Easyjet Planning $4bn Aircraft Order - Boeing or Airbus? [Archive]

In trim

7th January 2002, 12:54

There is a mod which will allow up to 150 on an A319. I believe there needs to be a slight change to emergency exits. In 'easy' config they would presumably remove much of the forward galley / wardrobe area to get another couple of rows in.

Whilst easy have, until now, gone for a single type, which obviously has a lot of benefits, there are also benefits with having 2 separate fleets.....imagine 75'ish 737's and the same number of A319's.....a lot of bargaining power between the two manufacturer's rather than being 'captive' to just one of the suppliers.

If they want to get into this dual-fleet position, with good bargaining power, then now is the time to start considering it.

Brakes to Park

7th January 2002, 13:34

Capitano , don't know what 737s you're flying but they sure must be different to the ones I fly. All the pilots I know love the -700 particularly and the machines are incredibly reliable.

FlapsOne

7th January 2002, 14:00

Brakes to Park

I agree entirely.

LTN Man. This continues (and boring) argument between Airbus and Boeing is ludicrous. The 737 is certified Cat 3B. What you get on the line depends on customer order.

This new order for EZ could well include the CAT 3B option for Boeing if they decide to go down that route.

IMHO it would be better to stick with Boeing to simplify the training impact and obvious nuisance factor of operating different types.

My vote would be for some -800s to cover those routes EZ now has that are being heavily subscribed.

euroboy

7th January 2002, 14:07

OK then 319 in very tight config.

StressFree

7th January 2002, 15:19

Capitano,
I dont know what 737's youve been flying but youre way off the mark. I fly an NG and its excellent. Youre talking out of your ar*e..........

<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

Fonck

7th January 2002, 15:19

Hey chaps !

I don't care about the final choice, I just care about 75 times 10 pilots jobs <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

Cheers,
Fonck

--------------------------------------------------
Look through the window <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

Big Tudor

7th January 2002, 15:23

Where the hell are they going to put them all ?? LGW is hardly empty, neither is LTN even in todays climate. Perhaps a new EZY hub opening somewhere ?

dwlpl

7th January 2002, 17:18

Flaps One,

"My vote would be for some -800s to cover those routes EZ now has that are being heavily subscribed", which ones are they?

Greg Baddeley

7th January 2002, 17:38

Good one, Fonck; a bit of cheerful news won't ever go amiss - get yer CV's out lads!

FlapsOne

7th January 2002, 18:03

dwlpl

EDI, AMS and BFS to name but 3.

The Scotland/Ireland/AMS routes are very well subscribed.

Augustus Finknottle

7th January 2002, 18:47

Flaps One,

Big Flaps might make you smile, but Big Slats are nicer to eat. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

rigidity

7th January 2002, 18:55

I thought Easyjet were considering the purchase of Coventry Airport.....that would sort out where to put some of em. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

f/spninx

7th January 2002, 19:40

easyjet has 9 737-700 all Cat3a from no 17 onwards they will all be Cat3b.

neil armstrong

7th January 2002, 20:16

Very nice putting so many seats in a aircraft.
I did fly ryanair last week(737-200) and there was no way that i would fit between the seats (thanks to the pilots for letting me sit on the Jumpseat).
I know people want cheaper tickets , but i'm willing to pay a little more if they would give me more leg room.
I will inform my company not to sent me anywhere on Ryanair again if they want to keep me off the sicklist.

Neil

Few Cloudy

7th January 2002, 20:18

Well boys,

So they tell us, the rumour is based on fact - both that they want a lot of ships and that they are looking at all options. The 319 can be upgraded as mentioned above.

The Prisoner

7th January 2002, 21:05

I just flew out of L'Pool with EZ recently. What ever the type they operate, the check in was a disaster, safety was a joke, and most the pax had an axe to grind due to the gash nature of the operation.
I'll try hard to avoid opting for this low cost option in future. Im not a sheep to be hearded, Stelios.

