From a Boeing to an Airbus - Pilot Point of View

[Dirkou]

Hello

I've been flying during the last 2 years a B767-300ER. It was my first aircraft as a pilot and I enjoyed it a lot: simple to understand, easy to understand scan flows and routines and a reliable aircraft.

Now I'm starting the A320 type rating.

Question: from you experienced folks that flew both a Boeing and an Airbus, what are the main differences between them from the pilot point of view?

What suggestions do you have for me to be more efficient while studying?

Tks. Andre

[MrBernoulli]

Hmmmmm. A retrograde step I fear. The Scarebus will probably frighten you at some stage by doing things that Airbus says it can't ....... and then later, very grudgingly, agrees is a software problem. :sad:

[Gretchenfrage]

Dead stick and dead throttles ----------- deadly wrong design.
Always follow ECAM, unless it is wrong --------- and it is, especially when you would desperately need it.
etc.

[hetfield]

Dead stick and dead throttles ----------- deadly wrong design.
Always follow ECAM, unless it is wrong --------- and it is, especially when you would desperately need it.
etc.

Excuse me, what are you talking about?

Dead throttles? You CAN use the thrust-levers (!) like on any aircraft else.

Dead stick? Only if you switch off all five Flight-cntl-computers:ugh:

Deadly wrong design? No, just different to BillBoeing.

Wrong ECAM? If so, it should have been corrected bei paper check list.

[vapilot2004]

I have only sim time on the A320. My PIC experience includes the 737 Classic.


Going from the old lady to the A320 was an eye opener. First thing you will notice is how apparently easy Airbus has made your job. From the ingenious Flight Control Laws of the FBW system, to the easy to follow ECAM action items when things go 'by-the-book wrong', to the lights out - all is well control panel design, I think you will find your short bus experience a pleasant one. They have thoughtfully pre-programmed many of the systems tasks for you. (not unlike the 777)


It bears repeating:

The Airbus FBW and systems design make it more difficult for a flight crew to screw things up completely in most normal operations and the standard non-normals. Workload is minimised.

I have learned:

Fear not the computers and fly her.

The transition to the sidestick (I'm a leftie) was no problem from either seat.

Obey the ECAM. :) If all else fails, the thing's got a bunch of reset 'buttons'. (CBs) :}

Green=good White=informative Amber=bad

I would recommend some sim time with the focus on non-standard (are they ever standard?) failures with an experienced crew member and take notes during any debriefings. :ok:

More (real) wisdom beyond my pittance hopefully will follow.

[Viscount Sussex]

:confused:
Not easy to advise you on this one. Try to go with an open mind. I am far more experienced on Boeing than on Airbus. This doesn’t mean I am any good at either. I have now been on the Airbus for around 18 months and it still catches me out at times. However the Airbus will probably grow on you. I was partly against it at the beginning, but now although I sometimes still get a bit puzzled with it, I am starting to like it. Get to learn how to use ECAM. If after using ECAM you still have time, look at the QRH and if you still have time dig out the FCOM 3. Listen to those good guys that have been on it for some time. Be methodical and disciplined with it. Not always easy.
Good luck.
:ok:

[GeeJay]

For me it is just a question of attitude. I always liked the planes I flew. When you change brand, you change philosophy. But I found it really easy to adapt.
I flew B737 (200 to 500), the famous DC10 and I'm on A330 since 8 years (after 2 years of A340). I've more than 18.000 hours and still like to switch off everything (A/P, F/D, A/T) and can tell you the bird is flying great even in rough conditions.

Ecam? very helpful in case of...

Side stick? yes, it's rather sensitive in the beginning but a few hours in the sim and you feel it.

Fixed throttles? switch off the A/T whenever it suits you.

The attitude limitations?? Tell me how often you would need more than 67° bank with pax on board.

But if a Cy offers me place on B777 I would not hesitate to take it.... just for the pleasure to discover another plane!!!

Happy landings

[flightleader]

Just don't compare why Boeing do this this way and Airbus do that that way.Airbus flightdeck like an office and Boeing is a piece of mechine.Airbus has superior FBW system,trust the computers while Boeing has great hardware system redundancy.Too bad they do work together.

[Joel Mitard]

:Try to go with an open mind. I was partly against it at the beginning

I do agree with Viscount Sussex. I've flown 8 years on Boeing (737-200 then 737-500 and now since 2002 on 747-400), I've flown 4 years on A340 also. At the beginning, as Viscount Sussex, I was totaly against Airbus philosophy. I've been an aerobatic pilot and glider instructor for several years and I thought Airbus CDVE is a non sense. Against all odds, I falled in love with A340. It's a wonderfull aircraft design to work with.
Just disregard people that haven't flown Airbus who are saying a lot of things without knowning really what they are talking about...
Just go with an open mind... You'll find a very efficient aircraft. I'm sure you'll appreciate it.

[Bearcat]

a bad handler can get away with a lot on the airbus......a good handler can look very ordinary.

[vapilot2004]

a bad handler can get away with a lot on the airbus......a good handler can look very ordinary.

Philosophically succinct.


I am in awe Mr. Bearcat. :cool:

[A4]

Perhaps I'm not in position to comment as I've only ever flown the Airbus narrowbody series. I've flown the B737-300 simulator a few times - and enjoyed it despite having only used a side stick for the last 8 years!

I train on the Bus and many of the guys (and gals) I train are converting from the 737. Almost without exception the preferred platform is the Bus. A much better office than the 737NG and no comparison with the 733 is the usual comment. The Bus does do things a bit differently but in the normal day to day operation of the aircraft it is straight forward once you understand it. When you have problems the ECAM covers 95% of issues BUT it does require discipline, a methodical approach and good crew teamwork.

The Bus is a self monitoring aircraft - it will look after you to a certain extent. For example if you don't put the Packs on after T/O you'll get an ECAM caution. If you're flying round single engine without the fuel x-feed open you'll get an ECAM caution before you run the tank dry. The comments about protections..... well my car has got 6 airbags. I don't plan on using them but it's nice to know they are there! Probably the most useful protection for day to day operations is knowing that if you get a hard GPWS "Pull up" You can just hit TOGA and pull the stick the whole way back, instantly, without worrying. Did it recently in the sim and hit 11,000 FPM :}

The side stick and FBW are great. Sidestick doen not take long to master and the self trimming makes it a very easy aircraft to fly. I've read the comments about being not being able to monitor the other guys inputs due to no S/S feedback - and it's true, your monitoring channel is now purely a visual one. However, this has never caused me a problem.

Go in with an open mind, embrace the philosophy - don't fight it and you will see the Airbus is an excellent product.

A4 :ok:

[Joel Mitard]

Hmmmmm. A retrograde step I fear.

That was my feelling when change from 340 to 747-400. "A little step for man but a giant retrograde leap of 30 years in terme of technologie for the pilot".... Anyway B744 is a good funny aircraft and I love it. But when thing goes wrong I miss my 340....

