EK Airbus' and Boeings.....
 

Hello lads and ladies,

So, with most of the EK A332's doing gulf/subcontinent/africa and short sectors, the tripples doing long hauls and all the cool places, it seems like the trend was set, but with the A388's arriving steadily, more of them are doing the routes slowly but surely of the 777's....... (we all knew this would happen...)

how would you forecast the boeing fleets future??

just curious to see where the trend could take us fleet and destination wise in the near future.....(boeing was IMHO the fleet to be on and still is, but i feel it may not be the case in the near future)...

First off the 777 does India and does it in the middle of the night. In a few years all of 332 flights will be 777. When the 350 comes its going to be the new Queen of the fleet and I dont think the first thing it does is going to be India.

A350 dosen't even have engines yet & if Airbus (or Boeing for that matter) are plagued with delays as history has shown you won't see that aircraft for at least another 5 years. Rumours abound on when the company will dispose of the A330's but they still seem to keep em' going. The Boeing fleet will continue to expand to even newer destinations. Its a proven moneymaker and a workhorse. The A380 is always being moved around the network as passenger numbers increase & decrease. It only carries 13 tonnes payload more than a B77W. IMHO the 777 is definitely the fleet to be on for the next 7 years at least.

Current layovers on Boeing are:

Auckland,
Amsterdam,
Birmingham,
Bangkok,
Brisbane,
Guangzhou,
Paris,
Jakarta,
Colombo,
Capetown,
Dhaka,
Moscow,
Dusseldorf,
Entebbe,
Rome,
Frankfurt,
Glasgow,
Sao Paulo,
Geneva,
Hamburg,
Hong Kong,
Houston,
New York,
Johannesburg,
Osaka,
Kuala Lumpur,
Luanda,
Los Angeles,
London(Gatwick)
London(Heathrow),
Lagos,
Manchester,
Melbourne,
Manila,
Mauritius,
Munich,
Nairobi,
Tokyo(Narita)
Perth,
Shanghai,
San Francisco,
Singapore,
Sydney,
Vienna &
Zurich

This doesn't include freighter flying on the B77F

777's doing Pakistan and Bangladesh too..... but i guess what i meant was that the 332's are doing most of the sub continent flights and the shorter sectors...

Hey Sandhound - nicely put here:D:D:ok:

So Sandhound, you're saying that the B777 is 3 generations behind the A380 and yet still manages to haul a comparable payload with half the engines? Doesn't exactly flatter the Airbus. Why isn't the 380 operating the US west coast? It's three generations newer! lol

They keep cranking out as many 77W's as fast as they can make them, and there's a reason for that. Hint: it's not because it loses money for the operator OR the manufacturer.

I could care less about the noise level of the B777, the FMS, the seats, and I suspect the folks who operate it think the same way. It's just a tool, a very very efficient reliable one, unlike the A380. And somehow I manage to struggle along with that 80's tech...lol...how much assistance do you NEED to fly an aircraft anyway?!? I would submit that your assertion that Airbus is the "future" should maybe be based more than the quality of the flight deck seating! Take a look at how many of the reportable incidents lately are coming from the 380 fleet. Why is such a minute fleet relative to the main fleet generating such a disproportionate amount of incidents? Shouldn't the tech and the comfy seats eliminate those problems? ;-) (Also, why are so many of the A380 commanders so short?! But that's another question, posed to me by 380 cc...;-)

The small bonus of the Boeing is I'm not ashamed to show a picture of the airplane I fly. The large bonus is I'm not still sitting in the right seat, as my "Super" brethren of the same hire date are...and the opportunities that THAT opened up, are worth more than any number of AB type ratings!

To each their own. The right tool for the job. Not just because it's biggest, newest, shiniest. Oh wait...where are you based, again?!

Hey Nolimit- VERY nicely put there!!:D:ok::}

so for those in EK, if you had to start again and were given the choice of the airbus fleet or boeing, which one would you go for? i know many variables come into the equation such as lifestyle/roster/layovers/upgrade time ect ect......

well, if anyone replies to this question, then please could you tell us your reasons??

many thanks :)

Would you be talking about that 300ER that drops payload just to be able to do the flight from SFO? At least that's what I hear:p from my Boeing chums:D

Of course - one engine over the middle of the Indian Ocean in the monsoon or over the Pole compared to three.... I'd rather have double the engines if something stops turning (and they do still) thankyou very much:ok:

WK, remind me how much the 380 lifts out of SFO again.......

