A320 V B737
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 V B737
It would be interesting to see the debate between A320 and B737 crews on the better in flight characteristics of the two aircraft, particularly those with a fair experience on both types.
Last few days I had my first A320 experience on a new JQ A320 and in particular the flight from Cairns To Brisbane last night was more interesting than I expected. Take offs were noticeably more noisy and with more vibration. Landing approaches a lot less stable, and in fact the decent last night was quite different, it was with a quicker rate of descent than normal, possibly for ATC requirements (or the crew wanting to get home), however it was not as pleasant for the customers.
Conditions at YBBN last night were not too bad, few knots of xwind and otherwise no significant weather. The approach was rolling quite a lot (hard to guess in degrees) but let say hundreds of B737 landings in much more volatile conditions were no worse, so it leads me to think it must be a characteristic of the a/c type. This was all the way on a right base and final and landing for RWY19. Possibly a green F/O getting his hands on the controls for the first few times, however I do not want to persecute the crew.
Can anybody shed some light or if you were crewing on Sunday night offer any explanation? Otherwise it seems to me Mr Boeing builds a nicer plane and one that does not rattle, squeak, vibrate, flex and roll as much under what were pretty good conditions.
Cheers
J
Last few days I had my first A320 experience on a new JQ A320 and in particular the flight from Cairns To Brisbane last night was more interesting than I expected. Take offs were noticeably more noisy and with more vibration. Landing approaches a lot less stable, and in fact the decent last night was quite different, it was with a quicker rate of descent than normal, possibly for ATC requirements (or the crew wanting to get home), however it was not as pleasant for the customers.
Conditions at YBBN last night were not too bad, few knots of xwind and otherwise no significant weather. The approach was rolling quite a lot (hard to guess in degrees) but let say hundreds of B737 landings in much more volatile conditions were no worse, so it leads me to think it must be a characteristic of the a/c type. This was all the way on a right base and final and landing for RWY19. Possibly a green F/O getting his hands on the controls for the first few times, however I do not want to persecute the crew.
Can anybody shed some light or if you were crewing on Sunday night offer any explanation? Otherwise it seems to me Mr Boeing builds a nicer plane and one that does not rattle, squeak, vibrate, flex and roll as much under what were pretty good conditions.
Cheers
J
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: planet igloo
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus vs Boeing
2 totally different design concepts, Airbus engineer a VERY efficient people carrier..
Boeing have always been in the business of building bombers...ones that drop bombs..and ones that carry people. Generally a boeing is more engineered than an Airbus..although I wonder how the 787 will come together.
Perhaps a better comparison is..Citroen vs Cadillac
2 totally different design concepts, Airbus engineer a VERY efficient people carrier..
Boeing have always been in the business of building bombers...ones that drop bombs..and ones that carry people. Generally a boeing is more engineered than an Airbus..although I wonder how the 787 will come together.
Perhaps a better comparison is..Citroen vs Cadillac
AIRBUS: built by dummies to be flown by genious's ( sorry about my spelling )
BOEING: built by genious's to be flown by dummies
AIRBUS: Hyundai ( cheap plastic crap, get what you pay for )
BOEING: Rolls Royce
I don't care how Bus drivers justify and defend their Aircraft, it is rubbish.
Roll on the 787
BOEING: built by genious's to be flown by dummies
AIRBUS: Hyundai ( cheap plastic crap, get what you pay for )
BOEING: Rolls Royce
I don't care how Bus drivers justify and defend their Aircraft, it is rubbish.
Roll on the 787
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having operated both types (9 years on B737 - 200,300 & NG and 7 years on A319/320), IMHO the Airbus has a very nice cockpit and an excellent autothrust system. Apart from that, it's a heap of ****. It appears to have been designed for pilots who can't fly and can't think.
Awaiting the incoming!
Awaiting the incoming!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could have seen it coming
This thread could go on for year by the sound of it.
Buster H
I think I know the noise you mean, and I did not notice it, so maybe its the CFM as you get it on some 737's...or its something in the Cabin crews carry on luggage
So back to sloppy approaches and take offs that make you think the fuselage is extruded like a PVC pipe (and might be), is this the bus or the crews? Two different crews, same aircraft VQQ and two different and sloppy rides.
By the way boys Holden V Ford......Holden by a nose but only because I race one.....I drive Toyota's!!
J
Buster H
I think I know the noise you mean, and I did not notice it, so maybe its the CFM as you get it on some 737's...or its something in the Cabin crews carry on luggage
So back to sloppy approaches and take offs that make you think the fuselage is extruded like a PVC pipe (and might be), is this the bus or the crews? Two different crews, same aircraft VQQ and two different and sloppy rides.
