Not exactly a backcountry aircraft but the Boeing 787 is in the air.

See: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE1 to track it

See: http://www.kirotv.com/video/21974146/index.html to see the take off and early time in the air.

Check the flex in those wings.

TD

Awesome! It was fun watching those taxi tests yesterday. What a machine.

I like the shark tooth engine exhaust.

I think it is pretty cool to look at the track log in Flight Aware to get an idea how they are putting the new bird through the paces.

That wing flex is incredible - that would be quite a sight in severe turbulence at FL35 over the Atlantic...

I think it is interesting that the two chase planes appear to be old T-33's!

N131CP wrote:That wing flex is incredible - that would be quite a sight in severe turbulence at FL35 over the Atlantic...

The flex of the wings will give the entire airplane a much softer ride, which is mostly good. So long as the flex is designed in, and the structure/control system is designed to allow it, I believe it's a big positive.

A ride in turbulence in a stiff-winged or strut-braced airplane can be pretty bone-jarring while the same ride in a flexible aircraft is usually much more comfortable. Having the flex in the wing also reduces the shock loads and load reversals on the entire structure.

Absolutely it would be a smoother ride, but those wings would be flapping like a goose...

I grew up next to my cousins on my grandfather's farm. The oldest son is an engineer for Boeing and worked on the 787. There is so much carbon fiber used in the plane to lighten it and make it more fuel efficient that it required special bolts in order to pass through the aluminum parts, and steel parts and the carbon. The bolt had to be compatible with all materials so as not to cause electrolysis between them as they passed through the holes of each component. There were not enough of those bolts in the entire world's inventory to build the planes they had contracted. It ended up being one of the unseen delays in the plane's delivery date. When he was sent abroad to check on the major components manufactured overseas he was assigned to stop at each bolt manufacturer and try to get them to special produce that bolt. They finally did get one manufacturer to shut down his entire product line and special produce the bolts. For planes that were to be sold in Europe, none of the manufacturer's of the bolts or other components could use methods that were environmentally damaging by European standards regardless of which country they were produced. (Think Airbus competitor). The delays of the plane piled up and finally now they have it in the air. I hope it performs as well as hoped for.

N131CP wrote:Absolutely it would be a smoother ride, but those wings would be flapping like a goose...

Hello fellow Whiteman Airport resident...

Yeah, flappin' like a goose for sure. But please believe me when I say that a SAFELY designed flexible composite wing airplane is easier on the occupants and on the structure. You ain't seen flexible until you've flown an AS-W20 sailplane up and down the Owens Valley in summertime

It's an awesome Cadillac ride in turbulence. More importantly, the energy of big gusts and choppy air is absorbed by the wing lifting several degrees, which means that the gusts don't stall parts of the wing, or create separated airflow over the wing... this means it's just a hair more efficient aerodynamically speaking. Although the sailplane is on the far opposite end of the spectrum as the 787, the principle is actually the same.

It will be interesting to see if the general news media comments on the wing flex, or the flying public.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQI3AWpTWhM

What they doin in that cockpit?

It will be interesting to see if the general news media comments on the wing flex, or the flying public.

The local Seattle NBC affiliate's aviation reporter did a bit on the flexible wings and the wider rib spacing in the fuselage. Then again we are a Boeing town.

TD

Stuff like this always gives me pride in the ingenuity of humans to create really awesome stuff.






Big Photo

Big Photo 2

courierguy wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQI3AWpTWhM

Yes... that shows my point exactly. If that was a metal wing airplane, or a strut braced airplane, all that destructive energy would have gone into tearing the whole thing apart, and the pilot would never have been able to remain calm. Now obviously that clip is the intentional wing structure flutter test, I believe a Glaser-Dirks DG-100 or early DG-300 prototype... but the ability of the wing to absorb all that movement and let the fuselage fly relatively stable is very clear. The airplane did not depart controlled flight and didn't even throw itself around violently. The same flutter test in a traditional strut braced airplane would have been a lot more destructive.

heres youtube of the take off i saw it live online very cool

Our plant where I work is located very close to the north end of "Boeing Field" in Seattle. As I was preparing to leave work around 1:00pm I noticed four different helicopters hovering about 500ft around Boeing Field and remembered that the 787 was on its maiden flight at that time although I was not aware that it was going to land at the old Boeing Field. I put two and two together an figured I best keep my eyes open and sure enough a bit later here she comes flanked by two classic T-33's. I must say, that is a pretty bird. Hope all the tests go well. Seeing the first flight is pretty neat deal.

I recall that when I was about 15 years old the very first 747 flew down to Boeing Field and was parked there for awhile. I wanted to see that thing so bad I one night I stole my dads Buick and drove down to the field to get my first good look at it.