LGW Vulture

7th January 2002, 21:18

Proliferation of the air travel market has happened. However, thanks to the likes of ezy and MOL's lot, the future still looks bright for the mainstream carriers.

Just think, all those pax that have been introduced to the concept of flying, by the likes of ezy et al, because of low fares, will soon look to alternatives because they are prepared to pay more for a quality product.

BA, bmi, BEA, your future is secure. You'll just have to pay big time to get your slots back!!!!

dundoniandean

7th January 2002, 22:59

LGW Vulture

Do you really believe that people will fly with easyJet just so that they can try flying and then change to the (used to be) bigger boys in order to get a sandwich and a cup of coffee?!?

I've got to disagree seeing as how easyJet have been operational for 6 years with ever increasing load factors. They are very well established on their routes me thinks - enough to keep hold of and improve their market share.

If you think that sitting tight will help BA, bmi and BEA etc., then why are bmi rumoured to be relauching as a different brand, BEA already having done so on some routes and BA, well losing £2m per day is hardly worth commenting further on..... <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

The future's bright - the future's orange!!

Jambo Buana

8th January 2002, 00:45

Your all talking crap! The NG is not yet CAT3B, most of you are wannabes and haven't got a clue about airbus or boeing. So get lost.

SkyCruiser

8th January 2002, 00:53

Classic PPRUNE,
A positive bit of news in a negative time for our industry, and what do you lot write about?

It makes me wonder!

dik dastardly

8th January 2002, 03:34

How about going for a hybrid..take a 320 fuselage, fill it full of boeing NG kit. easy! more room for the drivers and the pax.

calltheball

8th January 2002, 04:00

Beanflicker

Who mentioned bmi rebranding??????
Not one I've heard- Surely there's room for everyone???

BR Calltheball

Norman Stanley Fletcher

8th January 2002, 04:24

Michael B - I can cope with anyone preferring one aircraft to another on grounds of informed personal preference. I struggle more with ill-considered views that are gleaned from rumours and half-truths. I am concerned that from your comments you feel that Airbuses are more prone to error than Boeings or that there is some intrinsic error in the man-machine interface within the Airbus. You are stating as established fact something that simply is not. I do not wish to knock Boeings in any way as both manufacturers produce superb aircraft. I fly the A320/1 and although not perfect it would be totally incorrect to say that they have worse safety records than Boeings. Both have excellent safety records and this should be recognised by all responsible pilots. There have been a number of accidents with both B737s and A320/1s (a miniscule fraction of the total flights flown) and for some reason Airbus accidents have been held up as symptomatic of poor design. The most negative comments about Airbuses come from those people who have never flown them. I promise you that the A320 is a stunning aircraft to fly, and has an enormous number of built-in protections that other aircraft do not have. The Airbus will rescue pilots from countless errors and among other things will simply not allow the pilot to overbank, overspeed, over pitch up or down or to stall.

The much-publicised accident involving an A320 flying through trees on TV, which I suspect you are thinking of, was the result of extreme foolishness on behalf of the pilot involved. Had the pilot attempted this manoeuvre with a B737 the exact same result would have ensued, but probably sooner.

As for comments about an Airbus being trickier in emergencies, then again I think you will find this claim simply does not stand up to investigation. Any modern, complex airliner can be prone to difficulties in handling emergencies. The Airbus, although not perfect, has excellent systems for emergency handling that I firmly believe provide significant plus points in its favour.

This is in no way an attack on the 737 which has been a superb aircraft for a generation of pilots and passengers. It is to the credit of the 737 that so many of its pilots love it and defend it so vigorously. Perhaps, however, the ultimate testimony is to be found from those who have flown both aircraft. I have not personally flown the 737 apart from the simulator, but I fly nearly every working day with those who have. With virtually no exceptions, every pilot who has done a year or more on the Airbus says he would never go back to the 737. None of these guys has an axe to grind, and their opinion is arguably the most valid of all.

