The Hare and the Tortoise for real

[The Inspector]

RC-503, the first 747-8 received it's Airworthiness Certification, and the 787 is still driving around in circles trying-

[lotus49]

Ok, but is that really a fair comparison?

I fly the 74-400, and we are told that to fly the 800 is a 3 day differences course.
If I flew the triple, would it be a 3 day course to fly the 787?

I believe it's a new type course.
I have had a look in the 787 sim in Seattle, it is most definitely not a revamped 777.

I am sure they will get it sorted, sure it has had issues, but no doubt it will eventually be a success.

[The Inspector]

The posting was more the fact that the -8 started well after the '87 program got rolling and even with the admittedly minor 'erks' of the -8 it still beat the '87 to cert, but if you've read any of my previous posts about what a goat rope in the dark the 87 program is, you'll understand.

53 switches on the flight deck of the 787

[lotus49]

My point was that the 74-800 is essentially a stretched 400, the vast majority of the airframe is the 27 year old platform, and a percentage of that is from the classic, which has over a 40 year pedigree now.

The 787 is new tech in many areas, and a deparature from previous Boeing build experience. I am not saying they have run the program perfectly, there have been issues, but that it must have been easier to push the 800 through certification, simply based on the experience gained on the 400.

and I guess this is shown in the speed of certification completion.
I do not claim to know the technical ins and outs of the design and certification process, I just fly the end result, so this is merely an observation.