FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   TravelBuzz (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz-176/)
-   -   787 at DCA (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz/1343885-787-dca.html)

Global_Hi_Flyer May 7, 2012 6:44 pm

787 at DCA
 
Got to watch the Boeing demo 787 on final approach and landing at DCA today. What an elegant flyer!

For those of you traveling in/out of DCA this week, look for it - apparently it's here until Friday (receiving NAA award later this week).

cbn42 May 7, 2012 7:25 pm

I don't understand this... what is so special about seeing the 787 flying? It has certain cabin features that older planes don't, but from the outside it just looks like a mid-sized wide body plane, or am I missing something?

belfordrocks May 7, 2012 8:42 pm

Will they have trouble getting that thing out of there though? They'd have to fuel it really lightly...

Bear4Asian May 7, 2012 9:07 pm

Living in Seattle I've seen both the 787 and 747-800 on test flights, sometimes very low. Both planes give me chills. The 787 wings are swept back and the plane does look very elegant. The 787-800 has a lot longer "hump" and looks like a graceful hippo.

Both make me want to fly.

abmj-jr May 7, 2012 10:35 pm


Originally Posted by belfordrocks (Post 18532674)
Will they have trouble getting that thing out of there though? They'd have to fuel it really lightly...

Why? The 787 is a very fuel efficient, lightweight plane. Could you be confusing this with the A380?

nerd May 8, 2012 1:12 am


Originally Posted by abmj-jr (Post 18533160)
Why? The 787 is a very fuel efficient, lightweight plane. Could you be confusing this with the A380?

The issue is that the runway at DCA is relatively short for a plane that weighs 13,000 lbs more than a 767-400ER and whose engines deliver roughly the same thrust.

jpetekYXMD80 May 8, 2012 2:45 am


Originally Posted by nerd (Post 18533625)
The issue is that the runway at DCA is relatively short for a plane that weighs 13,000 lbs more than a 767-400ER and whose engines deliver roughly the same thrust.

There's no issue.

1. It will be very light, both in pax and fuel.

2. 7,100 is not that short. You could get a A340 out of there for Europe if you wanted. The 787 will be just fine.

kilton May 8, 2012 5:44 am


Originally Posted by cbn42 (Post 18532251)
or am I missing something?

You nailed it.

nerd May 8, 2012 6:30 am


Originally Posted by jpetekYXMD80 (Post 18533814)
There's no issue.

1. It will be very light, both in pax and fuel.

2. 7,100 is not that short. You could get a A340 out of there for Europe if you wanted. The 787 will be just fine.

Right. There will be no issue, as it will be relatively light. That's not inconsistent with what I was saying.

MissyH May 8, 2012 11:45 am

widebody landing and taking off at DCA is extremely rare....

I have never seen or heard of one during the last 27 and 3/4 years!

on the other hand, it's "just" a 787. :D

Let me know when the Airbus A380 lands at DCA!!!! :D :D :D

ironmanjt May 8, 2012 12:54 pm


Originally Posted by MissyH (Post 18536512)
widebody landing and taking off at DCA is extremely rare....

I have never seen or heard of one during the last 27 and 3/4 years!

About 10 yrs ago (give or take a few) a UA DC-10 diverted from IAD due to storms to land at DCA. In order to get it out, they had to completely strip the interior (seats, etc) and even then it was close.

DeaconFlyer May 8, 2012 1:16 pm


Originally Posted by ironmanjt (Post 18536982)
About 10 yrs ago (give or take a few) a UA DC-10 diverted from IAD due to storms to land at DCA. In order to get it out, they had to completely strip the interior (seats, etc) and even then it was close.

I don't believe that's true. From the Post:


Wide-body aircraft as large and heavy as the DC-10 normally do not operate at National, with its relatively short 6,800-foot main runway. Once it had landed, authorities were concerned about whether it could safely take-off.
But the three-engine plane, carrying a relatively light fuel load, made it easily into the air around 9:45 PM, and reached BWI shortly afterward, according to an to an operations officer at National. Carrying no passengers, but with cargo and baggage still on board, it lifted off about half way down the runway, he said.

guv1976 May 8, 2012 1:20 pm

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)


Originally Posted by ironmanjt

Originally Posted by MissyH (Post 18536512)
widebody landing and taking off at DCA is extremely rare....

I have never seen or heard of one during the last 27 and 3/4 years!

About 10 yrs ago (give or take a few) a UA DC-10 diverted from IAD due to storms to land at DCA. In order to get it out, they had to completely strip the interior (seats, etc) and even then it was close.

I'm surprised that a (lightly fueled) UA DC-10 would have to be stripped in order to take off from DCA. DC-10's regularly flew in and out of LGA years ago, and LGA's runways are only about 150' longer than the take-off distance available on DCA's longest runway.

highflier1979 May 8, 2012 1:59 pm


Originally Posted by cbn42 (Post 18532251)
.... or am I missing something?

^

Originally Posted by ironmanjt (Post 18536982)
About 10 yrs ago (give or take a few) a UA DC-10 diverted from IAD due to storms to land at DCA. In order to get it out, they had to completely strip the interior (seats, etc) and even then it was close.

Urban legend or myth

ericblair May 8, 2012 2:47 pm


Originally Posted by ironmanjt (Post 18536982)
About 10 yrs ago (give or take a few) a UA DC-10 diverted from IAD due to storms to land at DCA.

Anybody know whether commercial aircraft could divert to military fields like Andrews AFB? That would seem to be a better idea from a safety perspective, although there's the little matter of national security. Still, if it's a matter of life and death, they could spare a few guards I think.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:24 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.