Boeing - Airbus Comparison

[Bill Boeing]

Hi all. After being content to just sit back and read the contents of PPRUNE for a couple of years, I've finally decided to register.. .. .I'm an Avionics LAME with Qantas in Australia. Qantas has recently placed an order with Airbus for the first time. Our fleet in the past has been completely Boeing so learning the new systems and the Airbus philosophy is going to be very interesting to say the least.. .. .I'm after some opinions on the pros and cons of Airbus as compared to Boeing from people who have worked on both. We have ordered A330-200 and A330-300 aircraft but anything on Boeing v's Airbus will be helpful.. .. .Thanks.

[Oleo]

Working the 'bus is good- I've A320,A330,A340- eng, airframe and avionic 'extension'....but only 747 on the Boeing side. Prefer Airbus but that's because most of my (civil) experience is with it...just another aircraft with some different things to watch. Airbus books are a lot lot better than they used to be and, if you take the time, are pretty logical and usually good value. . .. .I've found most people who slag the Airbus' off either haven't worked them or don't know the systems well enough. Good beast...but not perfect.

[tinyrice]

Your attitude to the aeroplane will be predicated somewhat to what you grew up with technically. If you worked Airbus' then you'll prefer them, just as people prefer Boeings to the products of the Douglas Cable and Spring Company. My exposure to A320s and 757/767 said that there seemed to be more electronic gremlins on the A320 with avionics problems that seemed to fix themselves, but frankly there really wasn't that much of a difference. The aircraft works, and as long as you follow their troubsleshooting trees to the letter and dont try and get creative she'll do nicely.

[HiSpeedTape]

I'm rated on both the A320 and 757. I prefer the Airbus myself although the Boeing is a nice bird as well. My preference for the A320 is coloured by the miserable summer we spent a couple of years back trying to keep a friday night special 757 serviceable. There was hardly a day that went by when this particular aircraft didn't fall over. It was a real piece of S*@t.

[Bill Boeing]

Hi Speed - I'm surprised about the 757. Were most of the defects Airframe or Avionics? We have a large fleet of 767s and if we come on shift and we've only got 767s, everyone's very pleased. If we've got 747s on the other hand......

[tinyrice]

If said 757 was powered by a P&W 2037/2040 engine instead of a Roller, then yes it could require all hands to push the bastard to the end of the runway. If it was an older model the equipment cooling and FQIS can also provide all the technical stimulation you need.

[SnapOff]

I've got experience of both 340 and 747. The Boeing is a lot heavier build (stronger) but the Airbus is a lot more friendly to work on. Most system defects can be sorted by either a test or a reset. A personal preference as well, you can do a lot more via the CMC and the ACMS is excellent for monitoring real time info on the systems. If all else fails completely downpower the aircraft.

[Jetset Sparky]

...If you sneeze on a Boeing it usually doesn't go 'tech' . So it gets my vote.. .. .I don't like Airbus products for the same reason as i will never buy another RENAULT car again!. .. .Anything with a bit of 'Gallic flair' is tempremental - look how reliable David Ginola (f***** footballer) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

[SeldomFixit]

If you were raised on Boeing products, you will, initially " resist" the Airbus. Time will, Im sure, leave you with a grudging admiration for "Le Bus". It is a very nicely engineered aircraft. Teething problems aside, the 330's will give you very little grief ( not sure of your engine choice. . .As stated previously, CMS/ACMS are top drawer compared to Boeing's offerings and the "bus" manual system will make you wonder why you put up with the inferior " other manufacturer's product " for so long. . .As per any electronic aircraft, always keep a complete downpower, followed by a cup of tea before repowering, up your sleeve. . .Would love you to respond 12 months after your first "live engagement" and let us know what you think of it then.. .I was Boeing ( all signoff categories ) for over 20 years before meeting the Bus and I am converted.. .In short, excellent aircraft but like any other, not without its vices.

[Conehead The Barbarian]

Both great to work on , and long may they both continue to break ! Working solely on the 757 at present and they are being too well behaved at the moment (managers complacent) but miss the Bus .. . . . <small>[ 27 March 2002, 05:03: Message edited by: Conehead The Barbarian ]</small>

[Bill Boeing]

Freighterman - it's interesting that you recommend following the Troubleshooting Trees "to the letter". I'm assuming that the Airbus ones must be better than Boeing's. I tend to avoid Boeing's Fault Isolation Manual. After doing my own troubleshooting via the Schematics and AMM, I can see the pattern that they have adopted but I've found their methods a little "Shotgun" for my liking and often way off base. Unfortunately with the 747-400, suffering from it's normal "Digital Hypercondriac", it throws a CMC message with it's associated number and you have to trot off to the FIM. I'll be interested to see the Airbus equivalent.. .. .Seldomfixit - Can't wait to see the "Superior" Airbus MM system! Can you believe we are still using the Microfilms and hard copy books for all of our Boeings? Apparently we are one of the last airlines to be using it. The Computer Server based system for our Boeings (except 747 classic) is being incorporated as we speak (probably because Airbus have this or nothing). Our IT guys came out to give demos. It was like a stage show with the boys giving Oooohhhs and Aaaahhhs at all the right places!. .. .Everyone Else - Thanks for your replies so far. Interesting times ahead!

