United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - Live 787 Unveiling

Is anybody watching the live unveiling of UA's first 787? They just brought her out and she looks great!


Oops I just realized I should have posted this in the 787 delivery thread, sorry mods! Please move!

I was watching, but the comments being made by the other viewers were sounding too much like an "adult" site.
Examples include: "Oh baby!", "Let me see it!", "Here it comes!", and "I wanna ride that!".

Just ended.

The version of Rhapsody was pretty distasteful..

The version of Rhapsody was pretty distasteful..

I happen to have loved it. ;)

The version of Rhapsody was pretty distasteful..
They were cycling through several different performances.

With Boeing's main commercial airliner plants being here in the Seattle area they had this live this morning during the local news (KING TV is what I was watching). I watched clips of the replay as I wasn't up quite that early... the news anchors were ooohing and aaahing over how nice the special gold wave is down the side of the plane. I laughed because while the wave is a nice touch and it's a beautiful plane.. the livery is still hideous. That extra wave can't save it.

With Boeing's main commercial airliner plants being here in the Seattle area they had this live this morning during the local news (KING TV is what I was watching). I watched clips of the replay as I wasn't up quite that early... the news anchors were ooohing and aaahing over how nice the special gold wave is down the side of the plane. I laughed because while the wave is a nice touch and it's a beautiful plane.. the livery is still hideous. That extra wave can't save it.

Do they know the "wave" is a Boeing stock paint job? ;)

So, for those of us who couldn't log in on line to watch it live, is there a reason it isn't available on HubUnitedcom for viewing? The next time it will be available is August 2nd.

With Boeing's main commercial airliner plants being here in the Seattle area they had this live this morning during the local news (KING TV is what I was watching). I watched clips of the replay as I wasn't up quite that early... the news anchors were ooohing and aaahing over how nice the special gold wave is down the side of the plane. I laughed because while the wave is a nice touch and it's a beautiful plane.. the livery is still hideous. That extra wave can't save it.

Filed under "things people really need to get over".

Are there photos up of the new livery anywhere yet? I've seen the renderings but couldn't figure out whether the belly was white or CO-beige. A white belly would, I think, be a huge improvement, especially on the 744s (which look rather ungainly when top and bottom are different shades).

edit: Oh wait, here it is:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Portals/AWeek/TWW/Rupa/United3.jpg

I like it. If they can paint the bellies of all future birds (of all models) in white, while straightening out the yellow stripe, I think they'll have better-looking and more modern-looking planes without a massive change in corporate identity.

So, for those of us who couldn't log in on line to watch it live, is there a reason it isn't available on HubUnitedcom for viewing? The next time it will be available is August 2nd.

Maybe they are doing editing to it?

It costs them money to rebroadcast on ShowCaster -- not sure why they just don't upload it to vimeo and call it a day.

I cant seem to nything but artists renderings of the altered 787 livery. usatoday has a small one.

id think there would be threads on FT related to the event.

any help? Id like to send some pics to a few friends.

Thanks

I clagged one into this thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1372371-live-787-unveiling.html

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

I cant seem to nything but artists renderings of the altered 787 livery. usatoday has a small one.



id think there would be threads on FT related to the event.



any help? Id like to send some pics to a few friends.



Thanks

Grass fire

There is four photo posted by United on Facebook.

For those who don't have facebook...

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/s720x720/306887_433936373310577_1767026247_n.jpg

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s720x720/394665_433936413310573_1902691417_n.jpg

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s720x720/524216_433936459977235_649957312_n.jpg

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/s720x720/418711_433936533310561_892142906_n.jpg

Oh, it does still have a beige belly :(

Still, not bad-looking. I'm sure the thrill of sitting in a good-lookin' plane won't wear off when I'm packed for sixteen hours sitting nine-abreast into a plane designed for eight. ;)

Is there some Boeing rule that all 787s must be white with maybe a splat of color here and there? I watched a JAL 787 take off yesterday from Logan and aside from the tail it could have been any airline. That's not a livery, it's a generic name badge: "Hi, my name is _______"

Is there some Boeing rule that all 787s must be white with maybe a splat of color here and there? I watched a JAL 787 take off yesterday from Logan and aside from the tail it could have been any airline. That's not a livery, it's a generic name badge: "Hi, my name is _______"

You mean, the usual JAL livery? What were you expecting? JAL is Japanese minimalism at its best. It's ANA which has a tendency to go for the... uhhh, less restrained liveries...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Pokemon_Jets.jpg/800px-Pokemon_Jets.jpg

If you want a handsome not-so-white livery check out the Qatar 787s which have already been delivered. Or wait for the more garish deliveries for Gulf Air, Vietnam or Jetstar.

I was watching, but the comments being made by the other viewers were sounding too much like an "adult" site.
Examples include: "Oh baby!", "Let me see it!", "Here it comes!", and "I wanna ride that!".

LOL!! I almost fell off my chair, awesome post ^

I was watching, but the comments being made by the other viewers were sounding too much like an "adult" site.
Examples include: "Oh baby!", "Let me see it!", "Here it comes!", and "I wanna ride that!".

Ironic given your handle

Ugly livery. And UA screwed up the interior as well.

Ironic given your handle

Ugly livery. And UA screwed up the interior as well.

I like the livery. And have you seen the inside?

I like the livery. And have you seen the inside?

Apparently they start giving tours of the new interior on Thursday August 2, so there'll presumably be pictures available on that day.

If you google "united 787 interior" you can find some pictures which are clearly not actually of the United 787 interior.

I like the livery. And have you seen the inside?

I don't have to see inside to know that 9 seats per row is worse than 8 seats per row.

I don't have to see inside to know that 9 seats per row is worse than 8 seats per row.


You are downright wrong. With the large windows, dazzling ceiling, lighting and interior, 9 across will feel like 8 across. The 777 is only 16 inches wider with 9 across. The extra closeness to your seat mate with shoulders and elbows overlapping will make you feel togetherness like you have never felt, especially on those 17 hour flights.

Come together right now, Over me.

..... HOLD YOU IN HIS ARMCHAIR YOU CAN FEEL HIS DISEASE.

You mean, the usual JAL livery? What were you expecting? JAL is Japanese minimalism at its best. It's ANA which has a tendency to go for the... uhhh, less restrained liveries...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Pokemon_Jets.jpg/800px-Pokemon_Jets.jpg

You need to search for JAL Disney livery and JALways Resocha livery. They can go for "less restrained" liveries too :p

JAL will have a special 787 livery for their collaboration with Studio Ghibli this fall. You can see the old design featuring children's drawings here: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/1st_JAL_787livery.gif

I don't have to see inside to know that 9 seats per row is worse than 8 seats per row.

