Airbus vs Boeing (McDD)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: A grass castle in Victoria.
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus vs Boeing (McDD)
Now I know this has been done before and it might be boring; but it is Sunday afternoon ...........
Given that I have flown quite a few thousand hours on the A320/321 and the 737 (both Classic and NG.) and being spurred on by a post on another thread; I would like to hear how people rate the two types and if anything has changed in those opinions over the last year.
Obviously only pilots who have flown both types really know which type is best but all you Boeingheads who have never been near a 'bus have a go (and I think that includes you 18-Wheeler!)
I also include the 717 as a Boeing but as we all know it is firmly from Mr Donnie Douglas' stable (God Bless Him!)
Have at it
Given that I have flown quite a few thousand hours on the A320/321 and the 737 (both Classic and NG.) and being spurred on by a post on another thread; I would like to hear how people rate the two types and if anything has changed in those opinions over the last year.
Obviously only pilots who have flown both types really know which type is best but all you Boeingheads who have never been near a 'bus have a go (and I think that includes you 18-Wheeler!)
I also include the 717 as a Boeing but as we all know it is firmly from Mr Donnie Douglas' stable (God Bless Him!)
Have at it
Sorry, I think they're cheap rubbish.
This is based on the quality of the build, the longevity of the airframe, the long-term costs of running them, and the flight control laws.
Nunc est bibendum
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 wheeler.....actually admire a man putting his nuts on the block and respect you stating your opinion.........my issue with your last statement concerning the Bus "Control" laws......explain to me your reasoning.....
Have been to both(several) of Boeings and Airbus assembly plants,and invited on several "test" flights that have included operating those aircraft out of their normal envelopes........have flown the Bus to the ground successfully in "Direct law" .(not pretty) emergency electrical etc etc(in the sim).....as with most aircraft,its all in the training.......
Your reasoning of costs to operate are flawed...I have seen data from both.....up and down like a lady of the nights drawers.....depends who and how they are operated.........like I said...have flown both....
If Boeing is your choice...stick with it....its obviously your '"comfort" zone....
PB
forgot to mention...flew the the F-28(1000/4000,s) for a couple of years and there will be many here who have....now theres a piece of work....loved it....PB
it was indeed a "focker"
Have been to both(several) of Boeings and Airbus assembly plants,and invited on several "test" flights that have included operating those aircraft out of their normal envelopes........have flown the Bus to the ground successfully in "Direct law" .(not pretty) emergency electrical etc etc(in the sim).....as with most aircraft,its all in the training.......
Your reasoning of costs to operate are flawed...I have seen data from both.....up and down like a lady of the nights drawers.....depends who and how they are operated.........like I said...have flown both....
If Boeing is your choice...stick with it....its obviously your '"comfort" zone....
PBforgot to mention...flew the the F-28(1000/4000,s) for a couple of years and there will be many here who have....now theres a piece of work....loved it....PB
it was indeed a "focker"
Last edited by pakeha-boy; 10th Dec 2006 at 15:53.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: oz
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of comfort, if you have to sit in a piece of hi speed aluminium tubing for 4+ hours, there is no competition, the 'bus wins hands down.
Flight control laws? near the ground is pretty much conventional, away from the ground won't let you kill yourself ( and all your pax )......can't be all bad, and a dream to handfly.
That said, never had more fun than in the Douglas B717
Craps all over the bus apart from the above points.
Flight control laws? near the ground is pretty much conventional, away from the ground won't let you kill yourself ( and all your pax )......can't be all bad, and a dream to handfly.
That said, never had more fun than in the Douglas B717
Craps all over the bus apart from the above points.
I'm not going to participate in a A vs B slanging match, so this is my last post on the matter.
I have problems with the Airbus flight control laws simply because they have pre-determined how the aircraft is going to behave.
However, in the real world, strange things happen that the geeks sitting behind desks can never think of, and hence the software either cannot deal with or will not let you deal with.
In my old 747 Classic for example, some years ago we had some maintenance done just before departure. After liftoff there was a strong vibration in the airframe and to cut a long story very short it was found that the repair wasn't done properly and the inboard ground spoilers were standing straight up.
There's no procedure for that, we had to make up our recovery on the spot.
This is just an example, with my point being that ultimately ONE person has to decide how and what the aeroplane does, and that's the Captain, not someone safely sitting behind a desk.
If I have the need to over-G the plane to save it, I will.
If I have to run some non-standard configuration to deal with some strange problem, I will.
And yes I agree, I would rank MDD & Lockheed ahead of Boeing, then somewhat of a distance to ...... Airbus.
I have problems with the Airbus flight control laws simply because they have pre-determined how the aircraft is going to behave.
However, in the real world, strange things happen that the geeks sitting behind desks can never think of, and hence the software either cannot deal with or will not let you deal with.
In my old 747 Classic for example, some years ago we had some maintenance done just before departure. After liftoff there was a strong vibration in the airframe and to cut a long story very short it was found that the repair wasn't done properly and the inboard ground spoilers were standing straight up.
There's no procedure for that, we had to make up our recovery on the spot.
This is just an example, with my point being that ultimately ONE person has to decide how and what the aeroplane does, and that's the Captain, not someone safely sitting behind a desk.
If I have the need to over-G the plane to save it, I will.
If I have to run some non-standard configuration to deal with some strange problem, I will.
And yes I agree, I would rank MDD & Lockheed ahead of Boeing, then somewhat of a distance to ...... Airbus.