[ 08 January 2002: Message edited by: Norman Stanley Fletcher ]</p>

ojay

8th January 2002, 04:43

NSF,have to mainly agree with you,although a bit over the top with the 'stunning' adjective.Personally ,flown both FBW Airbuses and 737's, both great products of engineering and nice (although totally different) to operate/ fly.I suspect economics will triumph.B/ rgds.

Norman Stanley Fletcher

8th January 2002, 04:56

Ojay - Sorted!

Rongotai

8th January 2002, 05:05

Here are some indicator statistics (not the best, but all I can get without doing a bit of digging):

HULL LOSSES AS A % OF NUMBER BUILT

No losses
A319
A321
737-600
737-700
737-800
737-900

0.5% 737-500
0.8% A320
0.9% 737-300
1.0% 737-400
3.3% 737-100
7.5% 737-200

dundoniandean

8th January 2002, 22:55

calltheball

The bmi thingee: I picked up on a thread on here about a month or so ago that mentioned a rumour that bmi could be soon relaunching as a no-frills carrier. Perhaps only certain routes? (surely not the transatlantic ones!). Perhaps no truth in it at all? That's why I referred to it as a rumour.

There may well be room for all. True. I don't think it can stay as it is though with high fares versus low fares. And in the public's mind easyJet and Ryanair have always been cheap and always will be cheap and therefore will probably be the first airlines they turn to when they need to travel. Just my opinion as a traveller and as a fellow industry employee.

Here's hoping the industry can have more good news for all in the next 6 or so months. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

Trislander

8th January 2002, 23:32

Michael B -

Go back to sipping your champagne and eating your 'All Day Deli'!

Tri :)

Roadtrip

8th January 2002, 23:47

Whatever the decision will be, it won't be based on "I like the Buss better than Boeing, or vice versa." The flyability and safety are statistically insignificant.

The decision will be based on MONEY, just like ALL airline decisions are based.

Mad Max

9th January 2002, 00:24

Yes it's good news for pilots looking for jobs in the UK isn't it? And remember it's 75 x 12 pilots per a/c as we currently work on a crewing ratio of 6 point something per airframe.

I know that our company isn't to everyone's liking and I do sympathise with some of our colleagues in "Full Service" Airlines who wish that everything would just stay the same. But the world, (in short-haul anyway) has changed for ever in Europe and you just gotta move with the times.

An example for you.

This is genuine and was told to me today. My mate and his family want to fly from London to ZRH in the next few weeks, so they went to enquire about the price of tickets. With BA they were quoted £480 each return LHR-ZRH. Not happy with this, they shopped around and they've just bought EZY returns from LTN on the website for a total price of £320 all inclusive.....for all of them to travel! (That's eighty quid EACH including taxes!)

So now try and preach to us about what they're going to be missing when not enjoying the World Traveller experience on a 1 hour 20 minute flight?

Cheery! Max (eJ Spin Doc some say) <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

jetset

9th January 2002, 01:11

Jambo

easy is launch customer for NG Cat IIIB from aircraft 16 (or 17) onwards. Thats about mid year.

No. 12 arrives in Feb.

There you have it!

akerosid

9th January 2002, 01:22

As fine an aircraft as I believe the 319 to be, I honestly cannot see it winning this battle. Low fares airlines succeed because they cut costs to the bone; adding a new aircraft type, with all the training, spares, infrastructure etc. would undermine EZY in its battle against low cost carriers, all of which (exc. Buzz) rely on 737s; I'm not saying the 319 will never make it as a low cost acft, but for whatever reason, the 737 has - be it in Brazil, Canada, Australia or Europe - been the chosen instrument for low cost airlines. EZY has built its success, a proven formula, on the 737, so why change horses now?