Indeed. It's going to be just like flying on a 777 with 10 seats across in Y - a miserable experience.

I don't have to see inside to know that 9 seats per row is worse than 8 seats per row.



I get where your coming from, but don't agree entirely. Another factor of the plane is the atmosphere. Many says 10 across on 777s are unbearable which I agree with for the most part, except when flying EK. EK's 777's put out an atmosphere which makes you forget it's 10 across, and the seats actually aren't that bad (the amazing AVOD helps). And frankly another factor is one's attitude. If you go into the flight thinking "It's going to be terrible, the seats are too skinny! I hate this!" you will feel uncomfortable. But if you go in with an open mind, the flight will be much better. Just my 2 cents though.

I get where your coming from, but don't agree entirely. Another factor of the plane is the atmosphere. Many says 10 across on 777s are unbearable which I agree with for the most part, except when flying EK. EK's 777's put out an atmosphere which makes you forget it's 10 across, and the seats actually aren't that bad (the amazing AVOD helps). And frankly another factor is one's attitude. If you go into the flight thinking "It's going to be terrible, the seats are too skinny! I hate this!" you will feel uncomfortable. But if you go in with an open mind, the flight will be much better. Just my 2 cents though.

All the wonderful environment in the world and the most positive attiture around won't matter when your seatmate is so large that he/she further narrows what is already going to be a tight fit.

United could have made this new aircraft something that people actually want to fly. Instead, it's going to be a prettier sardine can.

I was watching, but the comments being made by the other viewers were sounding too much like an "adult" site.
Examples include: "Oh baby!", "Let me see it!", "Here it comes!", and "I wanna ride that!".

All joking aside, with 9 accross seating I think the comments will be more like "wow, that's tight"

I get where your coming from, but don't agree entirely. Another factor of the plane is the atmosphere. Many says 10 across on 777s are unbearable which I agree with for the most part, except when flying EK. EK's 777's put out an atmosphere which makes you forget it's 10 across, and the seats actually aren't that bad (the amazing AVOD helps). And frankly another factor is one's attitude. If you go into the flight thinking "It's going to be terrible, the seats are too skinny! I hate this!" you will feel uncomfortable. But if you go in with an open mind, the flight will be much better. Just my 2 cents though.

Noticing your posts from other threads, aren't you still quite young? I bet your frame fits fine in any Y seat, so I don't think your opinion really applies to an adult, especially the (male) business traveler. ;)

I get where your coming from, but don't agree entirely. Another factor of the plane is the atmosphere. Many says 10 across on 777s are unbearable which I agree with for the most part, except when flying EK. EK's 777's put out an atmosphere which makes you forget it's 10 across, and the seats actually aren't that bad (the amazing AVOD helps). And frankly another factor is one's attitude. If you go into the flight thinking "It's going to be terrible, the seats are too skinny! I hate this!" you will feel uncomfortable. But if you go in with an open mind, the flight will be much better. Just my 2 cents though.

Have you ever taken a 14 hour flight on EK in Y? On a 777? I like to walk around when I fly from F thru C to Y and up again. I can't do that on EK. I want to cry for the people back there. It looks like something out of the old national geographic magazines but with the smell to go along with the beautiful local wardrobes.

My girl friend just became a "dedicated" 380 F/A last month w EK and she said the best part about it is not having to even look at 10 accross any longer....
(wait till the EK 380 rolls out next year with 880 Y seats (dedicated HAJ charters only). She will be begging to get back on a 777

Noticing your posts from other threads, aren't you still quite young? I bet your frame fits fine in any Y seat, so I don't think your opinion really applies to an adult, especially the (male) business traveler. ;)



If your implying that the majority of bussiness travelers are fat (which I'm sure is true :p), then yes, my opinion shouldn't be taken into consideration. However I'm about the size of an "average person", so an average person can feel the same way I do.



Have you ever taken a 14 hour flight on EK in Y? On a 777? I like to walk around when I fly from F thru C to Y and up again. I can't do that on EK. I want to cry for the people back there. It looks like something out of the old national geographic magazines but with the smell to go along with the beautiful local wardrobes.

My girl friend just became a "dedicated" 380 F/A last month w EK and she said the best part about it is not having to even look at 10 accross any longer....
(wait till the EK 380 rolls out next year with 880 Y seats (dedicated HAJ charters only). She will be begging to get back on a 777



Not on a 14 hour flight, but on a good 8 hour, and I didn't feel any different, of course I was younger so thats a problem. My parents agree with me though...

If your implying that the majority of bussiness travelers are fat (which I'm sure is true :p), then yes, my opinion shouldn't be taken into consideration. However I'm about the size of an "average person", so an average person can feel the same way I do.







Not on a 14 hour flight, but on a good 8 hour, and I didn't feel any different, of course I was younger so thats a problem. My parents agree with me though...


For a "kid" it won't matter much. Even (at the risk of stereotyping) for the many passengers EK caters to in Y from South and West Asia where people are smaller it's no big deal. But I'm average size for a Caucasian of European parents (6'1" & 190 LBS) and no way could I sit in those seats for more then an hour. Frankly, I'm very surprised that EK who have always been so generous in everything they do (especially w C & F passengers) went this way with Y seating. They certainly do a good job in Y with entertainment and catering

Now, imagine those EK Y seats in a UA 787 but without the EK catering and without the ICE (over 1000 channels of IFE). Sounds like UA's 787's will be a disaster in Y. I would certainly book away from them if I was flying Y. (the good news is the windows are so big you can imagine jumping out that much easier)

For a "kid" it won't matter much. Even (at the risk of stereotyping) for the many passengers EK caters to in Y from South and West Asia where people are smaller it's no big deal. But I'm average size for a Caucasian of European parents (6'1" & 190 LBS) and no way could I sit in those seats for more then an hour. Frankly, I'm very surprised that EK who have always been so generous in everything they do (especially w C & F passengers) went this way with Y seating. They certainly do a good job in Y with entertainment and catering

Now, imagine those EK Y seats in a UA 787 but without the EK catering and without the ICE (over 1000 channels of IFE). Sounds like UA's 787's will be a disaster in Y. I would certainly book away from them if I was flying Y. (the good news is the windows are so big you can imagine jumping out that much easier)



I said my parents agreed with me, and they are standard size for Caucasains. To each his own, obviously.



UA's food isn't as good, however I consider the AVOD to be almost on par, at least it's enough. Seriously, the 787 won't be that bad.

