What do you Think about the 787

I really don’t like 787 because of the look but other that that I think it is a good plane

2 Likes

We get a A350 in Austin after the 77W I thought

1 Like

Low demand long hauls, sorry

1 Like

I was worried you were going to say they copied the A350. I would of had to rage then

That was a list of routes the 787 opened up. LHR-AUS began on the 787 and expanded to bigger aircraft.

1 Like

Ok, I thought it said opening

1 Like

I think it is the great plane. Especially because of the dimmable windows and the mood lighting. However, I really hate the automatic toilets, because the sensor is a bit too sensitive. And I don’t really like the feel of a gush of air while you are sitting.

2 Likes

Depends on how an airline uses it… the A350 can and is used in Asia for routes that don’t require a 747 or a larger aircraft like the 777, but needs more capacity than an A321 or 757 for example. Japan Airlines is probably one of the best comparisons, as they had a special plane made pretty much just for their market, the 747-400D. It could carry up to 660 passengers, and they were used by the airline, and the airline still made money! Now, the A350 is kind of it’s replacement as they fly the 787 to some more medium haul destinations, whereas the A350 only flies to a handful of places like Fukuoka, Osaka, and Nagoya, with a special interior made for these routes. Their A350 can carry 100 more passengers than the 787, and they seem to be profitable on these routes.

The 787 is of course an amazing aircraft, but the A350 can also be used on these routes, and I believe the A350 is even better than the 787 on some short haul routes in huge markets like Japan, Singapore, and Hong Kong.

2 Likes

I’ve flown on the B787 and the A350 many time’s in the past. In terms of passenger comfort, I would have to say that the A350 wins that.

The simple things like a noise cancelling cabin, a more spacious cabin, more legroom, bigger bathrooms (and sinks), etc. make the A350 better.

2 Likes

Economic viability aside, I prefer the A350 overall (especially as a passenger). That being said, the 787 is still a great airplane.

IMO:

A350 Pros

  • Noticeably quieter
  • Feels much wider
  • Looks better

787 Pros

  • Electronic windows
  • Noticeably better air quality

Me too. I always end up like slapping the sensor trying to get it to work. It flushes when you don’t want it to and it doesn’t when you do…and that toilet is LOUD

4 Likes

More legroom is really up to the airline.

I’d say Japan Airlines’ 787s Economy Class beats any other airlines’ A350/787 economy class thanks to the 2-4-2 configuration and pretty spacious legroom.

1 Like

That definitely is true, but JAL is kind of an anomaly when talking about legroom. I’ve also flown on two of their B787s, one in Economy and one in Premium Economy.

1 Like

Actually, regarding Premium Economy, this is where the 787 is wayyyy better than the A350.

Airlines featuring Premium Economy on the A350 will commonly configure it in a 2-4-2 while airlines using the 787 must configure it in a 2-3-2 due to the 787 being slightly more narrow.

3 Likes

I’m talking about that little BA 788 that came to San Jose to test the route and see if it’s worth the money and ended up with a 744

1 Like

Currently Japan Airlines’ A350-900 will strictly be used on regional routes within Japan, but they have confirmed their upcoming A350-1000s will be used to replace 777-300ERs on routes to North America.

Like you said though, it depends on how the airline is running it. ANA has a 787-9 configuration for regional Japan routes with 395 seats, 26 more than JAL’s A359s.

1 Like

It really depends. The A350 was made to compete against the 777, and the 787 was made to offer a low cost option. The A350, therefor, would be great for cargo.

1 Like

It depends, I’ve been on Cathay Pacific’s A350 Premium Economy and I would have to say that the experience was at least as good.

1 Like

I mean… 2-4-2 A350 vs 2-3-2 787… having less people squeezed together would be pretty preferable.

1 Like

The A350 is a great alternative to the B777. Much better aircraft. The A330neo is what we should be looking at here. It seems to be much better than the B787, both in terms of comfort and financially.

That would make sense if they were planes that were in the same class but they aren’t. In a comparative situation, the B787 should have a 2-4-2 config like the A330. The config most airlines use makes it equal to the 3-4-3 on the B777. The B787 is not as wide as these aircraft people are referring to.

1 Like

Yeah, and at the end of the day, it’s just how the airline is able to use it.


@Chatta290 Eh, I’ve flown both and think the 787 is better. It flies faster, and has a farther range than the A330neo, so it’s probably good for airlines that need to fly to destinations not very close, like Air New Zealand which has long flights to get to popular destinations.

1 Like