[tinyrice]

Its just seems like the Airbus troubleshooting trees are more focused. You have to use lots of that mechanic stuff on the Boeings because theirs aren't that great. The old DC10 FEFI/TAFI was light years ahead of Boeings FRM/FIM's and even when they went to the 747-400 with CMC's and all that other electrickery, they still just didn't seem to get it. I must be getting old but fixing aeroplanes by pulling the plug and having a cuppa just doesn't seem natural. I must admit I miss the days when "freed by percussion" was the sign-off du jour.

[Bus429]

After working predominantly on Boeings from '77 to '91, I moved to a company operating A300-600s and A310-300s. I hated them to begin with but once I learned Airbus philosophy and the way the manuals worked, I got to to like them. From an installation point of view, I feel the Airbus is assembled with a bit more care, at least with respect to wiring installation (although some of the bundles are tightly wrapped!). The A320 took a bit of effort but, again, once you learn how to use the books, A-OK.. .I'm in a bit of a aviation backwater right now, with no prospect of anything other than 757/767s.. .Conehead - I hear things are reasonable where you are!

[SeldomFixit]

Freighterman - yes - the "powerdown" fix is odd to anyone who ever lived with magamps and valves but the biggest hurdle to be overcome when tansitioning to "DigiGlass" aircraft is, simply put, If there is no message, there is no defect.. .Hard for both drivers and technicians to get a handle on, but nonetheless true.. .For the benefit the origonal poster, get used to neat stuff such as prox switches that are almost universally interchangeable and no 30' flyleads to cope with / airframe system valve actuators that are similarly interchangeable / one size fits all philosophy and execution across the different types of Bus ( except for the babybusses ). Except for the fact that the "Bastages" sank the Rainbow Warrior, I could almost love em !!. .It's mostly drivers who have to strap the bus on for an extra hour to fly the same sector length as a Boeing that complain about it. I have $50 that says in 12 months, you'll love it.

[Plastique]

We had a delagation of Qantas here in HK about a month ago and I was advising on service readiness, based on CX experience.. .. .Basically on any FBW Airbus, follow the TSM step by step. Make use of the PFR and the MCDU functions.. .. .The A330's going to Oz will have the latest landing gear, flight controls and bleed enhancements, and the custom cargo loading system you are getting from Telair (a la Boeing freighter) should both keep unions and LAME's happy.. .. .The less paper cockpit concept and the HUD which Qantas have specified are a bit novel and if you ask me it is in those areas you are likely to get most glitches, as they are bolt-on third-party goodies.. .Thankfully the aircraft is finally getting mature - I have been working in Design and Tech Services on the A330/A340 since 1993, so believe me the aircraft you will be getting will be streets ahead of what went into service in 1993.

[tinyrice]

Mag amps and valves.......?? I only just found out that "fly by wire" didn't meant bloody great steel cables.

[P CLIP]

Work B757/B767 and A320/321 Airframes/Engines with avionic extensions. Us lesser mortals with little electrical knowledege (who wants it any way)apart from changing light bulbs at home, oop's sorry filaments... Give me a Boeing anyday, actually a DC10 would be better, but there goes a past life.. I feel sorry for you boys who have to convert to JAR66, . .Heres to a pleasant retirement.

[gas_man]

but isn't the 777 as electronic as the bus?

[Leatherman]

Far too technical all of you!Boeings are better than Airbus for sheltering under in the rain!
This is due of course to the differing fuselage shapes.But you all knew that eh?:cool: :rolleyes: :D

[woderick]

can only amplify the positive responses. Insist on manuals on CD. When you have them take time to learn how to use them, and follow the troubleshooting to the letter, even though at times using brain and schematics you cant see where they are going. several times I have not been able to follow where the 330 tsm was going but it fixed it !! I have been workiing Busses for the last five years 320 + 330 along with 737, 747, & 757 and there is no comparison Airbus is best but you have to know how to work the manuals and they only work properly on a pc:)

[redtail]

Some of the bad feelings for Airbus over here came from when the A320 was first introduced. The manuals were on film and the TSM was only one book, about 250 pages thick. The local Airbus rep was a busy individual. Now the TSM is about eight or nine books.

Screw it. I want TAFI and a LAMM. Will settle for the 757 FIM (Block 113 "No problem found, go fly aircraft")

[Flightmech]

Having worked the Boeings & the Bus, i have to agree with some of you about the DC10 TAFI/FEFI. Give me that anyday. Also the MD11 (and now the MD10) FIM and LAMM manuals are good to work with. :cool:

[Bullishit]

:peoings are better anyday,than the Scarbus.believe me i know.