For a "kid" it won't matter much. Even (at the risk of stereotyping) for the many passengers EK caters to in Y from South and West Asia where people are smaller it's no big deal. But I'm average size for a Caucasian of European parents (6'1" & 190 LBS) and no way could I sit in those seats for more then an hour. Frankly, I'm very surprised that EK who have always been so generous in everything they do (especially w C & F passengers) went this way with Y seating. They certainly do a good job in Y with entertainment and catering

Now, imagine those EK Y seats in a UA 787 but without the EK catering and without the ICE (over 1000 channels of IFE). Sounds like UA's 787's will be a disaster in Y. I would certainly book away from them if I was flying Y. (the good news is the windows are so big you can imagine jumping out that much easier)

Has anyone calculated the aisle width yet?

We know it's gonna be 17-inch width, which is a disappointment but the same as the 744. We also know the cabin width is 16 inches less than the 777 which has 18-inch seats. So we lose an inch off each seat which leaves 3.5 inches to come off each aisle.

Alternatively, to cram ten-abreast in a 777 you'd also cut seat width down to 17 inches and then lose four inches off each aisle to give you the 17 inches you'd need for the last seat.

So yeah, this will be just one inch better than ten-abreast on a 777. Sounds awful. On the downside, every airline in the world will be doing it soon.

Ugh, I need to change jobs to something that'll let me fly C. Anyone hiring PhDs in theoretical physics?

Has anyone calculated the aisle width yet?

We know it's gonna be 17-inch width, which is a disappointment but the same as the 744. We also know the cabin width is 16 inches less than the 777 which has 18-inch seats. So we lose an inch off each seat which leaves 3.5 inches to come off each aisle.

Alternatively, to cram ten-abreast in a 777 you'd also cut seat width down to 17 inches and then lose four inches off each aisle to give you the 17 inches you'd need for the last seat.

So yeah, this will be just one inch better than ten-abreast on a 777. Sounds awful. On the downside, every airline in the world will be doing it soon.

Ugh, I need to change jobs to something that'll let me fly C. Anyone hiring PhDs in theoretical physics?

All airlines won't follow. In fact, some airlines are doing the opposite. Look at SQ's 1-2-1 config in C with lie flat seats. Airlines like UA or even BA fit TWICE as many seats in the same space. It all depends on the philosophy of the carrier. Airlines like SQ would rather sell every single seat to C paying passengers and not worry/care about upgrades or FF space. Airlines like UA or even BA have such large FF programs that Thry know they need at least some seats to go to awards, upgrades or even discounted biz fares like Z, P. This is the reason airlines like SQ/CK can also afford the catering, etc they have in C

I am fairly trim. I don't have a wide frame. But my shoulders overlap into the seat next to me on these 737/757s and probably the 787. I try to get a window or aisle seat so I can hang into the aisle or squash against the window. From what I understand, Boeing based the 707 cabin width to accommodate the body width of a U.S. soldier who was born in the great depression and grew up with the food shortages of World War II.

Hanging into the aisle and squashing against a window is apparently an assumption that was factored into cabin width.

It is not a Dreamliner, it is a Crammmmliner.

Engadget has posted a very comprehensive photo set of the interior.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior-0/

Engadget has posted a very comprehensive photo set of the interior.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior-0/

Great pictures.

Y seats look pretty nice, and not too cramped. But, even half an inch can feel much different, but be hard to notice in a picture.

Great pictures! ^

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/02/boeing-united-787-dreamliner-handson/

Tons of Interior/Exterior photos in the original article

Boeing's 787 Dreamliner is the hottest bird in aviation, and while the American-made airliner has already taken flight with passengers aboard, it has yet to land with US-flag air carrier livery along the fuselage. Japan's All Nippon Airways was the first to take delivery, with the premier pair making their way from the assembly line in September of 2011. Last year Japan Airlines made its first scheduled voyage across the Pacific in a Dreamliner of its own, and we were fortunate enough to fly roundtrip on a domestic ANA flight leaving from Tokyo a few months later. But now the 787 is making its way to an American carrier. As the first US airline to operate the plane, United Airlines is about to take delivery of its first of 50 Dreamliners, which will join the carrier's fleet to service both existing and new routes, such as Denver to Tokyo, which is set to launch in late March of next year.

We traveled to Boeing's Everett, Washington factory today for a first look at United's aircraft. While the Dreamliner looks physically identical to ANA's plane, the on-board experience is decidedly different from what we saw in Japan. Though the Dreamliner has a very similar layout to United's bigger 777, it feels roomier thanks to larger windows with dimmable shades, expanded overheard bins and higher ceilings. There's plenty more to see, though, so jump past the break for a video tour of United's new mid-size flagship, and a closer look in photos.

This is the first thing about United that has got me excited in ages!!!

Those windows are amazing

Engadget has posted a very comprehensive photo set of the interior.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior-0/

Thank you. Great photos!

Great pics!!!!! Thanks

Claustrophobic

9 across <shudder>

I don't have to see inside to know that 9 seats per row is worse than 8 seats per row.

219 total seats. Yuck. My guess is that AA outdoes UA with innovative 10 across seats on its 787s in a few years. :(

What I can't believe is that JAL went with 42J/144Y (8 across) for a total of just 186 seats. That just goes against every other airline's quest for higher seating density.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdRkuHeJ7oI

Here's a video of the interior of the UA 787.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdRkuHeJ7oI

Here's a video of the interior of the UA 787.

Great video thanks! BF looks just like any other PMCO BF cabin..works for me.

How much narrower is the 787 compared to the 777?

I know there was no plan for new business seats, but when I saw the BF seats, I just felt like they could've done something different. Maybe I'm spoiled from flying in C before, but its the same seat and there's nothing new or innovative to go along with such a new plane.

219 total seats. Yuck. My guess is that AA outdoes UA with innovative 10 across seats on its 787s in a few years. :(

What I can't believe is that JAL went with 42J/144Y (8 across) for a total of just 186 seats. That just goes against every other airline's quest for higher seating density.

And only 158 for NH! (46/112)

How much narrower is the 787 compared to the 777?

Someone above posted that the 787 interior is 16 inches narrower than the 777.

Someone above posted that the 787 interior is 16 inches narrower than the 777.

so that's about 1.5in per Y seat and 2.5 per BF seat. I guess it will encourage us americans to slim down.

so that's about 1.5in per Y seat and 2.5 per BF seat. I guess it will encourage us americans to slim down.

Or, to book elsewhere, as many of us have our choice of carriers as Mr. $misek tells us

so that's about 1.5in per Y seat and 2.5 per BF seat. I guess it will encourage us americans to slim down.

I can starve myself and narrow my waist and hips, but how do I shrink my width at my shoulders? That's where my issue has always been in 3 across economy seating. That's why I value 2-5-2; the pairs are much more comfortable for me.

Or, to book elsewhere, as many of us have our choice of carriers as Mr. $misek tells us

It's rare when we agree. I am only booking the 787 if I can clear directly into BF or it's a short domestic trip.

so that's about 1.5in per Y seat and 2.5 per BF seat. I guess it will encourage us americans to slim down.