That said, I'm sure Airbus recognises very well that it needs to get the 319 into the low cost market and I am sure the market will throw up further chances, perhaps in the guise of a new carrier, but it's not going to help AI's chances with EZY.

partagas

9th January 2002, 02:15

Costs will surely be the primary driver in determining which aircraft are chosen as has been correctly stated in previous posts. However, both manufacturers know this and will be offering the lowest prices commensurate with sound business practice.
One imagines that for small, ad hoc operators , used 737-300s and 737-400s would be attractive.The scenario is different for an airline with such growth potential as easyjet.
Notwithstanding Boeings commendable re-hash of an aging design,the A320 family offers more space,(width and headroom particularly), and thereby greater passenger appeal. It is also a bit quieter in the cabin and cruises a little faster.
Most importantly though there are the advantages of flexibility of aircraft size, in particular the A321 which offers more seating than any 737 variant,whilst providing outstanding fuel economy.
One imagines that easyjet might already benefit from the extra seats for flights to popular destinations such as Malaga during busy periods.
With auxillary centre tanks fitted the 321 will perform a 6 hour sector with a full load of passengers leaving typical reserves.Therefore it is capable of flying from Scotland to Tenerife even when hampered by considerable headwinds.Capacious,long-legged, yet economical aircraft like this have been proven popular in the UK market.The 757 is a good example.
Lufthansa and BMI have borne the disadvantages of operating both fleets of 737s and 320 family simultaneously.You already know what those two operators have decided for the near and long - term future, dont be too surprised if easyjet do the same!

Danish Pilot

9th January 2002, 02:43

Don´t know much about the 737´s and the A320 series from the flightdeck. But there is no question that Airbus are lightyears ahead of Boeing when it comes to where the plane cost money, and thats on the ground. Even if the B737-6/7/800 have slideing carpet it will still take about 20-30 minutes to unload luggage, cargo, and mail on a fully loaded 737. And then it needs to be loaded again. And normally it wil take atleast 4 workers to do the job.

The Airbus can be loaded and unloaded by two workers, because of the container system. If the outgoing payload is at the apron, the turnaround can be done in aprox. 15 min.

We once had a LH A321 that came in 30 min late. We unloaded, and then loaded in 12 minutes, waited for the fueltruck to finish, pax in and out, and they left on time.

Just my oppinion

TDK mk2

9th January 2002, 03:46

I dunno what they'll plump for, but whichever I'm sure they'll be successful with their ethos and accumen. One of my former housemates studied a year behind Stelios at one of the big London universities (UCL I think) and said he had been noted as a star even then.

I must have taken 20 flights with Easy over the years and they've delivered a quality product at a superb price nearly every time, indeed the only time there was a problem it was outwith their control (the big freeze between Xmas and NY in 2000), they brought in a replacement a/c from Titan to get us home and then refunded my fare without my even asking - now that's service. Must have cost them a fortune tho.

More recently I travelled on a 737-700 and from a passenger point of view it is a quality a/c. Engine starting almost indescernable, aircon stayed on and I didn't detect any bus trips. In the cruise it is so quiet - and that was sitting level with the fan disk. Not at all like the A320 I came back from my OPC in in December, noisy and lots of vibration - but then again not the newest being one of the BCal ordered jobbies. Still, wouldn't turn my nose up at anything with fans rather than props straped to it but when and if the time comes I do hope it's orange...

mccar

9th January 2002, 04:19

Danish Pilot- With the recent influx of passengers flying with ezy, ground handling crews have had to be increased from 4 to 5 men to turn the a/c in 20 minutes. (GLA routes)

I agree that the 319 with containers may be turned in 15 minutes but not consistently. There's too much can go wrong with this type of loading procedure - equipment failure etc.
The 737-8 is impossible to turn in a short time due to its monter of a hold!

I'd go with the -700 theory.

Danish Pilot

9th January 2002, 13:12

Tug4isfastest - One guy handling the cargobay transportsystem (with the "joy"-stick in the cargohatch) and the containerlift system outside.

The other drives the container to the trucks.