[wileydog3]

Hello
I've been flying during the last 2 years a B767-300ER. It was my first aircraft as a pilot and I enjoyed it a lot: simple to understand, easy to understand scan flows and routines and a reliable aircraft.
Now I'm starting the A320 type rating.
Question: from you experienced folks that flew both a Boeing and an Airbus, what are the main differences between them from the pilot point of view?
What suggestions do you have for me to be more efficient while studying?
Tks. Andre


Typed on the 707/727/737/757/767.. and 320.

I enjoyed the -320. Study so you know what the airplane is telling you and what mode it is in. The FMS is different so it will take some time to acclimate.

The side stick and non-moving throttles are a non-issue. You will find yourself spending more time actually looking at the instruments versus getting info from autothrottle tactile feel which may be wrong as they move whether the engine is still cooking or not.

The side stick eliminates the obstruction in seeing your displays. And once you learn to go back to your initial flight instruction of flying with your fingers you will find the 'bus a simple airplane to fly.

In windshear, you just pull aft... no hunting max AOA.. and no hunting for the 'nibble'.

Crosswinds, always an issue with new guys to the 'bus... remember the sidestick commands a roll *rate* rather than a fixed aileron position. So doing the cross control doesn't work well.

The Radio Management Units (RMU) can be confusing at first. Just think before you push buttons which is a good rule in any airplane.

And finally, do the same thing with the 'bus as with any other airplane.. play to the strengths, respect the weaknesses and then bid for the trips that pay the most, have the best layovers and the nicest flight attendants. Everything else is just parochial arguments.

[Stone Cold II]

I flew the 733 and 737NG then converted onto the Airbus. I wasn't keen to go on the Airbus at first being a Boeing fan but after flying the Airbus for a couple of months I started to prefer it to the Boeing.

From the start I found the Airbus by far more comfortable to work in compared to the Boeing. It doesn't take long to get used to the sidestick and some of the thing the Airbus can do are fantastic, an NDB approach is so easy in the Airbus and you can fly a typical crosswind landing technique (even though it's not recommended) as long as you remember you can't keep applying the side stick to the left or right otherwise it will continue to bank in that direction, all you do is apply a little bit of side stick to get some bank on and let go of the stick, the Aibus will hold that bank angle and just use a touch of rudder to keep it straight just as you cross the threshold of the runway it seems to work well but is a bit more trickey than the Boeing.

The only downside to the Airbus compared to the Boeing seems to be build quality. Some of our oldest Airbuses are only a couple of years old, even ones that are a couple of months old are starting to fall apart on the interior side of things.

I'm sorry but I can't see a 25 year Airbus airframe flying in 3rd world countries like some of the very old Boeings.

Both makes of aircraft are brilliant but if I had the choice I think I would take the Airbus.

[divinehover]

The only drivers to knock Airbus are the dinosaur pilots who haven't flown them yet. I've flown B727-200, B747-400 and now A319. Wonderful a/c to fly whether it be a CAT111B autoland or a manual thrust, autopilot out visual approach onto a runway with no instrument or visual aids. Tip: Try to learn as much of the Airbus talk as possible (MCDU, ELAC, SEC ect.)There are lot's of these. Side stick is the best thing since sliced bread. Boeing should drop the ego and get rid of the yoke. Having flown the best handling airliner ever designed (B727) I believe I'm qualified to say this. The Americans invented it anyway (F16). The ECAM is great but can lead you down the garden path in one or two emergencies, so know your QRH. It takes a bit longer to get comfortable with an Airbus than a Boeing but I guarentee you'll love it.

[luc]

Big difference when you get hungry, on the bus you don't have to eat with tray on your lap!!!!!!!!
Happy flights

[foxmoth]

There is a load of rot talked by Boeing pilots about the 'Bus, Flying it will not be a big problem - I went 757/767 to the 320 (now on 330 as well) the biggest problem you will have on the 320 is performance which is not as good as the 767, though operating in the States it is not quite the same problem as operating out of the Greek Islands! Don't believe everything you hear from those that have not flown it , and enjoy.:ok:

[A4]

Having a dead stick and throttle must be the worst design flaw in any modern airliner, no wonder the french are taking the A320 designers to court.
What in the world are you guys talking about "d/c the A/T at any time" ??? what does that give you? CLB thrust when you want to decend? Manual thrust?. how is this rectifying the fact that the A/T provides no feedback, keeps you effectivly out of the loop and does not give any early warning of an A/T failure?

Dead stick dead throttle. Do you know the likelyhood of ending up with a dead stick? Absolutelty minute. In 8 years and 6000 hours on the Airbus I've had ONE failure in flight of one of the FIVE computers. If you lose all five you can still fly the aircraft through rudder and trim whilst you get at least one of the flight control computers back online. The chances are extremely slim.

To play devils advocate - how many rudder hardovers does it take to spin in? No I don't want an A versus B debate but some of the comments about Bus are just not valid/biased.

Yes -shock horror you CAN disconnect the A/THR at ANY time - wow!!! If you disconnect the A/THR correctly i.e. retard THR LVRS to the present thrust postion as indicated on your engine display and then disconnect, you get........ current thrust. Why would you get CLB thrust?

It's true that A/THR does not give physical feedback by moving the levers so you DO have to adapt and improve your visual and aural scan. In 8 years this has not been a problem for me. :hmm: If you've disconnected the A/THR you won't get a warning about A/THR failure.....coz it's not in anymore. If it's active and it fails - believe me you will get a warning!

I think the comment about the French taking Airbus to court just shows what a stupid world we live in - and is symptomatic of the "let's sue someone culture" so beholden to those on the other side of the pond.....:rolleyes: If you operate the aircraft how it is supposed to be operated then it's no big deal.

A4

[longarm]

"How come I read reports of AT failure in the bus causing speed loss, mode reversion and decend, and the flightcrews first discovery is the TA that follows from the aircraft decending onto traffic below?"


out of interest can you give us a reference to these reports? I would be interested to read them.
As for Dead stick I've had 12 years and 7000hrs never had one flight control computer fail. Its a fantastic aircraft and has looked after me well.


p.s How do I put quotes in the blue box thingy? (makes an airbus look simple)

[wileydog3]

What in the world are you guys talking about "d/c the A/T at any time" ??? what does that give you? CLB thrust when you want to decend? Manual thrust?. how is this rectifying the fact that the A/T provides no feedback, keeps you effectivly out of the loop and does not give any early warning of an A/T failure?

What are we talking about? Something you may not know anything about. When the AT is disconnected, you can move the throttles through the arc just like on the Boeing.

Out of the loop? How? Are you solely dependent on throttle movement for your cues? If so.. not good.

When instructing in the -300, I used to induce a governor failure with the AT engaged. The thrust lever on the engine with the failure would retard to idle to try and control the thrust. When that failed with the AP on and in an LNAV/VNAV mode, the second thrust lever would then come back to idle to try and maintain the commanded speed. THEN when the crew finally looked at the instruments or when the red dot illuminated showing the engine WAY over normal temp and %RPM, they would disconnect the AP and what a fun time that was..