Or, to book elsewhere, as many of us have our choice of carriers as Mr. $misek tells us

Or book the 777 if shackled to UA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdRkuHeJ7oI

Here's a video of the interior of the UA 787.

Thanks JOSE! That video answers our question about the bulkheads between Y & C. It goes all the way to the floor.:(

Good points:

1. 36" seat pitch in Y+ is nice, so at least they're not skimping on that.

Bad points:

1. Ugh, nine-abreast, as everyone has already said. The 17" seat width is the same as the 747 so it's nothing new, but those aisles are narrower. On the upside an extra 2" of seat pitch vs the 747 will probably make Y+ an improvement, especially if you can manage to get an empty seat next to you.

2. Those screens look pretty small by today's standards.

3. Total failure of imagination and design. Why would you buy the fanciest highest-tech shiniest plane in the world and fill it with those early-90s blue-on-blue check seats? Why not buy Buckingham Palace and fill it with pictures of dogs playing poker?

Thanks JOSE! That video answers our question about the bulkheads between Y & C. It goes all the way to the floor.:(

Thanks for posting JOSE ^

Glad I went for seat 27F for both inaugural int'l and return :)

I know what my chances of clearing the upgrade on the inaugural are :rolleyes: :( :eek: but hoping to clear a week later on return.

EmailKid

Well it looks like Continental lives on. Thing looks just like Continental 777. Very nice thou.

i agree, it's kind of a letdown. i mean we all kind of expected it with the press releases and such, but i'm in the camp of being bummed by the fact they had an opportunity to do something different but it just looks like a pmco 777 with bigger windows and bins, which are nice, but that's it. the aisle in the BF cabin definitely looked narrow. i guess i'm just kind of underwhelmed. meanwhile i compare that to AA's announcement of their 773's and the improved J class and, well, yeah. i'm sure there's a whole bunch of technical improvements on the plane and it's efficient and aerodynamic and yadda yadda yadda, but if i'm sitting on it for 14 hours i care about the cabin comfort (and of course what kind of crappy service i can expect).

UA even ruined the dramatic arching entryway by placing a galley there! UA really knows how to make an innovative airplane seem incredibly dull.

UA has made this plane ugly. I'd rather fly a 767.

Why oh why choose those CO seats in Business. UA seat is so much better.

9 across! Bad move, wont this hurt range?

one note:

the pre-merger United IPTE cabins had color palets chosen by the design consultancy Pentagram. Always preferred the sophisticated look of the IPTE cabins.

Looks like CO outfitted it with their early 90s generic checkered palet. To be expected as I'd image the seats were ordered before the merger took place, though the seat covers can be easily swapped if need be.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3475/3216843044_3e550511cc.jpg
http://www.ausbt.com.au/photos/view/size:640,480/4d8ac02e07904c118bd26e4f767f1341-ua-bizclass-main.jpg

When fying intl, my favorite is still the 763. Right side 1K in F is the best premium travel experience of the entire fleet. I'll trade a larger dimming window and humidity for it, TYVM:

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/onemileatatime/files/2009/06/phpbikbwhpm.jpg

For what it's worth, an article:

Why it's not United's fault that its new 787 interior looks a tad dated (http://blog.apex.aero/cabin-interior/uniteds-fault-interior-boeing-787-tad-dated/)

Which at least explains why it looks a bit 2007, even if it doesn't explain why it looks a bit 1992.

Supposedly at some point they'll switch over to the more modern seats they're sticking in the 764s? Still the blue checkerboard that makes me think "Oh no, my Commodore 64 is broken" though.

one note:

the pre-merger United IPTE cabins had color palets chosen by the design consultancy Pentagram. Always preferred the sophisticated look of the IPTE cabins.

Looks like CO outfitted it with their early 90s generic checkered palet. To be expected as I'd image the seats were ordered before the merger took place, though the seat covers can be easily swapped if need be.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3475/3216843044_3e550511cc.jpg
http://www.ausbt.com.au/photos/view/size:640,480/4d8ac02e07904c118bd26e4f767f1341-ua-bizclass-main.jpg

When fying intl, my favorite is still the 763. Right side 1K in F is the best premium travel experience of the entire fleet. I'll trade a larger dimming window and humidity for it, TYVM:

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/onemileatatime/files/2009/06/phpbikbwhpm.jpg

Oddly, the IPTE 763 I was on last month had the old yellow sidewalls/bulkheads and carpeting. Nice ride though.

As for the 787, well, let's just say I didn't expect anything better for the interior.

Why oh why choose those CO seats in Business. UA seat is so much better.

Agreed, but this COdbaUA, not United Airlines.

9 across! Bad move, wont this hurt range?

More sardines!

Looks like CO outfitted it with their early 90s generic checkered palet. To be expected as I'd image the seats were ordered before the merger took place, though the seat covers can be easily swapped if need be.

I can't imagine that COdbaUA would adopt the PMUA business class color scheme.

Boeing and CAL/UAL over-hyped this plane, at least from a non-tech standpoint. Raised too many expectations.

No PSU air vents. (777 ac system too finicky to please all pax)

No way to get from one side of the plane to the other in Y unless you cut in front of the bulkhead row or go to the rear. (767-400)

No space for more than 3 or 4 pax who may want to stand on a 12 hr plus flight.

9 across in Y.

Skinny aisles.

Mediocre and underwhelming at best IMO.

Hello Everyone,

Here's a good look at the new United 787 interior:

Interior

http://www.gadling.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior/

Exterior

http://www.gadling.com/photos/united-dreamliner-exterior-0/

http://i.gadling.com/2012/08/02/inside-uniteds-first-787-dreamliner-at-boeing-hq/

Looks ok...

M.

Boeing and CAL/UAL over-hyped this plane, at least from a non-tech standpoint. Raised too many expectations.

No PSU air vents. (777 ac system too finicky to please all pax)

No way to get from one side of the plane to the other in Y unless you cut in front of the bulkhead row or go to the rear. (767-400)

No space for more than 3 or 4 pax who may want to stand on a 12 hr plus flight.

9 across in Y.

Skinny aisles.

Mediocre and underwhelming at best IMO.

There are PSU air vents.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2012/08/dsc06764.jpg

Hello Everyone,

Here's a good look at the new United 787 interior:

http://www.gadling.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior/

Looks ok...

M.

^. Thanks for posting!

Espressos (http://www.gadling.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior/full/#5189087) on UA (finally?)

Espressos (http://www.gadling.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior/full/#5189087) on UA (finally?)

PMCO had it in BF on the 767/777. It was disgusting, quite frankly.

