First on the interface question.... An interface is just a set of means of inputs and outputs for interaction. Every airplane has an interface which consists of its instrument system and control inputs (yoke, sidestick, etc). These interfaces ARE important and one should not ignore the problem just because the interface is standardized.
Also I think that one legitimate concern about Airbus is that they have sold increasingly complex airplanes as requiring LESS pilot training. In fact, with added complexity, I think MORE training should be required.
Looking at the statistics, it seems however that airplanes are getting safer. One cannot argue that the A330 has a bad safety record at the moment, nor do other airbus planes. Certainly all Airbus planes to date have better safety records than the B747. However, PJ2 is exactly correct that a lot of the argument is prejudice from years of
PR on behalf of those opposed to the trends.
Originally Posted by PJ2
This does not mean that this design, just like any other design, does not have it's compromises and problems. Every aircraft design has and it is trite to say or argue otherwise that "one design is superior to another". The record speaks for itself, and no one...absolutely no one, is casting an eye towards the most advance airliner in existence, the Dreamliner, and saying the same things and it is far, far more automated than any Airbus. Prejudice does this.
I dunno. I personally thought the possibility that a passenger might have been able to hack the flight control computers on the 787 might have removed the pilot even more from being in control..... The problem here was interfaces which should not have been available (there should be no access to flight control interfaces from the main cabin)!