Are most pleased with the limitations, i.e. flight controls, reverse thrust available, auto-braking effectiveness, i.e. two wheels per main gear instead of four? How about the simplicity of engaging autopilots and then disconnecting, in order to manually fly (to be a real pilot, for those who have little such background...)? Do any pilots outside the US hand-fly
the Airbus up to about 15,000', assuming that your airline Flt. Ops Chief Pilots/Fleet Captains are not afraid of your doing that?
How about with experienced pilots (with about 5,000 hours+) who already flew FMC aircraft such as the CRJ, Embraer, F-70 737-500, MD-88, B-757, etc?
Forgetting an employer's policies on manual flying, is the Airbus 320 etc just as easy to hand fly as on the 757 etc, regarding flying and non-flying ("handling") pilots' duties in a dense traffic environment?
One of our very experienced Captains told me that he was a bit disappointed with several limits which are imposed by Airbus systems designers upon the pilots-maybe the A-320 was his first FMC aircraft. Our most junior Airbus FO is probably over 35 years old with at least 6,000 hours (if total background in transports vs tactical). On the other hand, many guys love the airplanes. For a large number, the 319/320 or even the 330, is their first plane with an FMC and autothrottles. I'm seeking objective opinions based on operating style from a pilot's viewpoint, and am not interested in a nationalistic (or trans-Atlantic) Airbus versus Boeing (McD.) debate, Euro versus US, Toulouse versus Texas/Wash. state etc.