Anyway, it is just an airplane with different systems. And if you really want to jump on failures, you may go research the 777 that had the software failure a few years ago.

[wileydog3]

Big difference when you get hungry, on the bus you don't have to eat with tray on your lap!!!!!!!!
Happy flights
Didn't have to on the 727 either.. kick the FE out of his seat, kick back with the paper and have a leisurely meal. But yes, the pull out table is very nice.

[Maz11]

I've had AT fail or rather corrupted FMC input in the boeings causing the AT to command idle thrust in cruise, and that is something you notice cause they..err..move

Yes well thats a Boeing problem isn't it. I've been on the "Scarebus" for 3 years now, I've had one flight computer fail on me, and that was just after start up. Its a pleasure to fly, and as long as you know the systems and WATCH THE FMA, you'll always konw what its doing/trying to do.

As it is with any aircraft, if you don't like whats its doing, take the A/P out and do it yourself.

[Slasher]

Im suposed to do a 320 course in Jan. Been a Boeing boy since birth and cut my command teeth on the 737.

Ive been reading up and asking around. Seems this A320 is quite ok when everything is working just hunkey-dorey. Soon as you get a REAL problem (fuel leak, blocked pitot/static, loss of prim ess AC feed) the ECAM gives you crap. Follow it blindly and your dead.

Wasnt there an incident in UK where a cockpit went dark and lost all the screens and the prob was ess AC feed? The all-singing dancing ECAM had the required drill many pages down!

Ive tryed reading the FCOMs and QRH. What a nighmare! Boeing has 99% of all the info you need in the QRH. Scarebus has 99% of all the info you need scattered within 5 confusing books (1% youll never find)!

Im still deciding if I realy should do a course on this thing.

[flightleader]

Just disregard people that haven't flown Airbus who are saying a lot of things without knowning really what they are talking about...



Best piece of advice!

RTO,

When you turn the a/c,do you look at the control wheel displacement or bank angle?When you move the thrust level to set the thrust you want,do you look at the thrust level or the EPR or N1 gauge?

Now you know why Airbus made them stay put.

[Clandestino]

How come I read reports of AT failure in the bus causing speed loss, mode reversion and decend, and the flightcrews first discovery is the TA that follows from the aircraft decending onto traffic below?


I eagerly await for the links to the report. Provided it happened as described, the crew involved has some serious problems with basic instrument flying - not noticing speed drop and unwanted descend is something I find it hard to believe professional pilots are capable of. You know, FBW Airbi do have attitude indicator, altimeter, IAS and VSI - just presented a bit differently, compared to classic cockpits. They're not so different to be urecognisable or ambigous, though.

Gretchenfrage and RTO, I assume that by "dead stick" you mean stick that doesn't move with flight controls movement rather than FBW failure. Did I guess it correctly?

And the throttles that doesn't move with autothrust on, where's the problem with that? I mean, does anyone really use thrust levers position as indication of engine thrust, rather than checking N1/EPR? Hopefully not.

Slasher, nothing is to be followed blindly but more often than not ECAM (or even better, QRH) gives the best way to resolve most of the situations. It might be the cultural difference between us, because I wasn't born pilot (let alone Boeing TRed at birth, like you), and had to work long and hard to get into RHS of humble ATR, but with attitudes like "ECAM is crap, QRH is crap" I wouldn't suggest you to take the course. They're not the best possible but they're the best we have and not using them is not an option.

[Gretchenfrage]

Dead stick and fixed throttle.

If you "suddenly wake up" after a jolt or bang, then the first pilots instinctive action is to grab the controls. In a Boeing you will get instant tactile feedback that "it" turns to ... and that the thrust is up high or low. Every research found out that the tactile input is like parallel computer input, 10 times faster than a serial input. Humans react similarily. If you have to collect data via intellectual input (visual on display) you finally get the same values, agreed, but 10 times slower. That's my point.

I would go as far as pretending that Habsheim and Bangalore would have been avoided in a Boeing, because the tactile feedback, however distracted the pilots may have been, would have instinctively told them "...there's NO thrust" and they would have slammed the throttles to the mechanical stop. Any excuse like "they fiddled with the cb's or with wrong modes" is oblivious: If a pilot induced accident could have been avoided by better design, there's no excuse NOT to implement it.

Furthermore there is the pending outcome of the investigation of the Toronto accident. Apparently the inspectors will argue that a disconnection of the AT would have been the better solution. If however you disconnect the AT in a Airbus, you lose some protections. In contrast on a Boeing under such circumstances you need not disconnect the AT. Even if it works badly, by overcorrecting huge gusts, you can leave it in as a valuable back up and protection, but you can hold it back or override it with thrust, if required. This is undoubtedly the much better suited solution and again, there's no excuse NOT to implement a better one for extreme conditions. Especially if the constructor and the operators mostly recommend to use the AT.

That's my point.

[Mr Ree]

A good friend, a trainer on the 737-300, rang me up after a flight. He'd dispatched with the auto thrust u/s.
On approach the flaps and gear were extended.
Then the stick shaker went off.
Totally forgot that he had no auto thrust.

I also flew the Boeing. Loved it.
I'm on the Airbus now. I like it, it's definately a lot easier. But I don't find it a rewarding plane to fly; for me it has no soul.

Agree about the FCOM, not the easiest read. And the QRH binder! What a pain. Literally!

[CONF iture]

I would go as far as pretending that Habsheim ...
Investigate properly first ... the guy in Habsheim was in Manual Thrust, and Manual Thrust in a FBW Airbus is no different from any Manual Thrust.

[Mudfoot]

[QUOTE=longarm;2959829 p.s How do I put quotes in the blue box thingy? (makes an airbus look simple)[/QUOTE]

Look in the lower right corner of the comment box you're reading, there's a button marked "QUOTE". Press it and you will be taken to a new text box with the requested quotation in it. You can edit the quote to suit your response. Very simple, as this is a well-planned and moderated website.* :D

Cheers, y'all.

(*) - I haven't been banned yet...

[Gretchenfrage]

Thanks for the tutoring, CF.

The AT or MT would not be any different ...... if it REALLY would apply thrust when you slam the levers forward.
Now how was it there?
Did they slam them to the stop?
Did the system perform this command?

We can stop it here. Never will we consent.

It is just MY oppinion that Airbus is easier as long as everything works fine, but if something goes the other way, after having flown all three major products, I like Airbus least.

Gretchenfrage out.

[CONF iture]

Thanks for the tutoring, CF.
Sorry Man ... but there is so much misconception on this specific event.

