Virgin Atlantic orders Dreamliners

Originally posted by hourami
Also, Boeing say that it will only take THREE days to assemble a Dreamliner.

Requiring only a Philips screwdriver and an allan key ?

It may be too early, but is there anything out there on how VS intend to have them kitted out - in particular in respect of seatch pitch in Y ?

Paul

It may be too early, but is there anything out there on how VS intend to have them kitted out - in particular in respect of seatch pitch in Y ?

Paul

I cannot see the seat pitch in Y being anything fancy given the reduction in floor space.

I don't think we will hear about cabins for a while though. Chances are a new or updated version of each cabin will be fitted with details announced much nearer the time I would imagine...

[Darren Wheeler]

Where do I sign up to volunteer to test the new cabins???

Originally posted by PVGSLF
BHX-NKG must be a go-er given the number x rover people now in Nanjing. Bring it on!

Did you see this? http://www.autowired.co.uk/news/article ... ryid=18045

Originally posted by PVGSLF
You know, I can't get what all the excitment is about...

Must admit- its cool for VS to order these- but at the end of the day they will be just as common as the 767 in 10 years time.

[The new Virgin Atlantic 787 Dreamliners will enable the airline to continue its global expansion, possibly flying to cities including Rio de Janeiro, Seattle, Vancouver, Bangkok and Melbourne.

Not surprised with Rio considering VS has had the green light to operate it for the last 2 years. The others were all on SRB's wishlist- so no real surprise.

Hawaii has been mentioned before about the need for UK direct service but a/c range was the problem. FCA will probably pip VS to the post of being the first to land there though.

OHH! this is pretty
http://www.virginatlanticdreamliner.com/index.html

[Bazz]

Five seats at the bar then

OMG the bar area looks GREAT! Anyone for a G&T? [^]

[Scrooge]

London - Hawaii is a long flight..forget doing that in Y, heck even PE would be a stretch....

But saying that...VF social HNL '12 anyone ?

Another take on the biofuel aspect of the announcement.

It remains to be seen what the actual internal configuration will be, but from what I know [:w] I think we'll all be happy with the plane. I know the crews are in for a few (happy!) surprises [:0]... [:w][:w][:w]

Sux2Bmoi when I can say no more...[:(]

Am I the only one not in favour of this order?[:0]

VS.

[Darren Wheeler]

Originally posted by VS045
Am I the only one not in favour of this order?[:0]

VS.

At the risk of opening a right can of worms.....

Why?

I've heard grumbles aplenty about the same thing - 2 engines. Now, I'm not fond of that myself, but considering the escalating 'it's all their fault' re global warming, and the finger pointed at aircraft in general, wrongly or not, we must choose to fly greener.

If this is a way to do it and shut up the uninformed masses shouting for the grounding of all flyers on the planet, then I'll just have to get over my dislike of 2-engine planes.

Now, if we could only get the shouting unwashed masses to consider hybrid fuel or public transit vehicles to get to their frothing rallies against the flying public, that might do more good for good old Earth... [:w]

I think it's an order made for entirely the wrong reasons. To me, it seems that this is just for PR; VS appears greener and it appeases the US in order to get ahead with Virgin America.
In my opinion, the A350 would have been a far better choice, mainly for its greater commonality with the A346s (and A380s?). In addition, I quite liked the idea of the wider cabin [:I]

VS.

Pilots would still have to be certified for the A350 too, I believe, because I'm not sure Airbus will keep the same cockpit layout, just like Boeing updated their's for the 787. And anyway, there's plenty of time for pilots to get certified without interfering with the delivery. I think Virgin took the right choice. Airbus isn't looking like a good investment, and it's probably safer for VS to go with a plane that has so many orders than one that's struggling to keep the few it has.

Originally posted by VS045
I think it's an order made for entirely the wrong reasons. To me, it seems that this is just for PR; VS appears greener and it appeases the US in order to get ahead with Virgin America.
In my opinion, the A350 would have been a far better choice, mainly for its greater commonality with the A346s (and A380s?). In addition, I quite liked the idea of the wider cabin [:I]

VS.