Yep, you've got that right, certainly a more regular occurrence on the 380, maybe they should have put 5 engines on it?

In terms of build quality, durability, and reliability Airbooos are running a distant second to Boeing (just ask anyone who has worked on them!) moreover they have been shown to be far more susceptible in recent years to catastrophic events on the basis that the "3 generations more advanced than a crappy old Boeing" can enact that Murphy's law concept of unintended consequences..(just ask a 330 driver about his QRH and ECAM interface).
The 380 is also a looong way away from where the marketing said it would be, hmmm how about the 777?

And just to comment on A380's comments, ahh yes lots of that is nice and fluffy, but why the need for auto TCAS? I bet we will soon be seeing an Airbus flying TCAS RA's from a ships transponder..or a false signal, and 700 tonne Mtow? I'll believe that when I see that.....nothing like airbus to make claims they can back up on a regular basis.

Mines bigger - No MINES BIGGER
Mine flies further - No MINE FLIES FURTHER
Mine flies higher - No MINE FLIES HIGHER
Mine flies faster - No MINE FLIES FASTER
Mine carries more pax - No MINE CARRIES MORE PAX
Pax like mine more - No PAX LIKE MINE MORE
Mine is more economical - No MINE IS zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

W@nkers!

Probably the same routes as now but with more local night turns when the 332/343/345 go.

From a branding view point, I would imagine that EK's very good marketing department will want the world's aircraft of the moment, the 380, to be seen in daylight hours at the major hubs.

But really we'd all like this...

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/wp-conte.../vc10boac2.jpg

3 generations ahead of the game and nobody can sleep in the bunks!!!

(maybe they should stick a pod in the underbelly like other AB's...oh thats right theres no room!)

Doh!!

;)

f.

Mines faster than yours.....wtf!

It doesn't matter how fast you go, 92 hrs is 92 hrs and last time I checked the payslip's the same?

Another oversized point on the A380 is the cringe factor listening to their radio work and I'm not referring to the Super suffix.

When you sound like professionals, then you can boast with some impunity.

Now you're talking!

Not sure everyone agrees with you,
PARIS: Qatar threatens to cancel A350-1000s after upgrade disappointment | Flightglobal.com
and when it finally gets airborne in 2017 it will be 14(!) years after the 77W with basically the same performance. Wouldn't call that blown out of the water...

Who cares at the end of the day....

Our pay is the same. A DXB-LHR is a DXB-LHR no matter what way you cut it.

And slagging each other about R/T?? :D Are you serious??

Stop the childish rants guys... and grow up.

Rim,
right on, who cares about faster planes if you do 90+ hours.
I dont care which one uses less fuel because its not mine and I dont even bother to save fuel for these @##$$%.
thats really childish and you look like little boys who flew the first time a widebody and think its the best ever just because they havent flown the other brand.

the roster, lifestyle, seats and table counts :}

well, this was not quite what i was thinking of when i posted this thread, i was merely asking about what you chaps thought would be the future of the EK fleet and where the strength was A or B, and also as to how the A380 would affect the flights/roster/destinations/layovers on the Boeing fleet.........

instead it seems to have turned into an airbus v boeing sort of thing (i have to say that some of the posts have been quite amusing lol......)

as for me, I have flown both A and B and both have their ups and downs, but i make no further comment as to which i prefer becasue this was really not the reason for this thread....

anyway, its fun to see the A v B action on here... :rolleyes:

''......and I don't even bother to save fuel for these @$$&&%''

Mmm...and that's not being childish, is it?