Now how was it there?
The CAPT wrote a book on that, but I could not say if it's avail in English.
Le Pilote est-il Coupable (http://www.chez.com/crashdehabsheim/achat%20du%20livre.htm)
La suite est facile à comprendre. Lorsque j'ai avancé la première fois les manettes des gaz
vers une position intermédiaire, en arrivant au-dessus du terrain de Habsheim, le signal de
commande N1 a été élaboré avec le retard démontré précédemment, ce que j'ai assimilé à une
non-reprise des moteurs. J'ai alors instinctivement repassé les manettes dans le cran 0, avant de
les mettre sur pleins gaz, dans le cran TOG4.La suite est facile à comprendre. Lorsque j'ai avancé la première fois les manettes des gaz
vers une position intermédiaire, en arrivant au-dessus du terrain de Habsheim, le signal de
commande N1 a été élaboré avec le retard démontré précédemment, ce que j'ai assimilé à une
non-reprise des moteurs. J'ai alors instinctivement repassé les manettes dans le cran 0, avant de
les mettre sur pleins gaz, dans le cran TOG4.
Did they slam them to the stop?
Yes

Did the system perform this command?
Not exactly as expected

Gretchenfrage out.
Don't be offended.
Have a good day !

[Gretchenfrage]

CF
Sorry, I got a little upset.
It’s the constant battering by Airbus and it’s home crowd that gets to me and it shouldn’t. By battering I mean:
“you should have … not done this … rather done that … checked that … known better … read this … not followed ECAM in that case … done the QRH … not done the summaries … etc. etc.”
- Extremely wise words for afterwards.
I said it before and repeat myself: Not being the perfect pilot, I sometimes forget or screw up. Recovery is the magic word. To be able to do just that, in due time, I want a partner, mechanical or human, that’s simple and doesn’t give me a hard time. Any more sophisticated solution, programm or any more intellectual by-seater (or worse back- seater), both of them taking me longer to grasp, might be a enrichement for leisure hours and philosophy. But I definitely prefer the simple and fast to understand other option for my professional flying business, because I believe it gives me the better chance of survival.
Just analyse these quotes, they somewhat sum up my criticism:
le signal de commande N1 a été élaboré avec le retard démontré précédemment,
(the N1 command signal was processed with the formerly demonstrated delay)
- I do not like a delay, however demonstrated it is, if there’s a solution without.
ce que j'ai assimilé à une non-reprise des moteurs.
(what I correlated with a non-spool up of the engines)
- This is precisely a characteristic of the Airbus system. To make it work to your liking, you sometimes have to disengage the AT (I am not talking about malfunctions). On a Boeing you practically never do this, because you can intervene to cover your liking in AT mode, you would have felt the levers move up (keeping a feedback) and no one would have felt the need (instinctive behaviour in a stress situation) of doing the following:
J'ai alors instinctivement repassé les manettes dans le cran 0, avant de les mettre sur pleins gaz
(I therefore instinctively selected the levers to 0 (idle), before repositioning them to full thrust (TOGA) again.
I give every credit to all you guys who feel completely at ease with the Airbus. Some of you surprise me every single day with your extensive knowledge about it and its use.
Myself I have been taken by surprise by it twice, which scared the bejeesus out of me. Let me stay very sceptical, as I am still flying these birds, and let us hope we will not get caught out by them.
Back to the numerous FCOM’s, AOM’s, QRH’s, Memo’s, Notam’s ……………
GF

[Gary Lager]

Just as you can end up in trouble by trusting the FMC too explicitly without checking it's inputs/outputs properly, you can end up in trouble by blindly following ECAM.

Just as you can end up in trouble by blindly following QRH or RECALL drills on a B737.

Proper diagnosis of any failure must be completed by the flight crew prior to taking corrective action no matter what aircraft type you fly.
In the same way I like to think of the FMC as replacing the flight deck Navigator of old, the ECAM replaces the Flight Engineer. He may be an expert on the aircraft systems but he is not a pilot - the ECAM can only give you the info and no airbus pilot is trained to follow ECAM without reference to other sources of information, just like proper pilots.

I've seen the screens go dark in the sim with an AC BUS 1 fault combined with dispatch with DMC 3 replacing a failed DMC 2.

There aren't pages of ECAM, because there's no ECAM or anything else on in the cockpit except one amber FAULT LT, on the AC ESS FEED pb.

So we pressed it.

And everything came back up. No drama.

Gotta love the foot rests, too..

[Chrome]

I am reading with interest this thread. Traditional against 'modern'. I am still suprised how a lot of pilots still think visual movement of the control columns and thrust levers are important in flying. O well, maybe that's the only way they know how.

Gary Lager, I believe if the pullout table is unservicable, the aircraft is a no go.

[Gretchenfrage]

Chrome:
Do you mean Airbus to be more modern??
They're only different. A MD11 was much more advanced in Flight Guidance.
Again, I have flown Airbus, McDonnell and Boeing, so your sarcasm about "the only thing they know" is maybe misplaced.
You might call me a traditionalist, but I know what I'm talking about and the thread still reads: Pilot point of view.
What did you fly up to today? Multichrome or monochrome?;)
Cheers GF

[CONF iture]

Just analyse these quotes, they somewhat sum up my criticism:
le signal de commande N1 a été élaboré avec le retard démontré précédemment,
(the N1 command signal was processed with the formerly demonstrated delay)
- I do not like a delay, however demonstrated it is, if there’s a solution without.
ce que j'ai assimilé à une non-reprise des moteurs.
(what I correlated with a non-spool up of the engines)
- This is precisely a characteristic of the Airbus system. To make it work to your liking, you sometimes have to disengage the AT (I am not talking about malfunctions). On a Boeing you practically never do this, because you can intervene to cover your liking in AT mode, you would have felt the levers move up (keeping a feedback) and no one would have felt the need (instinctive behaviour in a stress situation) of doing the following:
J'ai alors instinctivement repassé les manettes dans le cran 0, avant de les mettre sur pleins gaz
(I therefore instinctively selected the levers to 0 (idle), before repositioning them to full thrust (TOGA) again.
Your translation is very good, so you may like reading the book of Michel Asseline, the CAPT on this specific flight at Habsheim.
(link is in the previous post ans it's a free download)
There is a lot to learn from it, especially for a bus driver.
The quote I've inserted in the previous post is from that book and it relates part of the chronology of the Habsheim flight just before the crash.
This flight showed some dysfunctions, one of them was related to the A/THR, another was related to the VSV (valve that regulates airflow in the engines).
So you will understand these actions and slow response were not standard on that flight.
Remember, 320 operation was brand new at that time, and Airbus had chosen to certify this revolutionary technology in only 1200 hours test flight ...
What happened is that the 320 was not ready yet to enter service ...
In normal ops, spool up time on 737 or 320 must be similar as they probably share common engine types.
But you're right: disconnect A/THR on 320 takes little thinking before action, and everybody get caught once at least.

