Airbus vs Boeing
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: invading asia
Having now surpassed 1000 hours on the B777 my position remains unchanged apart from constant back pain and dry/red eyes from the airflow.
In the Bus every air vent had a sliding 'on/off' control which apart from controlling the airflow had a direct impact on the noise level in the cockpit. The Boeing has no such controls and the cockpit is (as a result) far noisier and less conducive to: a) rest, and b) a satisfactory working environment.
If anyone has developed and/or sourced air vent 'plugs' that we could insert into the knee/side table/#2 window vents please PM me and I will buy them; otherwise I will tape them over on each flight.
I understand the reason for the airflow is to create an over-pressure in the cockpit compared to the cabin behind the cockpit door...and it is bollocks.
One further point to come out of a miserable thousand hours flying this airplane is the CG setting on the init perf page. What does it actually mean? It's preset at 30% for 300 and 7.5% for 300ER but what does it do? Unless the CG is 30 or 7.5% it's a nonsense! Airbus CG changes with fuel burn off and it compensates for it; change in fuel load in the Boeing has minimal effect on CG. 7.5% on ER is for alleged vibration but I have yet to encounter that. Changing CG upwards increases opt and max altitudes on the FMC and clearly the wings and engines (the most powerful engines ever on a civilian airliner) can handle it. If you have a (not unusual scenario) of an ocean crossing with little or no chance of an optimum altitude with 7.5% preset, change to anything higher (30-40%) and perhaps get your altitude. Normal CG is probably between 30 and 40 anyway.
The Boeing airframe is ok; put an airbus cockpit into it and keep the electronic checklist and it would be a good ship
In the Bus every air vent had a sliding 'on/off' control which apart from controlling the airflow had a direct impact on the noise level in the cockpit. The Boeing has no such controls and the cockpit is (as a result) far noisier and less conducive to: a) rest, and b) a satisfactory working environment.
If anyone has developed and/or sourced air vent 'plugs' that we could insert into the knee/side table/#2 window vents please PM me and I will buy them; otherwise I will tape them over on each flight.
I understand the reason for the airflow is to create an over-pressure in the cockpit compared to the cabin behind the cockpit door...and it is bollocks.
One further point to come out of a miserable thousand hours flying this airplane is the CG setting on the init perf page. What does it actually mean? It's preset at 30% for 300 and 7.5% for 300ER but what does it do? Unless the CG is 30 or 7.5% it's a nonsense! Airbus CG changes with fuel burn off and it compensates for it; change in fuel load in the Boeing has minimal effect on CG. 7.5% on ER is for alleged vibration but I have yet to encounter that. Changing CG upwards increases opt and max altitudes on the FMC and clearly the wings and engines (the most powerful engines ever on a civilian airliner) can handle it. If you have a (not unusual scenario) of an ocean crossing with little or no chance of an optimum altitude with 7.5% preset, change to anything higher (30-40%) and perhaps get your altitude. Normal CG is probably between 30 and 40 anyway.
The Boeing airframe is ok; put an airbus cockpit into it and keep the electronic checklist and it would be a good ship
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
From: No one's home...
This is all too funny. You guys sound like a bunch of 1960NASCAR rednecks arguing over which is best, Chevrolet or Ford. The facts are ALL airplanes are compromises and each has strengths and weaknesses. The best one is the one with the best departure and arrival times, the best layovers, the best F/As on board, the best pay and the most time off. Everything else is very subjective and anecdotal. 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
From: North of the circle
A.vs.B
I know itīs and old thread..
But seriously "Pugilistic animus" "Ksa 5223" and "Check airman"
You Had me laughing out loud with your "comments"
Ksa 5223 ha ha ha....hillarious!
Have a good day all..
But seriously "Pugilistic animus" "Ksa 5223" and "Check airman"
You Had me laughing out loud with your "comments"
Ksa 5223 ha ha ha....hillarious!
Have a good day all..
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 398
Likes: 23
From: Seoul/Gold Coast.....