Coke v Pepsi
Ford v Chevrolet
Apple v PC

Couldn't care less about 'the whale' FED - but I'm sure the 345 never dropped any payload:ok::ok:

Besides - the A v B is a great fishing expedition isn't it:ok: To be brutally honest I think the Boeing is agricultural:bored::bored:

Are we all having fun now?:cool::cool::cool::cool:

I love these debates. You actually learn some interesting nuggets of information about each type. Belittling or ribbing a 777-300ER pilot is not something you hear everyday - I guess only an A380 or 744/8 pilot could give it a go. Given that I have been flying old, analog, archaic aeroplanes myself, I could only hope to fly such advanced aeroplanes in the future - AND I'LL TAKE EITHER BOEING OR AIRBUS LONGHAUL IF YOU LET ME... :p

Airbus v Boeing
 

Gosh, how things have changed......two pages on this subject and no mention of "The Table".......... Progress, chaps!:ok:

Yet again a slagging match between Airbus and Boeing! Professional Pilots and this is how we act! Its embarrassing!! I went on the Airbus because I had no choice. I transitioned to the 380 because I could. Give me the opportunity and I would quite happily go to the 777. Its about career prospects and lifestyle. As for the piece of machinery i really could not care less!!

They are both long haul aluminum tubes. As many 777's are coming as 380's. Wherever you go you will have enough to bitch about.......

As a slight drift but interesting trivia, the 380 bunks were indeed originally designed to be where 380 says- at the front. Where they are now on EK aircraft is solely down to preserving cargo space- other airlines opted for the factory-standard crew rest.

From a CC perspective I don't care what the aircraft is as long as it gets me there in one piece- however the type & layout with regard to ease of service & effect on passengers' moods may often dictate my mood on arrival! :ok:

Having flown 330/340 & 777:

As a pilot I'd rather fly the Airbus.
For the lifestyle I'd rather be on the Boeing.

For the future, I'd take the 380. It'll get the weight increase for the West coast, it'll take all the morning European destinations and it won't do many night turns.

Craggie: Cooooooooooool :cool:
I miss the table and a modern FMS interface/SOPs :}

Helen,

"Having flown 330/340 & 777:

As a pilot I'd rather fly the Airbus.
For the lifestyle I'd rather be on the Boeing"

I flew the above plus 737,757 and 767, had many opportunities to go back on the 777 but didn't because I like the Airbuses better and the lifestyle is pretty good on the 380, I think it will even get better for a while.

I think the pax like it very much too, so whats the problem with it besides the bunks that were screwed up by EK?

White Knight

You say you do not care about the whale yet I bet you would love to be on it.:D Sounds like a case of sour grapes to me?:{

How many do EK have to get for your turn to come up?:confused:

Okay, so as a new joiner in the not to distant future. I gave my preference for the airbus fleet. Partly because I have 3000+ airbus 320 experience and I like the Airbus. But also because I figured, the a330 and 340 should leave the company in the future and the chance of moving on to the a350 or the a380 in a few years time are pretty good.
It just seems logical for airbus pilots to stay on the bus fleet instead of moving to the 777.

correct me if I'm wrong..... I might still be able to change my preference ;)

Logic from Emirates? Now that's funny.:=:=

ok.....disregard logic.....

At least it would be more cost effective as an airbus type change is bound to be cheaper then an all new 777 rating.....

doesnt matter....I'm happy either way.
It's just that if I know I might be transferred to the 777 later on I might as well go for it now and enjoy the apparent slightly better life style.

A380 to FCO and KUL 1st Dec 2011

you can have FCO (Rome, Italy for those who don't fly there) and the crappy location airport hotel. Although all the free booze in the exec lounge almost makes it worth it ;)

I have to say that the way EK generally tends to get good load factors on the A380's must come as quite a shock to many of EK's competitors for whom this is becoming quite the nightmare that they dreaded! I mean who would have thought that EK would be flying A380's into Rome and Zurich if this was said 10 years ago!

Years ago, airlines were so scepticle on how EK would fill loads on all their A330's and B777's.............quite something when you think about it!

i'm a fairly old pilot named bruno,

some things about flying i do know,

boeing is fine,

airbus is divine,

but lockheed is numero uno!!

tz

ya...the booze and maybe the fact that it's one of the most amazing places on earth...

but, hey, we're just glorified bus drivers and booze is all that counts, right? :yuk:

tz

GMC,
are you one of these guys who spent their life in the hotel to save the allowance?

Try to catch the FREE shuttle in the city and look at the 3000 year old sites, its worth it, if you don't have any interest in cultural stuff, try to eat real italian food, if that doesn't tempt you either then maybe you should bid for turns.

Only a few more I imagine - probably next year sometime. Actually, when I said I couldn't care less, it was about the petty comments from our 'light twin' brethren (777). It is a marvellous bit of engineering:cool::cool: