Overall, statistics just confirm that an airplane is a very safe place to be in, but that the 320 series "wash" the 737 series … not too sure what you mean ?
A serious event like HAM would not appear in such statistics, but is relevant in the way Airbus is modifying its Flight Control System in the most discrete way without revealing proper information.
Suddenly, as mentioned by the BFU, you realise that part of a FCOM paragraph on the crosswind landing just vanished … !?
What is in that paragraph now, I don't know, my book is not up to date. Anyone ? (FCOM 3.03)
Do you have an explanation on that ?
Or after a serious event you learn that the manufacturer did not consider as necessary to advise the pilots that after a brief rebound on one main gear they will get only half deflection of the control surfaces, which means that the very next second the airplane will respond very differently to the same sidestick input.
No need to say that the FCS has been modified since … maybe, who would know it anyway ?
No consistency in the flight control response is questionable.
Sorry but I find such behaviour and philosophy quite
unpredictable.
In that regards, I find the Airbus attitude as arrogant, and transparency is simply not in their line of thinking.
Except from the FBW Airbus, I’m not aware of any airliner being "extensively modified" in its Flight Control System ?
Why such modification still 20 years later, is it really because the vast majority of pilots feel "at home" … ?
If you ask me, FBW Airbus are great airplanes, but too much is happening on these birds at the ground proximity, enough that the Airbus engineering itself does not seem on top of it.