Dec 25, 2014, 12:13 pm
Last edit by: briguychau
*FAQ:
Q: On the 787-9 (789), which seats in J are missing windows?
A: Rows 5 and 8 on both port and starboard sides have only one window, instead of two on all other port/starboard J seats.
Q: On the 787-8 (788), which seats in J are missing windows?
A: Only row 5 port and starboard sides have zero windows.
Q: Does the middle J seats' middle divider come down?
A: No, on the 788 and 789 the middle divider does not come down and is fixed in place. In fact, all Dream Cabin (788, 789, 77L, 77W) middle dividers are fixed and do not come down.
Member pictures & videos of AC 787:
Trip review with pictures from galawdawg:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23555730-post1724.html
pictures from TravellingBeard
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/24068136-post2054.html
Onboard videos from cooleddie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBND...ature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvVH...ature=youtu.be
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/24182736-post2123.html
Video trip report, J-class, YYZ-YVR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRKfq6KEles
3 Class Video review of AC's Dreamliner with Pilot and SD interview
https://youtu.be/5N4_bIEut6I
Trip review with pictures from FlyerJT:
http://thepointsguy.com/2015/08/air-canada-787-economy-review/
In depth video review of AC's 787-8 Dreamliner International Business Class
https://youtu.be/X8u1jvjk_3w
Q: On the 787-9 (789), which seats in J are missing windows?
A: Rows 5 and 8 on both port and starboard sides have only one window, instead of two on all other port/starboard J seats.
Q: On the 787-8 (788), which seats in J are missing windows?
A: Only row 5 port and starboard sides have zero windows.
Q: Does the middle J seats' middle divider come down?
A: No, on the 788 and 789 the middle divider does not come down and is fixed in place. In fact, all Dream Cabin (788, 789, 77L, 77W) middle dividers are fixed and do not come down.
Member pictures & videos of AC 787:
Trip review with pictures from galawdawg:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23555730-post1724.html
pictures from TravellingBeard
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/24068136-post2054.html
Onboard videos from cooleddie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBND...ature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvVH...ature=youtu.be
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/24182736-post2123.html
Video trip report, J-class, YYZ-YVR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRKfq6KEles
3 Class Video review of AC's Dreamliner with Pilot and SD interview
https://youtu.be/5N4_bIEut6I
Trip review with pictures from FlyerJT:
http://thepointsguy.com/2015/08/air-canada-787-economy-review/
In depth video review of AC's 787-8 Dreamliner International Business Class
https://youtu.be/X8u1jvjk_3w
The Air Canada 787-8/-9 Dreamliner Discussion Thread
Apr 11, 2015, 5:09 pm
#2521
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SE MM, Bonvoy Plat, Hilton G,Nexus, Amex MR Plat,IHG Plat
Posts: 4,429
Thanks for the seat tips. I'm 6-3 and row 12 would have sucked for me due to closeness of the bulkhead. I switched to 13d at the Yvr lounge and it was definitely a better choice for my height
Food was a pleasant surprise - first time in PY - not bad at all.
I was on AC25 today from Yvr to PVG (I'll be specific since this is a thumbs -up) - and WOW the flight crew were absolutely awesome. One of the best in a long time - good show !
Food was a pleasant surprise - first time in PY - not bad at all.
I was on AC25 today from Yvr to PVG (I'll be specific since this is a thumbs -up) - and WOW the flight crew were absolutely awesome. One of the best in a long time - good show !
Thanks
Apr 11, 2015, 5:25 pm
#2522
Formerly known as tireman77
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,647
Some say had a 777 not had an engine issue at test flight for SAA, the A340 would have died years earlier.
Apr 11, 2015, 9:47 pm
#2523
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: sqrt(-united states of apologist)
Programs: *$ Green
Posts: 5,403
Isn't the 777-200LR to the 777-300ER what the 787-8 is to the 787-9? Or s the spec gap much wider with the 77L-77W?
Apr 12, 2015, 6:02 am
#2524
Formerly known as tireman77
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,647
I have sent an email to some Boeing Wide-body sales people I met on a recent flight. Not sure they can give me the 'exact' information, but I'll follow up with any pertinent information they allow me to share.
Apr 12, 2015, 9:03 am
#2525
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: sqrt(-united states of apologist)
Programs: *$ Green
Posts: 5,403
From everything I have been reading it appears the 787-9 could render the 787-8 redundant. Most carriers who had 787-8 order have switched a large part of them over and almost all new 787 orders are for the -9 & -10. It appears to be a trend as shown by the 767-200, the A330-200, the 777-200 etc. I guess the technology advances quickly enough during the development and build process that by the time an airline is ready to build the stretched version, its almost a 2.0 version in itself.
I have sent an email to some Boeing Wide-body sales people I met on a recent flight. Not sure they can give me the 'exact' information, but I'll follow up with any pertinent information they allow me to share.
I have sent an email to some Boeing Wide-body sales people I met on a recent flight. Not sure they can give me the 'exact' information, but I'll follow up with any pertinent information they allow me to share.
Apr 12, 2015, 12:26 pm
#2526
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,467
Not sure what fin number I'm on, but 5D's tray table kept sliding down when it was locked, and there's an issue with the monitor on 1K where it acts as if you've touched the screen every so often, showing the video controls.
Apr 12, 2015, 1:21 pm
#2527
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YVR
Programs: AC*SE MM, Marriott Titanium, National Executive
Posts: 1,587
As they age and more trays get loose, someone is bound to get hurt.