I am flying the 'computer' Boeing now - 777. It has envelope protection laws etc, but has still left the option that ULTIMATELY the PIC can override-ie if you NEED to over 'G' etc -YOU CAN. Even Direct mode is manually selectable, and handling is basically the same as Secondary mode, just a little less refined. Thus, in my opinion (one of thousands ,I know) Boeing is a superior product than the 'slowbus'. As an aside, consider how many elderly 73's you see around the world. I just don't expect to see many A32's when they are the same age.
Grandpa Aerotart
Taking the piss out of airbus', while fun and worthwhile, is really pointless...the control 'laws' aren't the issue. What is the issue is the froggies designed an aeroplane that had to be 'different' to the Boeing product in all ways and no matter what...in so doing they also went against 60 years of conventions and that, in my opinion, is why they are not generally as well liked as Mr Boeings product...even the landing light switches work in the opposite sense...as with many other switches...it amazes me airbus pilots don't fly around with the landing lights on and land with them off
But all said and done, airbus and airbus pilot stirring aside, Boeing just build better aeroplanes...period!!!
The current canning Tooloose are getting at the hands of Seattle attests to that fact.
Never flown one, hope fervently I never do...but have LOTS of mates who do and few, if any, have unqualified praise for Too-Loose's product.
It stuns me that the same aerospace industry that designed and builds Falcons, my all time favorite aeroplane and the only thing in current production that beats a Boeing, also builds the scarebus
I love the 767...it'll do me just fine until the promised 777s and 787s arrive over the next several years
But all said and done, airbus and airbus pilot stirring aside, Boeing just build better aeroplanes...period!!!
The current canning Tooloose are getting at the hands of Seattle attests to that fact.
Never flown one, hope fervently I never do...but have LOTS of mates who do and few, if any, have unqualified praise for Too-Loose's product.
It stuns me that the same aerospace industry that designed and builds Falcons, my all time favorite aeroplane and the only thing in current production that beats a Boeing, also builds the scarebus
I love the 767...it'll do me just fine until the promised 777s and 787s arrive over the next several years
Half the 747's I fly have the switches going up for on, and vice-versa.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a good discussion for pure entertainment 
Though i'm a Boeing fan:
Fair chunk of generalised, unsubstantiated rubbish. Consider that both companies offer a variety of products, different in many ways. Quite often, depending on the particular customer requirements, the Boeing product is superior, and other cases the Airbus product. They both have had dud products.
I'm affraid even Boeing is moving away from this, because technology is moving forward....
Many people who speak with authority on this subject lack the appropriate knowledge of both products.
Though i'm a Boeing fan:
Fair chunk of generalised, unsubstantiated rubbish. Consider that both companies offer a variety of products, different in many ways. Quite often, depending on the particular customer requirements, the Boeing product is superior, and other cases the Airbus product. They both have had dud products.
I'm affraid even Boeing is moving away from this, because technology is moving forward....
Many people who speak with authority on this subject lack the appropriate knowledge of both products.
Last edited by podbreak; 11th Dec 2006 at 10:59. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Never flown Boeing but I do work in Easyjet, where the world's largest transition from Boeing to Airbus fleet is in full swing at the moment.
I've seen it time after time after time, there are plenty of grumpy old buggers with thousands of Boeing hours in this company who initially slag off at the Airbus and basically despise the thing for, ooohhh, at least 6 weeks after their conversion course, while they slowly learn all the tricks and get their heads round the MCDU and the ECAM and the laptop, get accustomed to having tray tables and foot rests instead of some control column, taking your headset off in the cruise, slowly they figure out that the thing has actually got equal or greater levels of safety redundancy than the Boeing, show them a few cool make-your-day-easier tricks with the MCDU, they pretty soon stop their grumbling.
I have yet to find a SINGLE captain who's been on the 'bus for a year or two who would ever want to go back on the Boeing.
I've seen it time after time after time, there are plenty of grumpy old buggers with thousands of Boeing hours in this company who initially slag off at the Airbus and basically despise the thing for, ooohhh, at least 6 weeks after their conversion course, while they slowly learn all the tricks and get their heads round the MCDU and the ECAM and the laptop, get accustomed to having tray tables and foot rests instead of some control column, taking your headset off in the cruise, slowly they figure out that the thing has actually got equal or greater levels of safety redundancy than the Boeing, show them a few cool make-your-day-easier tricks with the MCDU, they pretty soon stop their grumbling.
I have yet to find a SINGLE captain who's been on the 'bus for a year or two who would ever want to go back on the Boeing.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luke skytoddler....ditto mate,..ditto....CC....read and weep son,read and weep...
Merry xmas to all and all the best to you and yours for a safe New Year..
If Ive pissed you off this last year...no offence or malice intended....BUT!!!...it will probably happen next year.....Arohanui...PB
Merry xmas to all and all the best to you and yours for a safe New Year..
If Ive pissed you off this last year...no offence or malice intended....BUT!!!...it will probably happen next year.....Arohanui...PB
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
I have yet to find a SINGLE captain who's been on the 'bus for a year or two who would ever want to go back on the Boeing.
(sorry Luke..you all right lah?)Actually I think the 737NG/A319/20/21 comparison misses the point, they are totally different design concepts
(boeing..update a 40yr old design just enough to keep the type cert valid)
(Airboooos a clean sheet of paper....and not enough engine power
)My experience of the 320 is only in the sim, but I have to say I like the layout..and many of the knobs and widgets are quite intuitive..so no complaints..even though I'm a boeing boy.
Talk to an engineer on the other hand...and its a different story, they bloody hate the things! Poor build quality, under engineered structures, and cabin floors that need constant attention.