To Templarknight
Our procedure on a 300ER is to subtract an extra 10% Off the TOMAC C of G and insert that pre-flight on the performance initialisation page.
I.E. TOMAC 31% -10% insert 21% in the FMC. This gives a more realistic initial cruise C of G usually giving a higher MAX ALT on VNAV Cruise page..
What do other operators do?
I.E. TOMAC 31% -10% insert 21% in the FMC. This gives a more realistic initial cruise C of G usually giving a higher MAX ALT on VNAV Cruise page..
What do other operators do?
Last edited by zlin77; 20th March 2009 at 15:42.
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: In my suitcase
I really didn't have the chance to fly a boeing yet, but if i could choose, i would say airbus... I'm not saying that Boeing is a bad aircraft, i just think that at the end of the day you are still in one piece after flying an airbus, and here's is why
- workload reduced
-ergonomic design of the cockpit
-Sidestick+ flight laws ( Ground Mode, Flare mode, Flight mode) that is hell of a good reason, since the relation between the sidestick deflection and the elevator and aileron deflection changes according to the phase of flight you are at..anyways there's much more to add to this post but i would have to spend the whole afternoon here
that's my opnion!
- workload reduced
-ergonomic design of the cockpit
-Sidestick+ flight laws ( Ground Mode, Flare mode, Flight mode) that is hell of a good reason, since the relation between the sidestick deflection and the elevator and aileron deflection changes according to the phase of flight you are at..anyways there's much more to add to this post but i would have to spend the whole afternoon here
that's my opnion!
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Aus
GE.
This from the Airbus operating manual re use of manual thrust and the 100' you referred to.
Regarding the fuel/wing icing prob, can't find the ref, but from memory, if the outer tank fuel temp is less than zero (??) and you are descending into an area of high humidity with an outside air temp less 10 (??) you need to transfer fuel to warm it up.
Can any other bus drivers, fill in the blanks on the temps?
Come to 'the other side' you might just like it
This from the Airbus operating manual re use of manual thrust and the 100' you referred to.
USE OF A/THR
The pilot should use the A/THR for approaches as it provides accurate speed
control. The pilot will keep hand on the thrust levers so as to be prepared to
react if needed. If for any reason, the speed drops significantly below VAPP,
the pilot may push the thrust levers forward above CLB detent (but below
MCT) till the speed trend arrow indicates an acceleration then bring back the
thrust levers into CLB detent. This is enough to be quickly back on speed.
The pilot should keep in mind, however, that, when below 100 ft AGL, moving
the thrust levers above the CLB detent will result in the A/THR disconnection.
The pilot should use the A/THR for approaches as it provides accurate speed
control. The pilot will keep hand on the thrust levers so as to be prepared to
react if needed. If for any reason, the speed drops significantly below VAPP,
the pilot may push the thrust levers forward above CLB detent (but below
MCT) till the speed trend arrow indicates an acceleration then bring back the
thrust levers into CLB detent. This is enough to be quickly back on speed.
The pilot should keep in mind, however, that, when below 100 ft AGL, moving
the thrust levers above the CLB detent will result in the A/THR disconnection.
Can any other bus drivers, fill in the blanks on the temps?
Come to 'the other side' you might just like it
Guest
Posts: n/a
Greeings
I was flying the A330, and yes it happens
We tranfer the fuel on the ground, the transfer enables the skin to warm up, because it is no longer in contact with sub zero fuel, and ice will melt I cannot found any reference in the books, but we use to do it especially when tankering fuel.
Now I am on the B777 and I love it
the only thing I miss is the table
I was flying the A330, and yes it happens
Regarding the fuel/wing icing prob, can't find the ref, but from memory, if the outer tank fuel temp is less than zero (??) and you are descending into an area of high humidity with an outside air temp less 10 (??) you need to transfer fuel to warm it up.
I cannot found any reference in the books, but we use to do it especially when tankering fuel.Now I am on the B777 and I love it
the only thing I miss is the table