By the way boys Holden V Ford......Holden by a nose but only because I race one.....I drive Toyota's!!
J
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southern hemisphere
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
J430, I just love listening to back seat drivers. So tell me, what 'experience' do you have to quote, 'sloppy approaches', 'a lot less stable' from down the back of this 'PVC pipe'?
The IAE V2500 does growl on take off, and the buffet you feel on descent is the landing lights being extended (into the airflow).
The IAE V2500 does growl on take off, and the buffet you feel on descent is the landing lights being extended (into the airflow).
Silly Old Git
One is bigger.
A quick glance up the wingtips told me i was getting into the right one.
Nope.
Thronomister left in high range.
A quick glance up the wingtips told me i was getting into the right one.
The approach was rolling quite a lot (hard to guess in degrees)......... Possibly a green F/O getting his hands on the controls for the first few times,
Nope.
Thronomister left in high range.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh no don't tell the press
Gooday Tinny,
Lets hope the media don't read this then, it will have been a near tragedy with 480 screaming passengers, wingtips almost wiping out the terminals and that bloody Thronomister left in high range!!!
Sounds to me like the bus is not as popular with the bulk of you too..... Just as I suspected.
the Bloody french!!......who said that?
EOM
J
Lets hope the media don't read this then, it will have been a near tragedy with 480 screaming passengers, wingtips almost wiping out the terminals and that bloody Thronomister left in high range!!!
Sounds to me like the bus is not as popular with the bulk of you too..... Just as I suspected.
the Bloody french!!......who said that?
EOM
J
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be interesting to see the debate between A320 and B737
it was with a quicker rate of descent than normal
The approach was rolling quite a lot (hard to guess in degrees) but let say hundreds of B737 landings in much more volatile conditions were no worse, so it leads me to think it must be a characteristic of the a/c type
Mr Boeing builds a nicer plane
Don't know enough about Airbus, but I saw Boeing build the 767 prototype and played around with the mockups and did the engineering familiarisation course.
Boeing builds a very nice aircraft in my opinion, at least from the maintainability point of view. They also listened to their customers (in those days).
Douglas on the other hand built over designed aircraft and and anytime you offered a suggestion all you got told was "We built the DC3, when we want your opinion we'll ask for it."
Typical example - pilot's opening window on DC9 - finely machined castings and forgings, lots of levers and a spring. Boeings one looked like it was cobbled together from old tuna cans.
Boeing builds a very nice aircraft in my opinion, at least from the maintainability point of view. They also listened to their customers (in those days).
Douglas on the other hand built over designed aircraft and and anytime you offered a suggestion all you got told was "We built the DC3, when we want your opinion we'll ask for it."
Typical example - pilot's opening window on DC9 - finely machined castings and forgings, lots of levers and a spring. Boeings one looked like it was cobbled together from old tuna cans.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys.. I think some of you are over the top here.
I have flown the 737- 300/400/NG for 3 years now and have recently just gone on the BUS. You could say the 737 is a real mans plane as it involves alot of direct inputs and handling from the pilot. It still has its conventional cockpit. The NG is a bit more modern as it has a glass cockpit but pretty much the same to fly (only faster on the approaches).
The 320 is a totally different concept. There is about 40% less workload for the pilot as everything is AUTO this AUTO that. Auto trim is probably one of the best things ever invented. You could say that your flying the computer rather than the plane itself. This concept is designed on the Crew Resource Management concept where team skills, computers and modern avionics is the key. Boeings are just hard, rigid, man's plane that requires more handling skills rather than computer skills.
As for the rough approach that got mentioned, it's not the plane. The smoothness of the flight varies from pilot to pilot, is weather dependant, etc.
I enjoy both. They are both totally different but excellent to fly.
I have flown the 737- 300/400/NG for 3 years now and have recently just gone on the BUS. You could say the 737 is a real mans plane as it involves alot of direct inputs and handling from the pilot. It still has its conventional cockpit. The NG is a bit more modern as it has a glass cockpit but pretty much the same to fly (only faster on the approaches).
The 320 is a totally different concept. There is about 40% less workload for the pilot as everything is AUTO this AUTO that. Auto trim is probably one of the best things ever invented. You could say that your flying the computer rather than the plane itself. This concept is designed on the Crew Resource Management concept where team skills, computers and modern avionics is the key. Boeings are just hard, rigid, man's plane that requires more handling skills rather than computer skills.
As for the rough approach that got mentioned, it's not the plane. The smoothness of the flight varies from pilot to pilot, is weather dependant, etc.
I enjoy both. They are both totally different but excellent to fly.