Engadget has many pics too:

http://www.engadget.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior-0/#5189124

Looks GREAT! I think I will have to find an excuse to fly DEN-NRT. :D

Those Y seats do indeed look narrow. But I'll admit it might be a cognitive bias from believing it should've been 2-4-2 instead.

Up front it's almost indistinguishable from a sCO 772. So, a little underwhelming I'd say.

I wouldn't be surprised if A 764 with the single middle seat in J and 2-3-2 in Y is thought as a more comfortable aircraft.

^ for the espresso machine.

And thanks for posting the link. Great pics.

3-3-3 doesn't do it for me. Unfortunately that seems to be the way most operators are going.

No way to get from one side of the plane to the other in Y unless you cut in front of the bulkhead row or go to the rear. (767-400)


This is an issue for whom?

No way to get from one side of the plane to the other in Y unless you cut in front of the bulkhead row or go to the rear. (767-400)


This is an issue for whom?

most people in Y who go to the bathroom within 15 minutes of finishing a meal. it's an inconvenience when i'm in C, it's an inconvenience when i'm in Y.

although truth be told i can't imagine it's any more or less obnoxious than it is crossing aisles in Y on a PMCO 772.

PMCO had it in BF on the 767/777. It was disgusting, quite frankly.

Dang! Was hoping for cappuccinos a la SQ/TG ... oh well :(

Are we getting rock hard seat a-la pmCO or the more comfy pmUA seats?

Engadget has many pics too:

http://www.engadget.com/photos/united-dreamliner-interior-0/#5189124

Looks GREAT! I think I will have to find an excuse to fly DEN-NRT. :D

Same pics as the OP.

Now if Boeing could start delivering more that the one per month they sent out in July:(

There are PSU air vents.I stand corrected.

Boeing and CAL/UAL over-hyped this plane, at least from a non-tech standpoint. Raised too many expectations.

No PSU air vents. (777 ac system too finicky to please all pax)

No way to get from one side of the plane to the other in Y unless you cut in front of the bulkhead row or go to the rear. (767-400)

No space for more than 3 or 4 pax who may want to stand on a 12 hr plus flight.

9 across in Y.

Skinny aisles.

Mediocre and underwhelming at best IMO.

Boeing didn't overhype it. United negated the goodness by what they did with it

Take an NH 787 and then you will agree Boeing deserves a cookie

Maybe I missed it, but is there any word on EIS or which hub-hub hops it'll be performing initially?

Boeing didn't overhype it. United negated the goodness by what they did with it

Take an NH 787 and then you will agree Boeing deserves a cookie

Part of the hype by Boeing was bragging about building different sections all over the world, then " seamlesly" putting it all together in the US. 3 yrs late &its just coming on line=overhype in my book.

Initial flights will be DEN-NRT.

Initial flights will be DEN-NRT.

That starts in March. The plane is being delivered in September and presumably will only do domestic hops. My question is, does anybody know *which* domestic hops these might be?

3-3-3 doesn't do it for me. Unfortunately that seems to be the way most operators are going.

I thought NH has only 8 abreast on its B787s, no?

LAX

That starts in March. The plane is being delivered in September and presumably will only do domestic hops. My question is, does anybody know *which* domestic hops these might be?

Hub - Hub flights, as well as EWR - MCO, IAH - MCO etc.

Hub - Hub flights, as well as EWR - MCO, IAH - MCO etc.

Any idea how MCO fits into this mix? Seems kind of odd to send the newest aircraft to a mostly kettle/leisure destination.. If anything, it should go on transcon flights that might attract more paying C pax.

Hub - Hub flights, as well as EWR - MCO, IAH - MCO etc.

Any idea how MCO fits into this mix? Seems kind of odd to send the newest aircraft to a mostly kettle/leisure destination.. If anything, it should go on transcon flights that might attract more paying C pax.

On CO, kettles rule

Boeing didn't overhype it. United negated the goodness by what they did with it

Take an NH 787 and then you will agree Boeing deserves a cookie

Part of the hype by Boeing was bragging about building different sections all over the world, then " seamlesly" putting it all together in the US. 3 yrs late &its just coming on line=overhype in my book.


I was referring to end product

You refer to project - and on that aspectyou definitely have a very valid point!

I thought NH has only 8 abreast on its B787s, no?

LAX

Correct. NH and JL went 2-4-2 for eight abreast, but all subsequent 787 operators have gone 3-3-3 in Y.

for such a remarkable aircraft, you don't even get direct aisle access in Business? sad.... :td:

Looks great. It'll be a real fun experience flying this for the first time!

The pics don't really show it, but I saw in one of the videos that they're using the same, drab gray bulkhead walls and lav/closet doors that they've been using for 20 years. :td:

I guess swooshing the gold stripe on the outside was as innovative as CO could get. Game changing no doubt.

for such a remarkable aircraft, you don't even get direct aisle access in Business? sad.... :td:

+1 (or maybe -1 depending on how you see it :D).

I find it a lack of touch with the business travellers needs to keep insisting on C seats with no aisle access. UAs new 777 with 4 seats in the center is the epitome of such disconnect.

Those air nozzles are the same type that are found on the new sky interior 737. Let's hope they do more blowing, than sucking; unlike their narrow-body counterparts.

The pics don't really show it, but I saw in one of the videos that they're using the same, drab gray bulkhead walls and lav/closet doors that they've been using for 20 years. :td:

I guess swooshing the gold stripe on the outside was as innovative as CO could get. Game changing no doubt.

+1

Could we really expect anything short of that? The only thing different is the new headrest flaps in BF and even that's half old! They sure do have vision.

it looks great. how exciting.

and it looks like all window seats in the BF cabin have great views out!

The pics don't really show it, but I saw in one of the videos that they're using the same, drab gray bulkhead walls and lav/closet doors that they've been using for 20 years. :td:

I guess swooshing the gold stripe on the outside was as innovative as CO could get. Game changing no doubt.

honestly when comparing old bulkheads i find the grey to be less depressing than the old UA dirt brown bulkheads. grey may be 90's but the brown feels 80's (feels funny to think that the 90's is "twenty years ago").

Any idea how MCO fits into this mix? Seems kind of odd to send the newest aircraft to a mostly kettle/leisure destination.. If anything, it should go on transcon flights that might attract more paying C pax.

It has nothing to do with kettles and everything to do with MCO MX... :rolleyes:

what is the layout in Business, 7 across? its just such a shame to squeeze in the kitchen sink... This could've been a great way to roll out something more appealing and appetizing, say like a 1 - 2 - 1 layout.

what is the layout in Business, 7 across? its just such a shame to squeeze in the kitchen sink... This could've been a great way to roll out something more appealing and appetizing, say like a 1 - 2 - 1 layout.