Where are the 2 - 3 other guys...??? (not counting the catering, fuelman, toiletservice, and cleaning)

Even if the cargobay container transport system fails, just put down the locks, and roll the containers out manually by pulling them. We once had a 767 where the system failed. We had to empty the containers inside the cargobay, lift the container out, empty the next one.....and so on. It took very long time, and it all stops if one container is packed with machinery parts = heavy!! The 757 is the worst of them all. Only a 737-800 without slideing carpet is vorse.... :)

Katy

9th January 2002, 18:26

Somebody told me that they read an article in 'The Guardian' yesterday which stated that Frankfurt is to be the next easyJet hub.

Can anyone confirm this?

bow5

9th January 2002, 19:01

Not being an ATPL yet, I can't talk about the technical aspects of the 737 vs Airbus argument.

However, the fact that an airline is willing to put faith in the market to that extent is very good news for all of us, wanabees and existing pilots alike.

Moaning about EJ's service etc. is all well and good but from a purely pilots point of view this is bloody good news, irrespective of which aircraft they eventually buy. I'm pretty certain that if EJ offered any one of the un-employed pilots out there a job they would bite their hand off. One thing I am 100% certain about is that if pilots continue moaning at good news like this then there are plenty of people ready to commence training or part way through it who are very hungry and more than willing to take your places.

dwlpl

9th January 2002, 22:29

Katy,

The paragraph that was used is as follows:

"EasyJet, the low cost airline, said yesterday that it could open new hubs at Gatwick, Frankfurt and Paris, with 75 new planes worth £2.7bn, in its biggest expansion programme since it began operations six years ago."

rentaghost

9th January 2002, 22:32

Boeing or Airbus - who knows?
The word from inside is that one of the offers equates to $2.1m per unit (yes, I did say 'per unit') less than the other, and the fighting's only just begun!

In trim

10th January 2002, 02:04

The thing to remember is that this does not just come down to a "per unit" cost issue on the proposed order for 75'ish aircraft....though that is obviously a key driver.

The business plan for easyJet envisages hundreds of aircraft at multiple bases across Europe. Sticking with one supplier means they will be less inclined to give the best price in future orders if they feel confident they have you as a captive customer.

Obviously a saving on these aircraft of such a huge sum is extremely significant, but the real (potential) benefit which the assessment is addressing is future orders.....aircraft 125-175, 200-250, etc. Now if easyJet are by then operating 50+ aircraft of each type, then that negotiation really would get interesting!

In trim

HOVIS

11th January 2002, 17:04

Michael B.

Sorry chief, but you are talking boll*cks!

Why are Boeing redesigning the entire rudder control system on the 737s?

If you look at some stats' then Concorde is the most dangerous a/c! But that has already been done to death elsewhere. (and I don't agree)

For what it's worth, thank the greek gods for Stellios. With all the redundancies in the aviation world at the moment, an order of this magnitude, whoever gets it, is very good news.

MarkD

11th January 2002, 17:13

Michael

you know 95% of statistics are made up? :) :)

And the air disaster websites, [as opposed to NTSB or AAIB] well they have no reason to hype it up, no none at all. <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

And as for the GF A320 - did you read ANY of the PPRuNe threads about it, or the accident reports? Those guys could have been flying a DC-3 that day for all the difference it would have made to the outcome.

AhhhVC813

11th January 2002, 17:18

Unfortunately, regardless of a/c makers or types, people who know nothing about aviation will use so called statistical data to make the sort of ridiculous remarks made by MB. Ah well, c'est la guerre.

xyz_pilot

11th January 2002, 18:44

Easy will go 737, talking to airbus will help them get a very good deal.

(airbus gain by keeping down Boeings profits/increaseing there losses from the deal!!!

Jetavia

12th January 2002, 02:09

Just look at the price SAS paid for their 737-600's .. they got huge discounts..

King Kee

12th January 2002, 13:50

xyz_pilot

Read the posts earlier in this thread. Easy may well end up going Boeing, but the danger there is that they are pretty much locking themselves in to a single manufacturer for the long-term....and this will not get them the best deals on future orders.

