ANA orders three Boeing 787-10 Dreamliners

I think the ANA 787-10's will first be used on the Tokyo-Haneda to Sapporo-Chitose route--one of the busiest shorter-distance domestic air routes in the world. They'll need it, since there are no more 747's in commercial airline service in Japan.

It takes 2 of them to replace a fully loaded 747-400 SR. So 2 planes burn less than one?

Maybe they wouldnt be able to get every 747 fully loaded for each flight so making two flights at different time with smaller aircraft makes more sense.

@YuriOtani: A 747 (any model) has 4 engines, a 787 (again, any model) has 2 engines. In addition, the engines of the 787 are MUCH more advanced and even with the fact that the 747 is a much larger plane, the 787 is much lighter because of the composite materials it is constructed from.

@YuriOtani, I think with the rise of low-cost carriers (LCC's) in Japan since 2000, there is now a lot less need for flying big 747's in domestic service in much of Japan on the most busy domestic routes. As such, the likes of ANA and JAL are flying smaller planes on routes like the Tokyo-Haneda to Sapporo-New Chitose and Tokyo-Haneda to Fukuoka routes.

Both of you 2 planes equals 4 engines and 2 landing slots. I have been on some of these flights and they were booked solid. So how does 2 flight crews, 2 planes, 2 landing slots beat one?

I flew JAL's Narita/Vancouver route a couple of weeks ago with 787-10 equipment. The most comfortable business class trip I've taken in years. A great aircraft, and JAL's made big strides in improving the ergonomics of their C class seating.

If it's not Boeing, I'm not going.

So will ANA's desire just to be called "the first" to do something again once again prove to backfire and them to blame everyone else for the losses? or will the gamble pay off this time?

The most comfortable business class trip I've taken in years. business class is for the peasants

What was that about American products being crap? I await your apologies.

What was that about American products being crap? I await your apologies.

Not 100% American product.

@tinawatanabe It was designed in the US and that is where the profits go.

＠YuriOtani: Fuel is by far the biggest cost for airlines—greater than even airline salaries. The fuel efficiency of an aircraft is of the utmost importance. In addition, not all airports have slots.

That the 787 is a plane that should attract buyers is indicated by the fact that the Europeans are building the A350 Airbus, which also uses composite materials and is more energy efficient with more comfortable internal pressure than predecessors.

As with the 787, the A350 will likely also have components manufactured internationally. Incidentally, a big chunk of the 787 fuselage is built in Aichi Prefecture, and with Toyota also present there, the prefecture is quite a manufacturing hub. I believe Toray is also involved in a major way.

Did Boeing ever make sure the cause of the batteries catching fire problem has been found and fixed?

"business class is for the peasants"

Har! What, then, is economy class? Wait,don't tell us,please...

Great aircraft hope the future is just as brit for Boeing

@tinawatanabe

Not 100% American product.

You're right, it's not 100% American made. The 787 dreamliner, later nicknamed the nightmare liner, had two problems. The batteries which caught fire and the wings with hair-line cracks. Guess which country supplied both the batteries and wings.....Japan.

Why are they buying some planes that were plenty of defects?

"Maybe they wouldnt be able to get every 747 fully loaded for each flight"

Yeah, they were usually fully loaded. The one that crashed in Gumma killed 520 people on board, nearly double the capacity of a 787.

It would surely be more efficient to just use one 747 rather than 2 787s on the busiest routes, since the 747s are still being produced with much more efficient engines and technologies than before.

The airliner sales and procurement business is quite corrupt, especially in Japan. So I imagine this is more about corporate profits than any environmental concerns.

For the Tokyo-Hokkaido route, both JAL and ANA are forecasting loss in ridership with the Hokkaido Shinkansen scheduled to go on line in next year. A 787 can also provide a more versatile flight schedule to since the new Chitose airport is open 24 hours a day.

So I imagine this is more about corporate profits

Gee, you think a for-profit enterprise is concerned primarily about making money?

It would surely be more efficient to just use one 747 rather than 2 787s on the busiest routes

Pretty sure ANA has a better handle on what makes them more money than you do. After all, as you mention they are only concerned about "corporate profits".

@Pandabelle

"Pretty sure ANA has a better handle on what makes them more money than you do."

You clearly don't understand the background to airliner procurement in Japan. Japan acquires aircraft based largely on to what extent its suppliers secure work on them. These are the corporate profits I'm taking about. The airlines aren't fully free to choose the aircraft it flies: the ministry of transport officials actively "assist" in making that decision.

Japan until very recent gave Boeing a market share in excess of 90%, unprecedented for a major nation. Airbus has since agreed to give more work to the Japanese suppliers in order to get in on the market. The more the aircraft, the more the profits for Japanese suppliers.

There, now you have been enlightened.

Why are they buying some planes that were plenty of defects?

Heard any big news of defects lately, or are ya still stuck from couple years ago?

As for 4 engines vs. 2 engines:

The technology of airplane engines is one of the most exciting and dynamic areas to advance, with new materials (primarily ceramic-based but some metallurgical) combining with advances in computer design capabilities to make much bigger and more powerful engines than were dreamed of in the past. The result has been that really large airplanes are able to fly really long distances on just two engines.

Two engines not only burn less fuel than 4, they also need less maintenance. Both factors have a huge influence on airline costs of operation. Some observers think that the era of “four holers” as aviation industry people call them, is over

There, now you have been enlightened.

Gee, thanks, JeffLee! What would we do without you??? As usual your insight into Japan is unparalleled and unbiased.

Thank you SO MUCH.

/s

"The reason why Japanese airliners purchased Boeing is basically it was more practical to narrow down suppliers so they don't have to carry spare parts for two completely different manufacturers."

If this were true, then all the other countries would have excessively skewed market shares. But they don't. Only Japan.

"As usual your insight into Japan is unparalleled and unbiased."

The arrangement is fairly well documented by researchers and other experts. You can learn more about the early background by reading about the Lockheed scandal, which led to the criminal conviction of the prime minister.

Then maybe you too would be able to make informative posts, beyond the usual knee-jerk sarcasm that reflects a lack of understanding.

Then maybe you too would be able to make informative posts, beyond the usual knee-jerk sarcasm that reflects a lack of understanding.

Yes, someday I will reach your level of understanding that everything in Japanese business= corrupt and inefficient, everything else in Japan = simply bad.

I look forward to getting that cynical.