July 09, 2007
Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
So, Boeing reveals the 787 Dreamliner to a breathlessly waiting world:
The Boeing Co. unveiled its first fully assembled 787 yesterday to an audience of thousands who packed into its widebody assembly plant for the plane's premiere.
With flight attendants on stage from each airline that has ordered the jet, the giant factory doors opened wide as the Boeing 787, which the company calls the Dreamliner, slowly moved into view.
Boeing has received more than 600 orders for the midsize, long-haul jet, which the company says will burn less fuel, be cheaper to maintain and offer more passenger comforts than comparable planes flying today.
The 787, Boeing's first all-new jet since the 777 in 1995, will be the world's first large commercial airplane made mostly of carbon fiber composites, which are lighter, more durable and less prone to corrosion than aluminum.
Of course, the 787 Dreamliner is the most appalling plane, a foul beast, one that no one should ever agree to fly upon, one that should fail, be excised from history even, one that will, when used, lead to dogs lying down with cats, rivers of blood and the end of human civilization, if not the return of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
Ahem. Did I mention I was a supplier to Airbus?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Boeing 787 Dreamliner.:
I am sure its more confortable than those rubbish Airbus' however. I will fly Boeing every time.
Posted by: Andrew Ian Dodge | Jul 9, 2007 12:39:33 PM
As a Boeing stockholder and European taxpayer I have financial backing in both Boeing and in Airbus. Somehow though, as a taxpayer, I have a sinking feeling that I am not going to see any direct benefit from the tax money I have invested in Airbus. Boeing shares, on the other hand, are looking better and better.
Posted by: david | Jul 9, 2007 1:38:03 PM
@ David - that'll be the US taxpayer's subsidies you're benefiting from, then.
Posted by: john b | Jul 9, 2007 2:31:55 PM
John b. What US taxpayers subsidies?
Posted by: davod | Jul 9, 2007 5:01:06 PM
I cannot hear you?
Posted by: davod | Jul 9, 2007 8:32:10 PM
Do you fancy cutting out the middleman here Timmy? After all, what's the point of supplying stuff to Airbus when they seem to have such an aversion to supplying their products to anyone? Why not supply the Scandium (or whatever) straight to the airlines with a set of instructions from an Airix model? (We could chuck in some of they fancy stick-on decals and stuff, tube of glue etc.)
As it was my idea, I will only take 50% of the profits. You can't say fairer than that.
Posted by: Monty | Jul 9, 2007 9:14:48 PM
Sorry, I don't spend *all* my time on Tim's blogs. If you don't think the US taxpayer massively subsidises Boeing, then you are mentally ill.
Posted by: john b | Jul 10, 2007 12:32:19 PM
Spoken like a truther. I think it so it must be true.
Posted by: davod | Jul 11, 2007 7:13:09 PM