Is first time exp of flying the 787 worth a layover?
 

Flying for leisure in a few months from Newark, NJ to Hong Kong & Japan, and have two options on itinerary ($15 price difference, so it's moot) on United:
NJ / EWR > Hong Kong > Osaka; Tokyo > NJ / EWR
NJ / EWR > Hong Kong > Tokyo; Osaka > SFO (2.5 hour layover) > NJ /EWR

Originally I was going to book the blindly book the more convenient, non-stop option of Tokyo > EWR on my return leg. But then I noticed that the flight from Osaka to SFO is the 787 Dreamliner. And I remembered all the excitement a few years ago, and my person geek excitement back then as well. But I had never gotten the chance to fly it.. and now that it's been a few years, is it worth it? Is it worth adding a 2.5 hr layover and ~2 hr extra flight time (due to indirect route), and clearing immigration/customs in SFO to transfer to domestic terminal... to experience the 787? All on economy (plus) by the way via United.

Welcome to FlyerTalk!

Compared to the 777 flying on NRT-EWR the seats on the 787 will be narrower. Whether you notice that or not depends on many factors, but it is measurably so.

The IFE kit is newer on the 787s and the air pressure and humidity levels are more comfortable. Those environmental factors should help you be more comfortable during the flight and adjust better to the jetlag after the flight, but they won't solve either of those two challenges.

I don't know that I'd go out of my way to do it given the scenario you've described, with the extra connection and longer total travel time. That's easy for me to say having been on the 787 several times now and having made a special trip to China and Japan jut to fly it 5 years ago when it entered operations. I would choose it over other types on a comparable itinerary in most cases, but yours is not a comparable itinerary.

Up to you. I would because you are interested in it.

There are some planes that I remember being on years after the flight. Some examples include a Lockheed L1011-500 (not just any L1011), both times I was on a Boeing 747SP, one time on an Airbus A340-500 and Boeing 737-200 Combi.

I might do the same to be on a 737-600 or an A380. Years after it started airline service, I have yet to be inside an A380.

No. The 787 had such promise but the actual our outcome is a perfectly normal aircraft. Crammed with seats and like every other.

Aside from staring out the window at some slightly different wings, and a lavatory where the flush was motion activated, I myself didn't notice much difference.

I wouldn't go hugely out of my way to take it -- you will end up on one soon enough some time!

In business class or higher, I'd say yes but in Y, I'd have to say no, it is not worth it unless you are simply satisfying your curiosity.

I have not been on a 787 and I want to be. However this advice is very good if you think you will eventually be on one by chance.

I fly 787 in J on QR and love it, also like J in their A380.
Flew QR 787 in Y 2x and no thank you.
Dreamliner??? in Y rather a Nightmareliner.
How come American companies find such lying names for their products?
I worked 10 years for Atlanta based MSA software company (a fantastic company to work for in the 1980ties)
But one day marketing added "Artificial Intelligence" to the product line, what a joke...

In coach I'd say no too. I'd just look for the shortest trip.

Last year I decided to fly ORD-DFW-PHX (on AA) instead of taking a direct flight specifically to fly on a 787 since it cost the same. I did spend the extra few bucks on an MCE which was nice since the middle seat was empty. I have to say I did enjoy the 787 (for as big a plane as it is sitting in 10A the cabin was surprisingly quiet) but to be honest I'd pass on it for a long haul flight in cattle unless you can get an aisle seat in whatever United's version of MCE is so you can at least get up and stretch as needed. If you really want to fly on the 787 I know AA semi-regularly flies it between ORD and DFW and I think UA does between SFO and DEN as well.

+1 to both of these.

Up to now, I've avoided the 787 because I principally fly UA in economy and, reportedly, UA's 787s in economy are awful.

But I've just done a perfect test. AC in Business. One way I flew the 787-9 and on the return their newly fitted 777. So they were identical products with identical seats. There was precious little difference. The windows on the 787 were larger and, despite myself, I didn't mind the electronic, rather than physical, shading and in fact quite liked it, although I didn't like the fact that the FAs had an override.

Otherwise there was no difference that I could tell.

I have only flown in an economy seat on a 787 once (short flight, DOH-DXB) and I don't wish to repeat the experience. If the 777 has larger seats, then that's what I would choose. With all the marketing BS around the 787, you'd think that stepping off the plane would leave you feeling like you've just been pampered at a spa. The greater pressurisation is nice, but not to make up for the generally more cramped seating.

This is what I was going to say. I went out of my way to fly the 787 in J and loved it. I would not have done so for coach. I slept like a log on the plane and did notice a difference in jet lag. And I'm just a plane geek, I really wanted to experience it.

5 hour layover in DXB just to fly on an A380. totally worth it. if you want to fly on it, just do it.