[Gretchenfrage]

CF
thanks for the tip

Cheers
GF

[dartagnan]

after reading your comments on the autothrottle, I remember when in the 320sim , you have to "recycle" the throttle, or you have no power.
I don't have any experience on the 320 except some hours in the sim, ... to kick a computer to react (an important one),you must move the throttle handle all way back .is that safe?
I can not say at what stage of the flight, we got this "simulation"or if it was a sim problem, but our instructor told us to recycle the power...

[Rananim]

If you "suddenly wake up" after a jolt or bang, then the first pilots instinctive action is to grab the controls. In a Boeing you will get instant tactile feedback that "it" turns to ... and that the thrust is up high or low. Every research found out that the tactile input is like parallel computer input, 10 times faster than a serial input. Humans react similarily. If you have to collect data via intellectual input (visual on display) you finally get the same values, agreed, but 10 times slower. That's my point.

Nicely put and this is the biggest bone of contention between the two.Boeing pilots never used to call out FMA's;you dont need to.I see that a lot of companies have copied this Airbus philosophy and applied it to Boeing,totally unaware that what they're doing is pointless and unnecessary.Only abnormal FMA's need be called out in a Boeing.The tactile feedback tells you the story,the FMA's need only be silently confirmed.

Slasher's comments about the ECAM are worrying.Can some Airbus pilot elaborate a little further perhaps?

[wileydog3]

after reading your comments on the autothrottle, I remember when in the 320sim , you have to "recycle" the throttle, or you have no power.

I can not say at what stage of the flight, we got this "simulation"or if it was a sim problem, but our instructor told us to recycle the power...

It sounds like a sim or sim instructor problem.

One thing that does confuse is "TOGA LOCK" where the thrust can go to TOGA and the action to get the thrust out of TOGA is to take the thrust levers up to TOGA and then back. It is not a big deal IF you understand what has happened. If you are confuses, moving or non-moving thrust levers won't make a lot of difference.

While on the 'bus, I disconnected the 'stuff' occcasionally just to reintroduce 'soul' back into the airplane (to use the jargon from another post). Moving the thrust levers and flying without a flight director didn't exactly take me back to the DC-3 and without trim, I was still some distance from the airplane but a lot of the fuss over the -320 comes from people who haven't flown the airplane.

I always said to senior guys, "It is not only confusing but with all those electrons floating around, I read one report that it can either make you sterile or cause erectile dysfunctions. And the entire oral must be done in FRENCH!!" My efforts were not totally successful in keeping the senior boys off...

[CONF iture]

Perhaps if you don't have the capacity at a given moment to properly disconnect, then that it isn't the moment to be loading yourself even further by adding manual thrust to the problem. The A/T does a great job, why not let it work away?

"If you don't like what does automation ... just disconnect !"
Isn't it a golden rule for automation airplanes ... ???

I would see two main reasons to disconnect AP or (and) A/THR:
1- For fun
2- Under pressure cos you're surprised by what you get through automation this time, and you want to go back to basic as quickly as possible.

But if you have never been caught yet ...
Do not worry ... your turn will come !

[Ignition Override]

This debate and the descriptive comments here are quite interesting. I hope to go to leave the old jet and transition somehow to the Airbus 320/319 when a slot is open (in a year?). The junior displaced Captains can always return to previous position before the more senior pilots' bids go into effect for Initial Training := .

I've often preferred a yoke in front of me to steer, whether right or left seat, but maybe a stick on the left side can feel a bit normal after a few sims.
Although a leftie, still prefer right hand for joystick at home for excellent WW2aircraft flight on (Ubisoft) "Sturmovik Forgotten Battles AEP". The most user-friendly.:)

[DISCOKID]

heres the report on the 777 software failure incident...

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/aair200503722.aspx

[Ag2A320]

Currently on the A320/A321, i'm going the other way Airbus to Boeing after 5 yrs on the minibus, my number can either hold an F/O slot on B-757 or Capt B737-300/400, hard choices, i'll miss the ease of the Airboose Logique, but i shall enjoy either the performance of the 757 or have another turn at the responsibility of command! I await the laughs of my sim instructor and partner, as i transistion to not having autotrim or having to read the FMA religiously.

Goodbye! SECs,FMGC,SDAC,LGCIU,DMC& U and all the other computers and associated faults and spurious warnings that i have become so familiar with; wont get caught again forgetting to activate the approach and then managing the speed! oh joy, So long! beloved traytable & footrests, back to resting the tray on the logbook; hmmm let me see, nope cant hold a 330 slot, Boeing Baby here i come! Seriously aslong as i can hold a slot on any of the company's fleet and the check doesn't bounce (more concerned about my daysoff & benefits than the type i fly), i'm happy with either Airbus or Boeing, flown manually with AP,FD and the autothrust off, as i am apt to do on a lovely VMC day, its almost as much fun, as flying my own airplanes.

[Dan Winterland]

I did the swap over a year ago. It's different.

My advice:

Airbus publish their golden rules. One is 'The aircraft flys like any other'. Don't forget this. The level of automation is high and it's easy to sit there and think what can I do do correct this situation through the box when all you have to do it take out the automatics and fly it yourself.

Fly it yourself as much as you can. It's natural to use the automatics but this will erode your flying skills. My company has just bought some glass Boeings and a couple of convertees have failed because thay let their flying skills lapse after 10 years on the bus.

The progression for ECAM drills are OEBs - ECAM - QRH - FCOM3. Don't forget that some ECAM drills will be superceeded by OEBs. And with the ECAM drills, if you don't have some knowledge of the system and what it is you are trying to acheive with the drill, you could create problems for yourself. The ECAM is supposed to make life easier but as in anything in life, you can make even easier with a bit of study.

Use TRACK/FPA for non precision approaches and manual flying. It's brilliant!

Don't listen to the Boeing diehards who trash the bus without knowing what they're talking about. I came to the bus with an open mind and I was pleasantly suprised. The automatics are superior (certainly from the Boeing I used to fly which constantly made you aware that it was a classic jet with the glass grafted on top), it's a very pleasant and easy working environment - and that table. It's fantastic!

[Tree]

The Airbus is designed for people without basic flying skills.

i.e. Don't know how to cross-control on takeoff or landing-no problem-just leave the stick alone and the sytem will take over from you.

Don't know how to calculate wind additives on approach-no problem-g/s mini will take care of it (unless the headwind down to 200ft is above 60kt then g/s mini will not let you go below VFE next.)

Don't know what the thrust lever position should be for various flight phases-no problem-they don't give you any feedback and they never fail!

Don't know what contol input the other pilot or autopilot is introducing-no problem-that is none of your business.

But the tray table is so sweet!

[sabenaboy]

It's amazing to see how even adult professional pilots can still engage in these futile A vs B debates. Very childish! While reading this thread, I thought I was on the flightsimmers forum on Airliners.net!

I have flown both B737 (2,3,4,500) and the A320 series.

