From a Boeing to an Airbus - Pilot Point of View
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Portugal
Age: 56
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus
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
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
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by pstaney; 26th Nov 2006 at 14:54. Reason: typo
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Miami
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by Ag2A320; 27th Nov 2006 at 03:16.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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 fall into category 4
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe-the sunshine side
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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..)
" 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..)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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).
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).
I can't see why the newer Boeings would be any different.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 30 West
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
you never wanna go back !
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
you never wanna go back !
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Twilight Zone
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
TBE.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts