You guys really can't blame Airbus if your Fringlish isn't up to standard.

I never used manufacturers manuals until about 5 years ago. Airbus FCOM is an abortion in the paper or PDF form. The "Airbus laptop" version is OK as you can input a single MSN and get only that MSN. FCOM alone is 4-5 books on the 320 in paper format. Boeing uses one, of the same size.

I still haven't used a straight Boeing Flight Manual, but my company just started using a straight Boeing QRH. Absolutely brilliant. I get an amber light, and within 5-6 seconds, I am on the correct page of the QRH every time. It is the best manual I have ever used in 25 years.

This is not Airbus vs Boeing. I have flown both, a lot. I like both. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

Airbus FCOM is a huge weakness. A tablet version where you can input a single MSN would go a long way towards fixing this problem.

But input MSN number solves only small part of the problem. It's also possible to skip pages in pdf. As I love to understand how things work and why it doesn't help. It would be nice to know what's the difference for some systems between 319 and 321 and reason ect. Now the only solution is compare multiple pages to find out that for A321 only difference is that some speed is computed +5 for A321

Already exists. It's essentially an iPad version of the LPC Browser

Does this "rascist" insult come from the very person who publicly decried me for using the term "septics" when referring to our Transatlantic Cousins,?

surely not! A.B. hoist by your own petard :D Stones, Glasshouses.

note: in cockney rhyming slang, "septic tank"= Yank = American
it is not, in normal use, derogatory, just as "wotcha, me old cocker" does not infer that the subject is a penis-waving pervert flasher.

Sorry for thread-derailment.

I heard there was a tablet version of Airbus FCOM, but never saw it. I am back using company manuals, but we just switched to a straight Boeing QRH.

Airbus QRH was OK. I would rate it as just average. A bit of jumping around, especially doing the landing distance procedure.

An example of the Boeing QRH is the "Landing with one engine inoperative". A bit wordy, but the procedure is brilliant. Once you start it you never turn go anywhere else in any book. It even includes an Approach Descent checklist and Landing checklist, made for the single engine condition. Awesome.

Anyone have access to the Lufthansa Tech Manuals?

If your airline is not cheap and buys the LPC NG you will love the manuals.

We also have the browser function available at home via the crew portal (and thus can look at SN specific manuals)

Airmann, .......there isn't only the airline/private owner you are working for with advanced tech, there is a whole different world out there. Having access to e-manuals from Aibus website it is not everyone's priviledge.

I think a lot of you guys who are singing the praises of Boeing manuals need to remind yourselves that the Boeings you flew 5 to 10 years ago were based largely on 60s and 70s technology.

You cannot expect the same quantity/detail of technical content between a 737 classic and an A320. The latter has over 200 computers and that's where the problem begins. Managing revisions of software and electronics is a much bigger pain in the arse.

I sympathise with Airbus, just a little.

Steve, as pointed out before if you can't tell the difference in offensive potential between calling someone a sewage pit and a small animal you're clearly severely socially challenged.

Thank you too for the rather patronising lesson on rhyming slang, I expect you thought I hadn't come across it before. How thoughtful...

ZFT
 

Goddit.

Oh I see, sorry. Yeh good link. Talking of for training purposes only, there were some cool (dependent on WAT/runway perf take off) charts, of HK for the A320. from Messrs AIRBUS. Can`t seem to find `em. Gave V1,Vr, V2 and a few others.

I could have written that. My thoughts precisely.

I can only think that this is your first jet type. The LPC makes an impossible situation bearable - but still not good. By selecting one MSN, you still don't get to see the differences, and each time you "read" the manual, the information is different. That makes it terribly difficult to form a mental picture of the aircraft systems, and a working knowledge of how systems can differ.

Nope Aussie it is not....

I would not be too bothered about learning everything from the FCOM anyway, as it seriously dumbed down when you compare it to the maintenance manuals.

The LPC contains everything we need to know operationally, as another poster has said this is not 1960 technology and the relationships between all the systems is highly complex.... I think it would be beyond the scope of the type rating or manuals to actually fully explain this.

As such we have "dumbed down" operational information, containing the things we need to know... The LPC browser provides 3 levels of this information.