They're both great aircraft!
Which Do I prefer? Definitely the A320! In automatic and in manual flight!
In "my" company, we are still allowed to fly the Airbus with A/P, A/T and F/D off and we do so on most of the approches. But it's very nice to know that, if necessary, this baby can bring me to an automatic full stop on the centerline in 0/0 vis, with one engine out!

(Just a personal opinion. You don't have to agree, but at least respect the opinion!)

[Gretchenfrage]

There was Joe Bloke, with his future ex-wife, both sitting across the judge who
was handing out their divorce papers. She then said stiffly: Oh, by the way honey,
I always faked my orgasms.
There was poor Joe Bloke again, this time alone, sitting across his chief pilot
who handed him his retirement papers. The CP then says unemotionally: Oh, by the way Joe,
the side-stick was never connected.:cool:

[hetfield]

There was Joe Bloke, with his future ex-wife, both sitting across the judge who
was handing out their divorce papers. She then said stiffly: Oh, by the way honey,
I always faked my orgasms.
There was poor Joe Bloke again, this time alone, sitting across his chief pilot
who handed him his retirement papers. The CP then says unemotionally: Oh, by the way Joe,
the side-stick was never connected.:cool:


Oh no......:D:D:D:D:D

[sabenaboy]

:O
Well, I'm sure that my side-stick is connected!

My wife's orgasms? Well, euh, I think they're real but then again...she's an amateur theater actrice!
:rolleyes:

[wileydog3]

The Airbus is designed for people without basic flying skills.


I guess the same could be said for the F-22 with its fly-by-wire systems also. Maybe you should try to buy a round at the bar at Langley with that line.

[Tree]

There was Joe Bloke, with his future ex-wife, both sitting across the judge who
was handing out their divorce papers. She then said stiffly: Oh, by the way honey,
I always faked my orgasms.
There was poor Joe Bloke again, this time alone, sitting across his chief pilot
who handed him his retirement papers. The CP then says unemotionally: Oh, by the way Joe,
the side-stick was never connected.:cool:

Too funny Gretchenfrage! Thanks for that one.

[Tree]

I guess the same could be said for the F-22 with its fly-by-wire systems also. Maybe you should try to buy a round at the bar at Langley with that line.

Good point wileydog3 but I think we are comparing apples to hammers.
Do they take Canukistan dollars at Langley?

[Tree]

Quote: "It's amazing to see how even adult professional pilots can still engage in these futile A vs B debates. Very childish! While reading this thread, I thought I was on the flightsimmers forum on Airliners.net"

sabenaboy;

I regret that you find this type of discussion futile and childish. I think most debates here are interesting or at the very least entertaining. I have learned a lot from this forum and I hope others especially the newbies find it a worthwhile exchange. I will work on improving my sense of humour.

[Chrome]

The Airbus is designed for people without basic flying skills

Indeed, I find that entertaining personally.

However I do hope the newbies won't take your personal opinion seriously. We find skillful pilots in any type of aircraft in any part of the world. It's dependent on a pilot's previous training, experience, knowledge and enthusiasm in their careers. There are useless pilots on the Boeing as well as on the Airbus.

[Thridle Op Des]

If you really want to go back to early days of fly-by-wire, the X-15 used the same system though with analogue processing and it was a side stick though sadly they didn't have a tray for the inflight.

Some interesting postings as to how an airbus flies!

Regards

TOD

[rubik101]

The biggest difference I found on conversion to the A from the B was the Auto-trim/auto-thrust combination. The fact that the thrust levers don't move never entered the equation. The change in thrust when levelling off/decending etc. and the really difficult job of either pushing or pulling on the side stick the effect the change is really so easy that it sometimes seems that you have forgotten something! Not having to trim the HS takes a great deal of workload off you when hand flying the aircraft.
Other than getting used to that, it's brilliant! I have been on the B 737 from the 200 up to the -800 for the last 26 years and I have to say that I was a reluctant debutant on the Airbus, but one year later, I have seen the light. Enjoy it folks, it works. :ok:

[FlightDetent]

whether right or left seat, but maybe a stick on the left side can feel a bit normal after a few sims.

I think you may reasonably expect about one and half sim sessions to completely forget about the "control input interface". That's 6 hrs and about 2 of real handling time. From that moment onwards, you'll be left wondering what use ever was that thing inbetween your legs. ;)

[alexban]

After reading dozens of posts on this A-B debate I'm still wondering why the scenario is all the same : many pilots making fun of the Bus and many pilots defending it and almost never any pilot making fun of the Boeing planes and no pilots having to defend it? If you think I'm not right read the previous posts and do a search..
I've never tried to put a plane above other,I think any plane is fun to fly,and a very nice machine.
The old turboprop that I flew years ago,almost no automatics,except for level flight,and hdg,was fun to fly,and a very reliable airplane.And you had to do all by yourself,even pressurization was manual.No computer whatsoever.
The modern fully automated airplane that can do all the things for you,even sometimes simulating real,manual flight for you,can be fun to fly.It's how you learn to master the machine that can make all the fun from it.Even if you won't touch the controls.
Maybe next generation airplanes will be 'thought' controlled.You think they won't be fun flying? I doubt.
The plane that I really won't like flying will be the plane that will keep me grounded,not needing me in the air with it.
Enjoy flying

[Soga]

Hi folks

Amazing A/C but the only away to fell confortable is study , and not trying memorize everthing (only the seven memory items request to any airbus pilot) . Yes there are 3 Fcoms and FMGC manual , start the vacbi and Fcom 1 , when you start the conversion to Simulator go to Fcom 3 and study the SOPs.
And follow the Sops always. Be standard
You will see and realize that after first year flying Airbus you felt that you dont know everything about the AC but you know how to search information in the fcoms and your proeficience and skills improved.
But be standard all the times and follow SOPs , and during the follows sim sessions you will find how important is CRM during drills and how to handle Ecams.
Good luck

[pstaney]

While being a North American and admittedly biased to Boeing, I observe that generally:
1. Those who have only flown boeings prefer the boeing
2. Those who have only flown airbus prefer the airbus
3. Those who flew airbus first and then switched to boeing perfer airbus
4. Those who flew boeing first and then switched to airbus prefer airbus

I think 3 and 4 say it all.

[ZBMAN]

I have flown the Airbus for a bit now, and I quite enjoy it. However, what really strikes me is that most pilots I meet are really over enthusiastic about it, almost like they have been brainwashed during their airbus convertion. I suspect those (and I have met quite a few) who sincerely think the airbus design is absolutely perfect do not understand it fully, and are not aware of the pitfalls.
Airbus has come up with some great ideas: alpha floor, high and low speed protections for example can be life savers in case of windshear or GPWS. This is a major improvement on safety, and I am surprised Boeing have not implemented it yet. Also the Airbus working environment is really excellent, especially compared with the 737. Simply put, the airbus is, in most cases, quite relaxing to fly. although, like any aircraft, it is challenging to fly it near the crosswind limit in gusty conditions, although I have met people who claim it is easy (the same people who think airbus is perfect, btw).