Apr 12, 2015, 4:29 pm
#2528
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: YYC
Posts: 4,035
However, the 787-8 situation seems to be nearly identical to the 777-200 (non-ER/LR), it was groundbreaking... until everyone realized two years later that the 777-300 series was where the real sweet spot was. They ended up only selling 88 of the planes and then discontinued it. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 787-8 go the same way.
Apr 12, 2015, 4:43 pm
#2529
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 16,700
Not quite, the 777-200LR was designed quite late in the 777 program for a very specific goal.
However, the 787-8 situation seems to be nearly identical to the 777-200 (non-ER/LR), it was groundbreaking... until everyone realized two years later that the 777-300 series was where the real sweet spot was. They ended up only selling 88 of the planes and then discontinued it. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 787-8 go the same way.
However, the 787-8 situation seems to be nearly identical to the 777-200 (non-ER/LR), it was groundbreaking... until everyone realized two years later that the 777-300 series was where the real sweet spot was. They ended up only selling 88 of the planes and then discontinued it. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 787-8 go the same way.
777-200 entry into service was 1995
777-300 entry in service was 1998 but at the time it was not the sweet spot - as you point out they sold relatively few of them.
The larger aircraft only became the "sweet spot" with the enhanced range of the 777-300ER which didn't enter service until 2004 - and even then it took a couple of years before customers saw the benefits of that aircraft.
With regards to the 787 series, Boeing has something pretty amazing with the 787-9... more seats and longer range. I suspect Boeing will ensure there is still room for the 788 by attaching a significant premium to the 789. If a customer throws cheap competitive pricing from Airbus on 330neo, Boeing will counter with cheap prices for the 788 but not the 789.
Apr 12, 2015, 5:30 pm
#2530
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: yyz/ord
Programs: AC E50 UA1k 2MM AA EXP Royal Ambassador SPG Platinum
Posts: 1,516
It seems AC just cant pick the right planes. Perhaps AC expects to go into receivership and dump the bad purchases again.
Apr 12, 2015, 5:40 pm
#2531
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Never home.
Posts: 2,971
CX was flying the 777-300 yyz-hkg months after AC started using the 200LR, also CO was using a 777-200 from NY, and those planes are at LEAST 10 years old.
It seems AC just cant pick the right planes. Perhaps AC expects to go into receivership and dump the bad purchases again.
It seems AC just cant pick the right planes. Perhaps AC expects to go into receivership and dump the bad purchases again.
An AC 77L once reconfigured to 300 seats and literal tonnes of cargo being hauled is probably more profitable than a 340 seat CX 77W with almost 0 cargo capability.
Apr 12, 2015, 5:41 pm
#2532
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: AC SE100K-1MM, NH, DL, AA, BA, Global Entry/Nexus, APEC..
Posts: 18,877
As PLeblond and I have posted before, this site is your friend
ALL THINGS 787
http://nyc787.blogspot.ca/
Interesting paragraph from his April 3 update:
"What was also interesting about March deliveries was the number of 787-9 (5) delivered vs. the 787-8 (6), almost half of the delivery totals for the month. For the quarter, Boeing delivered 10 787-9s vs. 20 787-8s. This will be an important metric to watch as production cost come down on the 787-9 (and the 787 program as a whole) the margins on these larger version will be higher vs. the 787-8. The more of these airplanes that are delivered the better Boeing's financial results will look. It is expected that the 787-9 (and the 787-10) should be more profitable to the company to produce than the 787-8. This profitability will be even more pronounced as Boeing has delivered over 50% of the 787-8 ordered thus far while only delivering less than 5% of the total 787-9 ordered to date. Boeing has delivered 24% of the total 787 orders thus far."
Apr 12, 2015, 5:41 pm
#2533
Join Date: Dec 2014
Programs: Executive Club, Altitude, Millennium Loyalty Club, President's Club
Posts: 21
From everything I have been reading it appears the 787-9 could render the 787-8 redundant. Most carriers who had 787-8 order have switched a large part of them over and almost all new 787 orders are for the -9 & -10. It appears to be a trend as shown by the 767-200, the A330-200, the 777-200 etc. I guess the technology advances quickly enough during the development and build process that by the time an airline is ready to build the stretched version, its almost a 2.0 version in itself.
I have sent an email to some Boeing Wide-body sales people I met on a recent flight. Not sure they can give me the 'exact' information, but I'll follow up with any pertinent information they allow me to share.
I have sent an email to some Boeing Wide-body sales people I met on a recent flight. Not sure they can give me the 'exact' information, but I'll follow up with any pertinent information they allow me to share.
I'm not sure I'd put the A330-200 on that list. Although the A333-300 range has improved significantly since its entry into service (and it does significantly outsell the A330-200), the A330-200 still has significantly more range and is used on routes the A330-300 can't perform effectively. I'm thinking of routes like Philadelphia to Tel Aviv. The fact that an A330-200-sized aircraft continues to be offered in the A330neo programme (as the A330-800, albeit with a few extra seats) demonstrates that this aircraft isn't obsolete, even if it isn't as popular as the A330-300 (or A330-900 under the neo programme).
Arguably the A330-200 is aimed more at the 787-8 market, while the A330-300 is more of a 777-200ER replacement for routes less than 10 hours.
Apr 12, 2015, 7:36 pm
#2535
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE 2MM; UA MP Premier Silver; Marriott Bonvoy LT Titanium Elite; Radisson; Avis PC
Posts: 35,268
Yep I've been in 5D several times on the FIN where the tray table slides down during moderate vibration whether it be taxiing takeoff landing turbulence etc.