seems overly simplistic given that parts of the aircraft have a "national origin" outside the United States. According to the article, different parts of the aircraft are manufactured in Japan, Italy, Korea, Sweden, France, and India. Which secondary sources explicitly call the 787 an "American" aircraft? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 14:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

All modern aircraft are built with bits from around the world but the national origin releates to where the final assembly and certification is carried out, with the Boeing 787 that is two sites in the United States, so clearly the aircraft is legally American by design and build. Engines are a large part of the cost of an airliner and most are built in different countries to that of final build and certification but for example you would not consider a RR-powered Boeing to be Anglo-American. MilborneOne (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

If modern aircraft are built with parts from around the word, then that would seem to undermine the notion that modern aircraft possess a nationality at all. According to whom does national origin relate to where the final assembly and certification are carried out? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 10:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The 787 is assembled from various parts from around the world, indeed, but by Boeing, an american company, under the review of the US FAA. For example, one of the most established source in the industry is (the British) Jane's All the World's Aircraft, and the 787 is referenced for the USA section, along with other Boeings. Airbus is under the multinational section.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I can agree with describing Boeing Commercial Airplanes as an "American company"; however, does Jane's book explicitly describe different aircraft as being American, Russian, British, etc.?

Regardless, American is a nationality, which I think is different than national origin; I don't think that manufactured products such as airplanes have nationalities per se. It's a colloquial or journalistic convention to speak collectively of "Japanese electronics", "German automobiles", etc., but I don't think that such journalistic shorthand fits well in an encyclopedia article about a specific product. For instance, the Sony PlayStation is not described on Wikipedia as "a Japanese video game console", nor is the Mercedes S-Class called "a German luxury car". These products are simply described as items produced by their respective companies. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 10:17, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Aircraft do have a national origin as it relates to airworthiness certification, any Boeing 787 would be described as a product of the United States. MilborneOne (talk) 10:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The S-class article is within the Category:Mercedes-Benz vehicles itself within Category:Cars of Germany. Companies have nationalities. But I agree I don't really care for the 787 of being american, it is foremost a Boeing product, itself a US company. I don't care either if other wp editors want to underline that the 787 is american. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boeingmedia.com/imageDetail.cfm?id=14679&KeyWord=787&buID=0&caid=0&prid=0&sc=lrg&pn=1&clr=&CFID=2903355&CFTOKEN=34556541
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.engenuitytech.com/products/VAPS/XT_661/faq.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080304140424/http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a330-200/specifications.html to http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a330-200/specifications.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/S5-2013%20ET-AOP.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140823220152/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-01-27/gs-yuasa-shares-surge-as-japan-ends-probe-of-787-battery-maker to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-01-27/gs-yuasa-shares-surge-as-japan-ends-probe-of-787-battery-maker

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Design/Interior Section Appears Grossly Inaccurate

"The 787's nine-abreast seating for economy provides passengers less space, particularly across the hips and shoulders, than any other jet airliner.[230] This has led to recommendations that passengers, particularly taller or larger individuals, avoid the 787 for international service.[230][231][232]"

I'm afraid the article cited for link 230 is just completely inaccurate. The article's author claims "Nine-abreast on a Dreamliner means a seat width of 17” or below," however, every 787 configuration with nine-abreast seating I've seen has stated much more seat width in a nine-abreast seating configuration: ANA (18.6"), United (17.3"), BA (17.5")

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/ANA/ANA_Boeing_787-800_D.php https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/United_Airlines_Boeing_787-800.php https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/ANA/ANA_Boeing_787-800_D.php