There is lots of room for improvement however, and I will start with the ECAM. I feel it isn't as user-friendly as it should be. It requires lots of discipline to handle correctly, and can be a nuisance at times. It can also send you down the wrong path. The QRH is quite confusing as well, and not very well thought out, with a mix of TR's, procedures that may or may not be ECAM eg, the smoke drill which is both ECAM and QRH, which I feel is difficult to handle, especially in this kind of stressful situation!
I'm not a traditionalist, but I do agree that the thrust levers should be driven back. Those who claim that we shouldn't use other senses than our sight have probably forgottent what was said during their Human Factors class for their ATPL. How our body collects information about its position in space is called proprioception, and a good deal of our situation awareness comes from it. Having fixed throttles as opposed to backdriven ones removes some of our proprioception, therefore reduces our situation awareness. Same thing goes for the sidesticks. Also one must understand that in the original airbus design, thrust levers were replaced by a switch to set the thrust rating. The only concession airbus made to that design was to replace the little switch by two dinky thrust levers which act exactly as a thrust rating switch.The ideology behind all this is to remove pilots from the loop, which I feel is dangerous. Did you know that the pitch trim wheel in the a380 had been replaced by a switch on the pedestal? So now we won't know what the pitch trim is doing either. I fail to understand how this will make the aircraft any safer!

To conclude all I can say is that the airbus is a great aircraft, although it isn't really exciting to fly (but we are not paid to get excited are we?). The main danger in my opinion is that it makes you lazy, and everytime I try to be keen and pick up the FCOM, all I find is a piece of over-simplified badly translated-from-french bullsh*t!:8

[wileydog3]

Good point wileydog3 but I think we are comparing apples to hammers.
Do they take Canukistan dollars at Langley?

They will take whatever currency you have...

And no not really comparing apples to hammers. The point was FBW is for people who don't have the basic stick and rudder skills. No doubt, this same argument was advanced when they moved the third wheel from the tail to the nose... any simpleton can fly one with that nose-thingy... for kids and people who can't really fly. Maybe same argument when they put canopies on airplanes so you couldn't hear the wind in the wings as well.. or when they stopped bracing the wings.

Which fighter is it... the Rafale that has 2 engines but only one throttle?

Airbus, like Boeing, McDoug, Fokker and anyone else you would like to mention tries to build an airplane that will *sell* and each go about it slightly differently. When I was a kid growing up in the south of the US, the argument was Chevrolets versus Ford. Then when I got to flying.. Boeing vs. Airbus.. Boeing vs. Douglas.. Gulfstream vs. Bombardier.. Lear vs. Citation.

The *one* airplane I have flown and currently fly that doesn't allow you to relax is my Swift. Crosswinds and gusty winds always make for an interesting day and you can run out of enough rudder with a strong crosswind from the left.

[Ag2A320]

Well Ladies & Gents,

Had a mini- A v B forum in the crew lounge today. I would prefer as my dream-ship ( if i was allowed only one) a cross between the B757 and the A320, the performance & reliability of a RR powered 757 with the ease of the Airbus FBW - sidestick, traytable, alpha prot - the works. The current Bus line:- A320/A321, A340-300 are a bunch of bloody optimised gliders!;no climb performance or extra power, Airbus forgot the power and went for fuel efficiency; forever stuck in the 320 bumping around in the tops at FL 390 while 737-700s are above in the clear at FL410 ARGhhh!. The 73-300/500 & 75/67 reminds you that the glass was grafted into an existing design as an afterthought.

Personally think the G550, G-xpress & Falcon DX both out class A&B products, wouldnt mind if Airbus & Boeing took a page from Dassault and intergated the Falcon's EASy concept on their respective types, but as we know no airline is going to spend all that money just yet to equip their fleets.

The A vs B arguement will continue.

Ah! talk of true airplanes- taildraggers- The Swift is a pussycat compared some of the others i have encountered. What i fly at work, some days comes close to the fun i have in my own airplanes but can never equal it : - every now and again i steal a couple of circuits in what ever my brothers arent using that day in the Ag business : PT-6 & R1820 S-2R Thrushes, failing that is a hop in the Stearman,Pitts or C-140. I try to find a bus driver who hasnt flown anything else for awhile, just to remind them of how "REAL" airplanes fly; Stick & Rudder, No FD or AP, and if they make a fuss, the airspeed gets covered too!

Flying both the 73 & Bus never has given me the same feeling of joy, as either flying in the Army or cropdusting. Ah the joy of hauling 4000lbs of fertilizer in an 1400HP Thrush and rocketing off from a freshly cut 2200ft grass levee at first light. Ah! the rumble of the engine;cool blue flame and the sheer acceleration pulling 55 Hg of manifold; no checklist; no talking on the radio, just me and the airplane and it a extension of my thoughts!


But Alas, as stated we are not paid to have fun only ensure the safe and efficient operations of our respective airlines. Airbus has its sore points; the ECAM and others. Ah yes! my favourite Pre -Sim sleeping aid the FCOMs - poorly written yes, but usually asleep after browsing Vol3 - Supplemental proc.

[sabenaboy]

While being a North American and admittedly biased to Boeing, I observe that generally:
1. Those who have only flown boeings prefer the boeing
2. Those who have only flown airbus prefer the airbus
3. Those who flew airbus first and then switched to boeing perfer airbus
4. Those who flew boeing first and then switched to airbus prefer airbus
I think 3 and 4 say it all.
:ok: I fall into category 4 :ok:

[hetfield]

:ok: I fall into category 4 :ok:

Good summary!

Me too, category 4.......

[Jet_A_Knight]

There is much discussion about 'Airbus Logic' and 'Airbus Philosophy'.

Can anyone point to any documents that outline these?

[alexban]

ZBMAN : Boeing planes also have alpha floor,high and low speed protection,even on the Classics.

[ZBMAN]

alexban, no they don't.

[alexban]

ZBMAN: Maybe we are talking about different things,as I don't know the definitions for the Bus,but regarding Boeing , alpha floor,and speed limits you may find some info's in FCOM2 (737) ,command speed limiting and reversion modes:
" The AFS provides speed,pitch and thrust commands to avoid exceeding the following limit speeds: Vmo/Mmo ,wing flap placard,ldg gear placard,minimum speed.
Minimum speed is based on angle of attack and is approx 1.3 Vs for the current flap configuration.It is sensed by AOA vanes,one on either side of the fwd fuselage....
Either pitch or thrust,whichever is engaged in a speed mode ,attempts to hold the limit speed....
During some flight situations,speed control by the AFDS or A/T alone could be insufficient to prevent exceeding a limit speed.If this occurs,AFDS or A/T modes automatically revert to a more effective combination.The reversion modes are placard limit speed reversion and minimum speed reversion....
The AFS commands a speed 5 knots greater than minimum spped.Reaching a speed 5 kt greater than minimum speed reactivates normal MCP speed selection control....."
If you are talking about the fact that the AP won't intervene in case you are flying manually,with the A/T OFF...well it is true,it is not a FBW airplane...you can stall it if you wish...but only if you're manually flying...
So,are we talking about the same thing?..(limit speeds,alpha floor..):)

[ZBMAN]

I see what you mean Alexban, but what you are talking about are essentially mode reversions (ie, the AP won't stall or overspeed the A/C).
What happens on the bus is a bit different. In the case of alpha floor, the auto thrust system will apply TOGA (whether it is engaged or not, even in manual flight), once a certain value of AoA has been reached.
As for speed protections, in the case of an overspeed for ex, the system will gradually reduce nose down pitch authority to prevent the aircraft from exceeding VD (it may exceed MMO if full forward stick is held).
There are also bank angle protections (max bank is 67°), and load factor protection.
These protections mean that if you have a windshear, you can pull FULL backstick, and you will get maximum performance from the aircraft to get out of it (it will give you your maximum AoA).