If they are operating 125 aircraft, a mix of Boeing and Airbus, and suddenly need another 40 or so, then they can play one off against the other. Shrewd move, and with the size easy is at the moment, and the current aviation climate, a very sensible time to be considering this option.

Best of luck to Stelios and all.....helping to keep some hope in the European aviation industry, which in the long term is good for all of us.

Vee2

12th January 2002, 18:55

Acquiring a further 75 Boeings wouldn't necessarily lock EZY in to Boeing ad infinitum. Look at the deal Boeing came up with at Singapore to get the 777 into service with them.

That apart the Boeing will always have the edge over the Airbus for the low cost operators. The full service (high fare ) carriers operate in to established airports with the infrastructure to cope with large jet aircraft: jetways, container baggage systems etc. The Airbus requires substantial ground support and equipment, it need stairs or jetways and canoot be loaded from ground level without equipment. On the other hand the Boeing has integral stairs and the baggage can be loaded and unloaded by a couple of guys with a donkey and cart as the holds are all accessible from the ground without steps etc.This benefit is substantial to the low cost operator who generally operates in to less well established, or joint civil military airfields e.g. Torp, Treviso, Save, Dinard etc.

As for the pax, they get a tad damp when walking to the airplane in the rain and snow but have you flown bmi from EMA? They have the problem there due to the lack of jetways at the airport.

In trim

12th January 2002, 20:28

Vee2,

Some valid points, but......

1) More ground equipment needed for loading Airbus due to height of holds. May be true when compared with 'old generation' 737's, but the New Generation is taller. Many easyJet stations load the -300 rear hold without belt loaders, etc, but have to use belt loaders for the -700. This point therefore largely irrelevant to the debate.

2) "Acquiring another 75 Boeings wouldn't necessarily lock easy into Boeing". True, but it would make easy less willing to look elsewhere, and Boeing would know that. With the current market conditions (post-Sept 11th), and Airbus keen to break into European low-cost market with this 'modified' A319 to the required config, now is a good time economically to 'make the break'.

In trim.

A and C

12th January 2002, 21:14

some people above seem to be a bit mixed up about the NG 737 and the 3,4,500 aircraft.

The NG normal econ cruse is about M.79 , max alt is FL 410 it is CAT3a (50ftRA 300RVR)and it will move a full pax load (189 on the 800)for 6 hours with normal reserves.

As for the technical reliability I,v had two problems in two years only one stoped the aircraft flying.

Which aircraft should easy buy ?.......the one that is the best deal ,after all this is not a flying club the aim is to make money.

cheer up

12th January 2002, 22:23

A and C - sounds like you're mixed up. Cat 111a aircraft work to an RVR not less than 200m;I went tech. last month six times on the 700 (out of 34 sectors) and the flying club which gave me the 'bug' is still in business fifty years after it was started - I reckon that means it makes a profit! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

cactusbusdrvr

12th January 2002, 22:31

For what its worth, I've flown both A319/320 and all versions of the 737 except for the NG. I rode in back on CO from SEA to EWR on an 800 this past summer and I was pleasantly suprised. Very comfortable. The Bus is great to fly but after 5000 hours in the left seat I'm ready to try something diffrent. I am tired of fighting with flight standards people who want the automation on all the time. I hand fly all my approaches and I would prefer the HUD for CAT 2 or 3 the way SWA does it. I have been in the J/S for a CAT 1 approach and I think it is great. I have always admired the French Aeropostal guys for hand flying their approaches. Its great to have an autopilot and autoland capabilities for times when you are toast from flying all night but as a standard I would rather not.
Easy Jet should continue with 737s not for the above reasons but because it makes the most sense. As much as I dislike the Herb Turds (SWA) for the type of flying and the type of pax they do I admire them for having the best balance sheet in the business and the foresight to stick to their plan. Boeing did not seem to have a problem giving them discounts when they made their last order. A mixed fleet when you are doing the same type of flying makes little sense. We operate both and it forces all sorts of bad crew schedules operating a mixed fleet into the same cities(a lot of 30 hour layovers for no pay).
As far as safety both are the same, just diffrent issues.