2-2-2 same as the pmco 772 BF config.

what is the layout in Business, 7 across? its just such a shame to squeeze in the kitchen sink... This could've been a great way to roll out something more appealing and appetizing, say like a 1 - 2 - 1 layout.

Or how about a -1- layout? Just one seat per row, really wide? And then just one row, so just one seat in the whole cabin. FAs would stand beside you with giant feather fans feeding you grapes for the whole flight. :D

Seriously though I'm trying to understand the density. I'd thought ANA would be significantly less dense because it's 1-2-1 and 1-1-1 in alternating rows, but looking at the seatmaps and comparing the cabins fore of the main entry doors it seems like ANA crams twenty biz seats into that cabin while United only has eighteen. However United also has two lavs and a bit of galley in the same space.

I'm guessing that over the longer run most airlines will go for an ANA-like configuration where one man's footwell is another man's side-table. It seems like that's the best way to get the best of all possible worlds: you get lie-flat ability *and* all forward facing *and* a combination of seats with privacy and seats where you can talk to your companion *and* direct aisle access for everybody *and* reasonably high density of seats. But nobody has ever accused UACO of being on the bleeding edge of cabin design.

Good news: The Indian government has approved the compensation agreement between Boeing and AI, so AI can start taking deliveries.

Bad News: AI is refusing to take delivery until the GEnx engine mishap is sorted out.



meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Any idea how MCO fits into this mix? Seems kind of odd to send the newest aircraft to a mostly kettle/leisure destination.. If anything, it should go on transcon flights that might attract more paying C pax.

When introducing a new fleet type, you generally fly it on the longest possible domestic routes that pilots can fly as a 1 day trip. As crews build up time and experience, you expand operations. Since new aircraft always have a certain amount of teething problems, you generally try to start operation between cities that have maintenance capability.

MCO can use the additional capacity, is a suitable distance from IAH and other hub cities, and has UA maintenance capability. Therefore, it is a good candidate for early flights.

MCO can use the additional capacity, is a suitable distance from IAH and other hub cities, and has UA maintenance capability. Therefore, it is a good candidate for early flights.

That'll make it the most expensive flying day care center in the world. They'll be finding stale cheerios in that thing for years! :)

That'll make it the most expensive flying day care center in the world. They'll be finding stale cheerios in that thing for years! :)

Hahahah Great!

Looks a mess in that paint scheme, it is so outdated it is untrue. It is like putting flowery old ladies wallpaper on your new home just because you had some spare rolls of it therefore saving money...

The blue livery was hardly a masterpeice but that ex-CO scheme has to be one of the worst of all time of any legacy carrier along with JAL, Iberia, Alitalia, Air india etc.. Wasn't it also created by a criminal?

Looks a mess in that paint scheme, it is so outdated it is untrue. It is like putting flowery old ladies wallpaper on your new home just because you had some spare rolls of it therefore saving money...

The blue livery was hardly a masterpeice but that ex-CO scheme has to be one of the worst of all time of any legacy carrier along with JAL, Iberia, Alitalia, Air india etc.. Wasn't it also created by a criminal?

What makes a livery a masterpiece?

I cannot wait for this bird to start flying the IAH-LOS-IAH route starting in Dec 2012 or April 2013.

It must speak wonders if the biggest airline in the world is bypassing "First World" destinations like LHR, FRA, AMS, MAD, CDG, HKG, ICN, SIN and instead using this aircraft to LOS (Lagos, Nigeria).

It must speak wonders if the biggest airline in the world is bypassing "First World" destinations like LHR, FRA, AMS, MAD, CDG, HKG, ICN, SIN and instead using this aircraft to LOS (Lagos, Nigeria).

Not really, it means that IAH-LOS is a long and thin yet potentially very profitable (thanks to all the oil industry traffic into Nigeria) route.

LHR, FRA, AMS, MAD, CDG, HKG, ICN and SIN are all served with other aircraft.

What makes a livery a masterpiece?

The CO livery / branding activities made/make pretty much everything else look like masterpieces. I have yet to speak to one branding professional who sees this new Frankenstein brand as anything more than a mess. I guess some loyalists like it, but not many others.

The CO livery / branding activities made/make pretty much everything else look like masterpieces. I have yet to speak to one branding professional who sees this new Frankenstein brand as anything more than a mess. I guess some loyalists like it, but not many others.

So basically your response to my question is, "anything not connected to CO." Can you and your branding experts tell us what makes a good airline livery and how a good (or bad) livery can impact ticket sales and yields?

I'm guessing that over the longer run most airlines will go for an ANA-like configuration where one man's footwell is another man's side-table. It seems like that's the best way to get the best of all possible worlds: you get lie-flat ability *and* all forward facing *and* a combination of seats with privacy and seats where you can talk to your companion *and* direct aisle access for everybody *and* reasonably high density of seats. But nobody has ever accused UACO of being on the bleeding edge of cabin design.

Agreed, the NH Business Staggered config is truly innovative and a win-win for carrier and pax. DL gets it. Why is UA taking such a myopic approach? I'm with Henry Harteveldt (http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/story/2012-08-02/United-Airlines-unveils-its-first-787-Dreamliner/56722556/1) on this:

Travel industry analyst Henry Harteveldt, co-founder of Atmosphere Research Group, questions United's cautious approach with the new aircraft.

"I think they really missed an opportunity to raise the bar on their product," he says.

The CO livery / branding activities made/make pretty much everything else look like masterpieces. I have yet to speak to one branding professional who sees this new Frankenstein brand as anything more than a mess. I guess some loyalists like it, but not many others.

Fine, call me a loyalist :p :rolleyes:

I didn't care for the new UA livery, and downright hated (and still loathe) the old one, still seen on many a plane.

I may be in the minority here, but always felt that the old CO showed understated elegance. I was sad to see the new typeface, as the UNITED name looks very much out of place IMNSHO.

If you want ugly, I'll point out ugly. Pre merger US and current AS - what are/were they thinking, puting a picture of Wolfman Jack on the tail :confused: :eek: :rolleyes:

AS needs to repaint the entire fleet to look like its retro livery - now that's a fine looking jet. Actually AA probably should do the same ...

EmailKid

Correct. NH and JL went 2-4-2 for eight abreast, but all subsequent 787 operators have gone 3-3-3 in Y.

Perhaps NH is the only *A B787 operator I will fly then, since I can't really afford to fly anything but Y!:(

LAX

Looks a mess in that paint scheme, it is so outdated it is untrue. It is like putting flowery old ladies wallpaper on your new home just because you had some spare rolls of it therefore saving money...


The blue livery was hardly a masterpeice but that ex-CO scheme has to be one of the worst of all time of any legacy carrier along with JAL, Iberia, Alitalia, Air india etc.. Wasn't it also created by a criminal?