[Bearcat]

A320 is nice...big cockpit etc...perf not an issue.....on a dirty night with howling winds give me a Boeing 737 anyday.

[18-Wheeler]

On the B, should you hand-fly an approach with A/T engaged, after landing, as you decelerate, the A/T will increase power to keep you at Vref !

That's certainly not the case on the 747 Classic I fly. The radar altimeter sends information to the autothrottle so that by touchdown the throttles are at idle, and they stay that way.
I can't see why the newer Boeings would be any different.

[A330AV8R]

Hi

Well all I can say as the other chaps have before is go with an open mind . Mind you Ive only been on the Bus so far and I love it .

Once you eat of the tray ....food :E you never wanna go back !

:ok:

[flightleader]

While being a North American and admittedly biased to Boeing, I observe that generally:
1. Those who have only flown boeings prefer the boeing
2. Those who have only flown airbus prefer the airbus
3. Those who flew airbus first and then switched to boeing perfer airbus
4. Those who flew boeing first and then switched to airbus prefer airbus
I think 3 and 4 say it all.

I'm in 5. Flew the Boeing then the Airbus,back onto Boeing(777), personally prefer the Airbus.

[ruddman]

I'm 6. As a pax I prefer the Boeing to Airbus.


But what does my opinion matter? I'm only a meaningless person to the rear of the cockpit doors........;)

[The Big Easy]

Having never flown the bus. What is the technique in heavy crosswind takeoff's? Is there a side-stick aileron input or does some control logic look after things?
TBE.

[hetfield]

Having never flown the bus. What is the technique in heavy crosswind takeoff's? Is there a side-stick aileron input or does some control logic look after things?
TBE.

No, even on the A300/310 no aileron input on x-wind takeoffs.

[dartagnan]

in the 320,the cabin is 60-70cm larger than the 737 and 40 cm larger than a 777.
(not exact numbers)

[ruddman]

in the 320,the cabin is 60-70cm larger than the 737 and 40 cm larger than a 777.


Not what I meant. Don't no why, but the more automation on a vehicle, train, aircraft etc, the less safe I feel. Perhaps I trust imperfect man more then computers?


Anyway, the airbus is bloody noisey. Sounds like people are drilling into the fueslage from underneath when at the gate. The gear extension/retraction is noisey. Not sure if you can hear the trim operating, but something whined and screetched from the rear last time I flew on one.

Ah.....us fussy passengers eh!

[Tree]

QUOTE: Ag2A320 "Well Ladies & Gents,

The current Bus line:- A320/A321, A340-300 are a bunch of bloody optimised gliders!;no climb performance or extra power, Airbus forgot the power and went for fuel efficiency; forever stuck in the 320 bumping around in the tops at FL 390 while 737-700s are above in the clear at FL410 ARGhhh!."

You made it to 390 in a 320? What were you carrying, ping pong balls or did you have a tow-plane to get you up there?

[alexban]

dartagnan,indeed 'not exact numbers'.....I'm amazed you think the 320 is larger than a 777...:D
Exact numbers for cabin width are:
320 3.70m
737 3.53m
777 5.86m

So,a bit different from your 'not exact numbers',dah..

[dartagnan]

alexban,

I am talking about the cockpit(distance from pilot window to pilot window), not the passengers cabin.

[18-Wheeler]

I'm 6. As a pax I prefer the Boeing to Airbus.

Me too, as the only times I've had to get out of my seat as a passenger because I just couldn't stand the torture of being in them was when I was on an Airbus. I know the interior is purely the decision of the airline and shouldn't be aircraft specific, but that's all I have.
I was also on a new A320 a few months ago, and was sitting in an isle seat. Every time someone walked past me, I could feel the seat moving as the floor flexed around. Then on landing, the crew used a lot of brakes and reverse, and I honestly thought the overhead lockers were going to fall right off, as they were flapping around so much.

I'd much prefer to be in something that inspires confidence that it's not going to fall apart at the drop of a hat.

[pakeha-boy]

18 wheelies....a little dramatic arent we mate???... toughen up a little.....will admit the bus does shake a bit .....but thats a design feature to wake you up,and ready your carcass for departure....:}learned that at school,see...it,s there for a reason ....

Seen the boeings,even the 18 wheelies twist a little on landing.....flew the 727 for a couple of years..now thats real metal,no plastic...and a very sturdy and fine piece of boeing craftmenship...I rest my case...PB

[18-Wheeler]

18 wheelies....a little dramatic arent we mate???... toughen up a little.....will admit the bus does shake a bit

I wasn't being dramatic at all, I described exactly what happened.

[hptaccv]

...anybody here made the transition bus to MD11?

[pakeha-boy]

18 wheelies....ever heard the term...."one mans light turbulence is another mans severe turbulence".......like I said mate...a little drama for sure...

life is good,because those of us that fly it have the ability to "adapt"....and really,it,s not that bad of an aircraft....Boeing or Airbus.....gimme a paycheck and Ill "try to fly "ethier .....Ilike,em both...PB

[what_goes_up]

...anybody here made the transition bus to MD11?
Yep I did. It is like going back to Jurassic Park. Handling is poor but it has some nice system controllers.
Glad to be back on Airbus though!

W_G_U

[Ignition Override]

At some airlines there is no choice between a Boeing or an Airbus-depending on your desired crewbase and whether you are willing to spend many, many hours per month commuting, knowing that there is often NO guaranteed open seat on your back-up flight :yuk: .

There is often the choice of a very old jet or a new Boeing (i.e. 757-2/3; more seniority is required with the need to now qualify for overseas routes), or a newer Airbus, but often just one, instead of both types. For example we have no 737s, but they seem to requir a good bit less training.

And with a larger number of days built in January's trip pairings,which leave you hanging around a US domestic layover hotel for 30 hours, commuting is becoming much less desireable. We have never yet been in a hotel where they film "Girls Gone Wild", and some are not yet 18 years old :uhoh: .