In a boeing I could crank it over to a 45 degree AoB but I couldn't do that in an Airbus
Sure about that one Nev?
If you fly the bus you might want to do some more reading, if you don't you are making statements based on ignorance. Anyway, in airline operations, why would you ever want to "crank it over" to 45 degrees let alone more? Control laws in the Airbus allow a full normal range of control deflection, you would only find them intruding on your skygodlike inputs when reaching what would be considered by any normal definition, to be an unusual attitude.
To make a Airbus something resembling an aeroplane you would have to turn off the protection modes and go to something resembling manual reversion.
Thats just plain BS. The usual anti Airbus sentiment, probably from someone who has never touched one. By the way, Direct Law on the bus is nothing like manual reversion in the Boeing.
If you're talking about boeing yes that is correct, if you're talking about an Airbus then that isn't necessarily true. You never control the aircraft until you start turning off the protection modes.
Yet more BS. For a start there is no such thing as "protection modes". The aircraft has control laws. I am also pretty sure that Airbus aircraft aren't flying around the sky not being "controlled" by the pilots.
This is not a thread discussing the pros/cons of Boeing v Airbus, it is about the flying abillity, or lack thereof, of the people charged with the responsibility of flying them, whether Airbus or Boeing. Why do people feel the need to slag off Airbus or Boeing based on their own experience and lack of knowledge? I have seen pilots who would struggle to fly either with everything turned off (in this case I would prefer to be in the airbus). Conversely I fly with people who could fly a house brick if you could get it off the ground. Mainly because they are keen, interested and knowledgeable pilots who work hard to maintain their flying skills, both with the stick and the automatics.