In trim

12th January 2002, 23:19

A few previous posts comment on the 737NG only being Cat 3A. Just to take this issue out of the debate, all easy's -700's from about number 12 or so will be delivered Cat 3B. A319 also Cat 3B capable.

Slickster

13th January 2002, 04:56

Face it , the only reason anyone likes the scarebus is because there's a meal tray that folds down in front of you, and the control column doesn't get in the way of your beer gut. Bar that it's effectively working it's way to doing pilots out of a job. If you scarebus fans want that,then fine (in fact you'd probably be happier at your PCs anyway). Personally I'm trained to do this job, and would rather do it, rather than have it subcontracted to bunch of clever geeks, who've worked out that it isn't necessary for pilots to have thrust levers etc etc, ad nauseam.

mjenkinsblackdog

13th January 2002, 11:49

Interesting debate about airbus and boeing bubbling away.
As far as realiability was concerned boeing 737/200 was far more realiable than new shiny ai
rbus a320s in the middle east.
Airbus hydraulic systems and air conditioning systems were not man enough for the job.
Easyjet should stay with boeing both for training and long term maintenance. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

LTN man

13th January 2002, 12:08

Anyone know if easy are going to replace their maintenance tent at Luton with a real hangar?

boss man

13th January 2002, 18:29

easy should go with Boeing, that way we all know there are real pilots up front not play station joc's!
not nice i know but very true in my experience as a training captain after 3 year of flying airbuses pilot lose basic skills even things like decision making

Fat Boy Sim

13th January 2002, 23:06

Boss man, As sweeping statements go..on that one I think you just plugged in the Hoover, Hoovered the bedrooms and swepted majestically down the stairs.

boss man

13th January 2002, 23:16

fat boy slim: the scary thing is i'm right and every one know's it.

northern boy

13th January 2002, 23:20

Boss man, in the last three years I have gone from Boeing to Airbus and back to Boeing again thanks to friend Bin Liner, and apart from a bit of "where the hell is that switch?" I don't feel that my flying ability has been in any way reduced.If you walk like a pilot, talk like a pilot and look like a pilot, then you are one and aircraft type makes little difference IMHO.

Prehaps as a trainer you see more of folk under pressure but day to day I really find the whole Boeing v Airbus debate as amusing but irrelevant in terms of ability of crews.

In terms of Easyjets future acquisition plans, no doubt economics will win the day and rightly so, much as I would like to eat my breakfast off a tray again. The future methinks is Boeing shaped.

mccar

13th January 2002, 23:50

Danish Pilot - 1 man operating controls and hi-loader, 2 men to secure bins on dollies, same 2 to empty bags at belts and hopefully a man to put outbound bins back on to hi-loader.

You said you can pull bins out manually which is very true and takes a VERY LONG TIME. This is what you don't have for an easyjet turnaround!

Airtours 767 "MC" caused serious injury to one handler because the hold system wasn't working.
Health and safety regulations were strictly followed and several workers refused to work on the a/c until it was fixed. I don't like pulling 1 tonne LD8's off an a/c, do you???

Easyjet can't afford to risk more delays because of loading/unloading difficulties. They have to keep it simple ie. 737's.
But not the -800 cos its a f****r of a plane without a carpet!

boss man

13th January 2002, 23:56

If you push buttons and twiddle knobs for years then your skills as a handling pilot diminish.
I too started on Boeings converted to Airbus and back again. During my 1500 hours on Airbuses and on 4 separate aircraft I felt scared, whether Airbus like it or not those of us with the stripes on up front know best, I can tell a junior FO “I have control” its far harder telling the dame plane as we are on a 6.5 degree glide slope its determine to fly.
What ever you fly but especially Airbus joc’s you should fly at least 25 hours a year in a light a/c preferably a twin but a pa28 will do. Go fly in some demanding weather, shoot an approach or two.
I do this a lot at weekends with some very experienced pilots, 9/10 airbus joc’s can’t fly the plane most of them will have completed their IR’s in, the Boeing drivers might be a bit rusty but they can fly

mjenkinsblackdog

14th January 2002, 11:23

Bossman remind us not to fly with you.thanks <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

In trim

14th January 2002, 13:55

This started out as a thread on easyJet's assessment of whether to buy a different aircraft type.....a decision which will no doubt be based on sound business / economic principles, following a detailed study.