I just cannot agree.
the Airbus aircraft are without a doubt the worst aircraft i have ever flown on.
Wider, lower roofed cabin, great selling point for the plastic rattly Airbus.
VS should never have gone down that route in the first place. A300 awful peices of kit.

Well done Virgin for getting something right for a change.

the Airbus aircraft are without a doubt the worst aircraft i have ever flown on.

I just cannot agree;)

VS.

I'm quite excited about flying on one of those. To be shallow I could happily play with the window dimmers for hours.
Nice sexy dreamliner website. Five seats at the bar, and facing the seats. Wouldn't facy being in them If I wanted a kip, but for party seats they're great.

Cheers!
Dean

Originally posted by VS045
VS appears greener and it appeases the US in order to get ahead with Virgin America.

After my initial excitement I have to admit I'm somewhat sceptical of the order.
Certainly it has been well handled with great spin and the packaging of two (or three) bits of news synchronised with the ORD restartup for maximum impact. The 787 is a good PR tool for VS - especially in the US - and it seems that Boeing's naming of a/c matches VS's preference for naming routes. It is certainly a nice looking a/c with some character - unlike Airbus - and I will be looking forward to my first flight on one.

However it does have a slightly nasty whiff about it and it certainly passed my mind that Virgin America may have played a part. Airbus would have seemed a better fit and potentially a better environmental partner too but hell what do I know. The prospect of new routes - especially BKK (presumably then on to MEL/PER) and Hawaii (presumably via VAN or SEA) are certainly mouthwatering - even if they are some way off and I would certainly not consider the choice of a/c a particular turn-off. This from someone who fairly regularly flew A343 to EWR purely because the timing worked.

The missing link in the equation is just how are VS going planning to replace the 744s - or are they?

Phil FM

[ChuckC]

If they can get them to fly on biofuel, perhaps the 744 will fly forever. One can hope.

Chuck-

Originally posted by FamilyMan
The missing link in the equation is just how are VS going planning to replace the 744s - or are they?

That's a question I'd like to see the answer to also. With the announcment that the bio fuel test will be conducted on a VS 744 I suppose that question won't happen until after the test. If VS, Boeing and Virgin Fuels successfully complete tests and are able to start operating the 744's on bio fuels, thus increasing efficiency and making them green then I think we'll see the 744 fleet stay around. These aircraft are not old by any stretch of the imagination, have been well maintained, and certainly have a lot of life left in them.

Now on the other hand, if VS ops are starting to be dictated by their new environmental policies (which I applaud them for, it's about time someone steps up to the plate and influences some change) and the tests don't go well, then VS may be forced to consider another alternatitive to the 744 in order to keep with the policies and change that they've started.

Time will tell.

In my opinon the test will be successful, and I'd like to know where I can buy some stock in Virgin Fuels [8D]

Just seen an interview with SRB on CNN.
The man knows how to put on a show!
It was an interesting interview mostly about Virgin's green agenda.

The A380 is still on, and he threw down the gauntlet to Airbus, saying that boeing had definately fought back with all guns blazing and if Airbus come up with a plane 30% more effecient than the 787 then he'll definately be back talking to them in the future!

[Scrooge]

The A300 is a 30 year old aircraft design, so you cannot compare it to a modern airliner, take a look at the A332, very nice aircraft.

I am pretty sure Boeing for an order of this size will throw in the pilot training to get them type certified on the 787.

The main thing is the green issue...well ok not the green issue to be exact, it's the fact that combining the 787 with the new engines results in a 27% lower fuel burn..that equals big $$$$$$ savings for the airline...and lord knows the bean counters may break down and allow some of that $$$ to be passed back to the pax in the form of a decent seat pitch [:0] LMFAO ....sure it may happen

Interesting point about direct flights from the UK to Hawaii

From Great Circle Mapper

LHR-HNL = 7237
SIN-EWR (Already a scheduled route for SQ) = 9535

So it aint that long, and technology is already available.

[Scrooge]

True, but the SIN-EWR route is run with an A345 with restrictions.

You are still looking at a 14 hr flight which in a 31" seat pitch seat would not be a good way to start a trip IMHO.

However if they can make it work good for them, it has been tried before (with a stop at ANC) by Western way back when using a DC 10-30 ? but the flight was pulled after a year or so.

Of course times change...and as I said..what better place for a VF social