What's wrong with Alitalia's livery? Where is the focus group comments saying it is not classy or good looking...?

I would agree with someone that says 'UNITED' does not look as good on the plane as 'Continental' did/would based on the font but it is hardly bad on the eyes IMO. I also think both are marginally better on the port side than starboard.

You want bad look at the new Air Malta, I think the colour splashs look horrid, but I digress.

Bring on the 787s!

If you want ugly, I'll point out ugly. Pre merger US and current AS - what are/were they thinking, puting a picture of Wolfman Jack on the tail :confused: :eek: :rolleyes:

AS needs to repaint the entire fleet to look like its retro livery - now that's a fine looking jet. Actually AA probably should do the same ...

EmailKid

The worst part about flying into SEA is taxiing past rows of AS aircraft. The paintjob on those tails frightens me...

Looks a mess in that paint scheme, it is so outdated it is untrue. It is like putting flowery old ladies wallpaper on your new home just because you had some spare rolls of it therefore saving money...

The blue livery was hardly a masterpeice but that ex-CO scheme has to be one of the worst of all time of any legacy carrier along with JAL, Iberia, Alitalia, Air india etc.. Wasn't it also created by a criminal?

Random observation and I am sure I will be scolded for being off topic....

Was watching the Olympics tonight and they were talking about the Women’s Gymnastics that won gold in 1996 so showing a lot of old footage. While watching the family commented on how bad the clothes, haircuts, and logos looked. We all laughed because 1996 doesn’t seem like that long ago. Then square in the background of the practice gym was a CO sign with the "current" globe logo. The style of the banner looked just like something you would see today. Had to laugh that the marketing folks at UA obviously think something from the 90s still looks good.

Back on the 787 topic, I did think the gold ribbon looked much better on the actual plane then in the pictures they released earlier this month. I also think the interior of the place looked pretty boring; too bad they didn't do something special for the new plane.

Always liked BMIs planes.

I think the 787 will be an OK short haul domestic aircraft.

I will certainly avoid it on any flight more than 3 hours.

The worst part about flying into SEA is taxiing past rows of AS aircraft. The paintjob on those tails frightens me...

Oh, you poor dear:rolleyes:

I think the 787 will be an OK short haul domestic aircraft.

I will certainly avoid it on any flight more than 3 hours.

That won't be hard. The 787 is a long haul aircraft.......................

Perhaps NH is the only *A B787 operator I will fly then, since I can't really afford to fly anything but Y!:(

LAX

My problem is such that I would certainly prefer NH ( or JL ) with their 2-4-2 config, but I am stuck with UA in Y because of E+. As long as there is no guarantee that the pax in front of me does not recline, then E+ is a must ( in Y ). But if I make my AA requirement this year, all of this is mute.

Back on the 787 topic, I did think the gold ribbon looked much better on the actual plane then in the pictures they released earlier this month. I also think the interior of the place looked pretty boring; too bad they didn't do something special for the new plane.

you have to realize that all of the seats and IFE materials were bought a couple of years ago, as airlines expected to take delivery in 08 and 09. Airline are not going to throw out new seats and systems just because they are slightly out of date.

you have to realize that all of the seats and IFE materials were bought a couple of years ago, as airlines expected to take delivery in 08 and 09. Airline are not going to throw out new seats and systems just because they are slightly out of date.

Not so sure about that, I could imagine that the technology that goes into seats, IFE equipment and other customer ordered equipment was not frozen for those 3-4 years that the airlines had to wait for actual delivery of the aircraft. In other words, I don't think, technology came to a standstill at that time and the ordered equipment was stored in a hangar, mothballed until the aircraft became available?

What makes a livery a masterpiece?

It is debateable but colourful, memorable, classy, modern are some examples.

LAN, Aer Lingus, Thai and KLM are good examples. Some airlines have very little colour to their paint schemes but still manage to pull off a classy fresh image like Air Canada, British Airways and Qantas.


Random observation and I am sure I will be scolded for being off topic....

Was watching the Olympics tonight and they were talking about the Women’s Gymnastics that won gold in 1996 so showing a lot of old footage. While watching the family commented on how bad the clothes, haircuts, and logos looked. We all laughed because 1996 doesn’t seem like that long ago. Then square in the background of the practice gym was a CO sign with the "current" globe logo. The style of the banner looked just like something you would see today. Had to laugh that the marketing folks at UA obviously think something from the 90s still looks good.

Back on the 787 topic, I did think the gold ribbon looked much better on the actual plane then in the pictures they released earlier this month. I also think the interior of the place looked pretty boring; too bad they didn't do something special for the new plane.

Always liked BMIs planes.

Lol, even early 2000's clothes and spectacles are starting to look like relics and indeed Smisek is very 90's, Spice Girls and a mobile phone weighing 5kg is about right ;)

BMI have a reasonably nice scheme but their lack of distinctiveness and not even knowing the name of their company has spoilt most of their branding. A large amount of the BMI planes have already been painted into BA livery and I am seeing less and less of them at my local airport as they aim to cease operations by December.

So basically your response to my question is, "anything not connected to CO." Can you and your branding experts tell us what makes a good airline livery and how a good (or bad) livery can impact ticket sales and yields?

I know some people may whine about branding as it belonged to CO but as an outsider I can safely say it is because it is old fashioned and boring.

As for the whole 'customers don't care' clearly most businesses disagree as branding and marketing is a major industry and even ulta LCC's like Ryanair pay for branding and liverys and even have them refreshed every so often.

There is four photo posted by United on Facebook. The wave is a little strange.

The wave is a little strange.

It's a stock Boeing Dreamliner paintjob - no add'l graphic design work required (kind of like the "new", "custom" logo) ;)

Hub - Hub flights, as well as EWR - MCO, IAH - MCO etc.

I am hoping this will be flying the 10am SFO-ORD and 5pm ORD-SFO that lost the 67I from end of Sept to late Nov.

I am hoping this will be flying the 10am SFO-ORD and 5pm ORD-SFO that lost the 67I from end of Sept to late Nov.

This is what Im guessing. No way they pull that 767 and throw a 737-700 on that flight.

This is what Im guessing. No way they pull that 767 and throw a 737-700 on that flight.

Although I have a gut feeling that it will only be doing the 10am SFO-ORD as it was cancelled versus the 5pm ORD-SFO being replaced by a 752.

This is what Im guessing. No way they pull that 767 and throw a 737-700 on that flight.

Really? Tell that to the LAX-IAD-LAX widebody...

And here's hoping to it doing some SFO-DEN or even LAX-DEN runs. It only makes sense if the first international route will be out of DEN.

And here's hoping to it doing some SFO-DEN or even LAX-DEN runs. It only makes sense if the first international route will be out of DEN.