But surprise, surprise, it's turning into another Boeing v Airbus debate. Please don't let another thread go down the same path as many others in the past!!

In trim

blended winglet

14th January 2002, 19:48

Boeing / Airbus ?

I know, go for Boebus, then every ones happy !?
(Airing sounds silly !)

Back to the actual thread !
EZY certainly got it right it seems,
thats a phenomenal expansion from their start up.

aviatorwrld

15th January 2002, 06:44

So back when this interesting topic was first introduced....I wondered and asked when we might here a verdict on this all important issue.....as so much time has gone by.....I will ask again as the debate has been thoroughly discussed!

I would hope that EasyJet would make a decision soon so to end the debate for awhile or perhaps change the comments to things like "I told you so!"

Danish Pilot

15th January 2002, 14:10

Tug4itsfastest:

"....1 man operating controls and hi-loader, 2 men to secure bins on dollies, same 2 to empty bags at belts and hopefully a man to put outbound bins back on to hi-loader.
You said you can pull bins out manually which is very true and takes a VERY LONG TIME. This is what you don't have for an easyjet turnaround...."

Hmmmm, we do it (did it, regarding myself) different. The total time to handle an aeroplane of equal size is more or less the same. But regarding the 737's time i spent out at the apron, where as on Airbus time i spent in the baggage sorting aera, and not on the apron. We had one guy for the cargobay, and the highloader. The other guy drives the bins from the loader to the dollies. Thats two! The guy who drives the bins into the baggage claim, comes from a different aera, and he secure the dollies (takes about 2 sek.) When the bins are out, only compartment #4/5 is left, but not much in there. So it takes two guys, at least that how we did it for 5 years, no problems at all. When we only are two guys (normally three) on the Airbus 319/20/21 we are flexible, since we don´t care who have to drive the bins into baggage claim, just as long someone shows up to drive them. That is a very flexible system since we can move from one plane to another in no time. I cannot understand why you say it is hard to pull the bins out manually...? This is where I mean that Airbus are ahead of Boeing. The floor in the cargobay on the A319/20/21 is flat and no holes to step into. The floor have hundreds of small golfsize balls, which the bins rest on. I can pull and push them with one hand, takes no strengh at all. That is not possible on the Boeing.

".....Airtours 767 "MC" caused serious injury to one handler because the hold system wasn't working.
Health and safety regulations were strictly followed and several workers refused to work on the a/c until it was fixed. I don't like pulling 1 tonne LD8's off an a/c, do you???....."

No, and I wouldn't even try, because its a Boeing, so it cannot be done... :) Remember that the LD8 containers, are bigger than the ones used for the Airbus A320 series. The floor on the 767 prevent that the containers can move without the use of the on/off loading system. On the A320 that is possible.

"....Easyjet can't afford to risk more delays because of loading/unloading difficulties. They have to keep it simple ie. 737's.
But not the -800 cos its a f****r of a plane without a carpet!...."

Precise...!! They have to keep it simple, and go for the plane that spend time up in the air, not on the ground. Airbus please...!!!!!

(sorry for my spelling)

RAT 5

16th January 2002, 02:26

It doesn't really matter which type they chose, although you can shoot holes in a Boeing and it will still fly, but by the time all these a/c arrive and the business has picked up, who is going to be around to fly them???? That was the question before OBL. and will remain the question over the next few years. And, if charter airlines, the originators of cost conscious operations, chose Boeings, I'd be inclined to go with their choice.
Remember though, there is more to life than strapping an aluminium tube to your arse for 10 hours a day.