787 Dreamliner Draws Boeing Logo Across Country With Flight Path (PHOTO)

Flying cross country is all in a day's work for most airlines, but tracing your company's logo with your flight path? That's clever marketing.

SCROLL FOR PHOTO

The 787 Dreamliner (Flight ZA236) drew the Boeing logo during a 19-hour test flight between Washington and Iowa, Gizmodo reports.

A spokesperson for Boeing told Wired UK the flight, which took place between Feb. 9 and Feb. 10, was "coordinated with the many air traffic control centers, choosing the routing to avoid restricted airspace."

Flight Blogger Jon Ostrower noted he was tipped off to the plane's intended path while sitting at Houston International Airport on Feb. 9.

According to Business Insider, the 19-hour journey is the 787's longest flight yet. And it isn't the company's first attempt at skywriting either: The 747-8 Freighter traced a "747" over several states during another test flight in August, Wired observes.

The 787 Dreamliner boasts lighter-weight composite materials and consumes less fuel, according to the Associated Press. Boeing recently discovered a glitch on fuselages, but said the problem should not affect production.

The Dreamliner made its first commercial flight in October, the BBC reports. United Continental is expected to be the first U.S. airline to fly the plane in 2012.

Via Gizmodo

PHOTO:

Comments

[Totto]

10:05 AM on 02/16/2012

Gosh, what a beautiful aircraft. And WE build it!

[TeeSC]

01:08 PM on 02/16/2012

Yes, we do!!!!

[WilliamWalton]

04:25 PM on 02/14/2012

Wouldn't it have been less money to just draw it with an Etch-A-Sketch?

[falgiano]

03:06 PM on 02/14/2012

Sounds safe. hahaha

[blackhole2008]

02:43 PM on 02/14/2012

Would you like 5 peanuts for $20.00?

[kenan01]

02:37 PM on 02/14/2012

Does the FAA approve of this kind of flight plan?

[neurolux]

02:35 PM on 02/14/2012

It's a shame they couldn't come up with a more fuel efficient way to draw their logo on a map.

[kauthon]

03:00 PM on 02/14/2012

They want people to know that something this big can stay up in the air for 19 hours. Now you know I'd say that is pretty efficient. Do you know how long other planes can stay up?

[Whogivesafox]

03:03 PM on 02/14/2012

A B52 can stay up indefinitely with refueling.

[jDriscoll]

08:20 PM on 02/14/2012

That does not prove efficiency. It would if they said "we are going to use the same amount of fuel a 747 uses to stay in air for 17 hours at a certain rate, and we will go 19 hours at the same rate." It is like car companies saying "this SUV gets 400 miles to the TANK when the SUV has a 44 gallon tank. Which is like 9ish MPG. Not a measurement of efficiency. Oh, and AirBus has a commercial non-stop flight of 18 hr 50 min.

[gr8bsn]

03:09 PM on 02/14/2012

You're right. In no way should the precision flight characteristics and real world flight performance of a commercial aircraft hurtling 350 people eight miles above the earth be tested in any way.

[barknasty]

02:28 PM on 02/14/2012

How many bags were lost on test flight?

[kenan01]

02:38 PM on 02/14/2012

None, only because it had not been delivered to an airline yet

[Moder8tion]

02:24 PM on 02/14/2012

They better hope it earns a safe track record or it will be called the Screamliner....

[stepintothelight]

02:24 PM on 02/14/2012

Big deal .... You should see the logo I drew in the snow last night out back of the bar!!!

[Spins VMFA321]

02:46 PM on 02/14/2012

You have snow??!!! (From a snow-less DelMarVa-ian...)

[Whogivesafox]

03:05 PM on 02/14/2012

Mr. Tony is pleased that there is no snow; let the Gods be praised.

[stepintothelight]

03:17 PM on 02/14/2012

A mild dusting here in Chicago last night. But not enough to hide the doggie land mines!!!

[BannedInBoston]

01:52 PM on 02/14/2012

"Dreamliner"??? I'll believe it if flying on it is any different than the major _hassle that flying on any other aitplane is....

[Vintage59]

01:52 PM on 02/14/2012

From a business perspective, it might have been more successful if Boeing actually had a logo that people would recognize.

[frantaylor]

01:55 PM on 02/14/2012

Why does Boeing have to resonate with consumers? They do not purchase Boeing products.

[Vintage59]

02:09 PM on 02/14/2012

Then why do they have a logo? "Consumers" in the context of Boeing;s sales would include anyone who makes decisions about what type of jet to purchase for their fleet, not those who purchase tickets.

Those consumers decide what brand to use based on what they think the purchasers of those tickets perceive as the best jets available.

[BannedInBoston]

01:50 PM on 02/14/2012

Big whoop....

[frantaylor]

01:56 PM on 02/14/2012

20% fuel savings is indeed a big whoop!

[BannedInBoston]

02:07 PM on 02/14/2012

But not flying the Boeing logo pattern. Huffpost should have led with a fuels savings headline. Boeing Dreamliner Cuts Fuel 20% or some such.....

[hazbro24]

01:46 PM on 02/14/2012

There seems to be a lack of critical thinking in the criticism of this flight.

How else are they going to do a long test flight without retracing parts of the flight path?

Should they fly to Japan instead for a test flight? Because over the middle of the Pacific isn't exactly where I'd like to find out there's something wrong with the plane.

Should we get rid of test flights to save fuel and run WileyCayoteAir instead?

[Spins VMFA321]

02:48 PM on 02/14/2012

Thanks for getting the point of the flight, oh hallowed maker of Transformers!

[Air Vice Marshal Park]

01:45 PM on 02/14/2012

For all the folks decrying this as a waste of fuel: this was an ETOPS certification test. Without ETOPS certification, the airplane cannot be used to cross oceans. They could have drawn a copy of the Mona Lisa just as long as they flew the right number of hours required. There will be further ETOPS tests, so just relax.

[kenan01]

02:40 PM on 02/14/2012

Finally, a reasonable post.

[gr8bsn]

03:13 PM on 02/14/2012

People who call this a waste of fuel want to fly in untested machines at their peril.

[Air Vice Marshal Park]

03:27 PM on 02/14/2012

I wouldn't want to set off across the Atlantic or Pacific in a 2 engine airplane that wasn't ETOPS certified. In fact, your flight plan wouldn't even be accepted.

[KarenGeorgetown]

01:43 PM on 02/14/2012

This wasn't a waste of jet fuel.....

[hazbro24]

01:47 PM on 02/14/2012

No it's not.

And the next person to say so goes on the No Fly list.