Also other routes for the 787 once they internationally in addition to DEN-NRT. Will be LAX-PVG, LAX-NRT, IAH-AMS, IAH-LOS. Domestically the aircraft will fly EWR-IAH-LAX-IAH-MCO-EWR, as well as to the sUA hubs.

Thinking that the 787 will rotate LAX-NRT-DEN-NRT-LAX...

Thinking that the 787 will rotate LAX-NRT-DEN-NRT-LAX...

I meant that in reference to the first six months in which the plane will be doing exclusively domestic hops.

As for what they'll do when DEN-NRT actually starts in March, the a/c is only on the ground in NRT for about 75 minutes, meaning a 787 will sit in DEN for at about 22 hours. The second aircraft will most likely not just sit in DEN, so it'll probably continue to do another domestic hop or two each day, or perhaps they'll start another int'l route out of DEN as some people hope.

I meant that in reference to the first six months in which the plane will be doing exclusively domestic hops.

As for what they'll do when DEN-NRT actually starts in March, the a/c is only on the ground in NRT for about 75 minutes, meaning a 787 will sit in DEN for at about 22 hours. The second aircraft will most likely not just sit in DEN, so it'll probably continue to do another domestic hop or two each day, or perhaps they'll start another int'l route out of DEN as some people hope.

I agree will probably see SFO/LAX-DEN in the first six months.

As for another domestic hop...maybe DEN-SFO to visit MOC?

Lax-NRT on a 787? Yuck, what a downgrade

We can rule out IAH-DEN :rolleyes:

Flight number starts at IAH, but as is so often the case, equipment change at DEN.

Actually, for all I know the flight number starts even before IAH, didn't research it that far :p

And probably continues to somewher in Asia with yet another equipment change at NRT.

EmailKid

So basically your response to my question is, "anything not connected to CO." Can you and your branding experts tell us what makes a good airline livery and how a good (or bad) livery can impact ticket sales and yields?

Yes, that is my response, thank you for taking the time to confirm your understanding.

Your second question is quite bizarre and it's no question your implication is that branding doesn't matter and that mediocirty is therefore acceptable.:td::rolleyes:

for such a remarkable aircraft, you don't even get direct aisle access in Business? sad.... :td:

This is truly disappointing-- state-of-the-art aircraft with 5-10 year old seating layouts... Direct aisle access is the main thing that drives me toward other *A airlines, or even non-*A.

Not so sure about that, I could imagine that the technology that goes into seats, IFE equipment and other customer ordered equipment was not frozen for those 3-4 years that the airlines had to wait for actual delivery of the aircraft. In other words, I don't think, technology came to a standstill at that time and the ordered equipment was stored in a hangar, mothballed until the aircraft became available?

Actually it was, it's why you don't see the latest systems and seats on any of the 787 airliners. Airlines aren't going to throw away brand new equipment or seats, just because they are slightly out of date. This was a big thing when ANA's dreamliners entered service people were commenting how behind the times the seats and systems were. (also explains why their first deliveries were in the regional configuration).

Oh, you poor dear:rolleyes:



That won't be hard. The 787 is a long haul aircraft.......................

But re-designed on cabin width for short-haul comfort. There was that story about dreaded Emirates going to Boeing to widen the cabin to make it possible to squeezzzzzzzzzzzzeeee 9 across in coach.

I agree will probably see SFO/LAX-DEN in the first six months.

As for another domestic hop...maybe DEN-SFO to visit MOC?

As United is taking delivery in a month, any firmer sense as to the domestic routes / schedules in the first six months?

As United is taking delivery in a month, any firmer sense as to the domestic routes / schedules in the first six months?

The 787s will mostly be doing hub - hub flying, as well as EWR - MCO, IAH - MCO type of flights. So it should go something like EWR - MCO - IAH - LAX - DEN - ORD - SFO - IAD - MCO - EWR sort of pairings. I'm sure it won't be in that exact order but those are the cities it's expected to see. Also IAH - AMS and IAH - LOS are expected to go 787, which I believe will happen before year end.

I was on the turnaround ANA B-787 Dreamliner long haul inaugural HND-FRA-HND 21 January 2012, first long haul commercial flight of a B-787.

It was wonderful with all the different cabin colours, the wonderful staff and all the inaugural goodies gifts that were given to us by ANA. Not talking about the gate parties and fabulous on board service.

Simply magnificent.

Now... about the Conti-nited 787s?

I am not excited at all.
They should have the Tulip on the tail - not that fugly globe.
If I spot one in an airport somewhere, I won't even look at it.

Bring back the Tulip.
Bring back our old United with a U on the tail.

Then I will become a loyal United flyer again.

:(

I was on the turnaround ANA B-787 Dreamliner long haul inaugural HND-FRA-HND 21 January 2012, first long haul commercial flight of a B-787.

It was wonderful with all the different cabin colours, the wonderful staff and all the inaugural goodies gifts that were given to us by ANA. Not talking about the gate parties and fabulous on board service.

Simply magnificent.

Now... about the Conti-nited 787s?

I am not excited at all.
They should have the Tulip on the tail - not that fugly globe.
If I spot one in an airport somewhere, I won't even look at it.

Bring back the Tulip.
Bring back our old United with a U on the tail.

Then I will become a loyal United flyer again.

:(

Good. More space for me then. Not everyone cares so much about the outer color, if it's the only NA carrier with a 787.

Bring back the Tulip.
Bring back our old United with a U on the tail.

That's what's keeping you from flyilng UNITED :confused:

I'll let you know how the int'l inaugural goes. I'll be in one of the exit rows :D

Not everyone cares so much about the outer color, if it's the only NA carrier with a 787.

Not yet it's not. IIRC there were others in NA that ordered this bird, but CO was the launch customer.

EmailKid

I was on the turnaround ANA B-787 Dreamliner long haul inaugural HND-FRA-HND 21 January 2012, first long haul commercial flight of a B-787.

It was wonderful with all the different cabin colours, the wonderful staff and all the inaugural goodies gifts that were given to us by ANA. Not talking about the gate parties and fabulous on board service.

Simply magnificent.

Now... about the Conti-nited 787s?

I am not excited at all.
They should have the Tulip on the tail - not that fugly globe.
If I spot one in an airport somewhere, I won't even look at it.


Bring back the Tulip.
Bring back our old United with a U on the tail.

Then I will become a loyal United flyer again.

:(

Too bad the first set of 787s coming online are the sCO ordered ones. The sUA ones don't even come online till 2016.

Good. More space for me then. Not everyone cares so much about the outer color, if it's the only NA carrier with a 787.

Not everyone cares about the 787 either if another aircraft is more comfortable

The 772 is better in Y, and has F.

CO has made their 787 just a curiosity sake type of aircraft, not something to aspire to fly