ksa5223 LOL thats hilarious

Not quite in the same way if I underdstand the point here. Airbus's show VFEnext whilst decelerating so you get a visual indication on the PFD speed-tape of the flap limiting speed for the next flap setting

Also:
-setting the park brake; airbus is a simple, no effort switch. I will need a chiropractor after a few months on this tractor, and
-how can this airplane have been certified when it is IMPOSSIBLE to do a full and free control check (full control column pull back) if sitting in the correct position reference the white cross in front of the column used to SET the correct position!!!!

Hint for Mr Boeing...side stick.

As an aside I understand one of Boeing's major issues with the side stick is lack of feedback/situational awareness.

2nd hint for Mr Boeing...make the side sticks move together as if they were a conventional column and if need be make them move with autopilot inputs. There you go...problem solved now lets get on with it and ditch the biggest negative in your airplanes.

Mr. t

1. Some of us value true performance over frills and we don't expect a flight deck to be a spa or a balcony seat at the Opera House.
2. There is no history of a "cross-wired" yoke ever causing a near-accident.
3. I have not seen a video of a wingtip strike involving a 777.
4. Setting the park brake is one of life's difficult challenges and sometimes you must conquer it more than twice a day but then again there is no history of landing with it on. Also it still works on an electrically unpowered aircraft.

Ok,
you drive your tractor; I prefer my bentley
or maybe I just prefer shopping at Harrods compared to Woolworths
(lets face it; it's a good accountants airplane but a poor pilot's plane compared to the Bus)

It always amazes me when the Airbus v. Boeing question comes up that some of us get very up tight as if it's something personal. I really don't think either of the two company's management really care what we think. Especially the coming years when all management will be looking towards the accountant for which aeroplane is better.
But my Airbus is still better than your Boeing:)

I rest my case!:p

They're both good aeroplanes and they can both get from A to B with a minimum of fuss and ease.
However, while they carry about the same amount of people, the A340 burns something like 8 tonnes per hour and the B777 more like 6 t/hr and it goes faster.
Why on earth would anyone buy an A340?

I feel both airplanes have there good and bad points. Ultimately though I feel with productivity on the increase around the world , more of us will be spending more and more " hours" in the seat. So you can argue all you like about the technology. All I want is a nice comfy office ( that wont neccessitate back surgery in a few years). Also with the mountains of info we have to access at times give me the table any day.
The bus wins hands down for comfort. I still think Mr Boeing faired very poorly with the comfort factor. Its almost disgracefull.
Can you imagine buyng your new Ferrari with "go cart " or lawnmower seats in it. Even the averge public bus has a better seat.

PLEASE MR BOEING , BUILD A BETTER SEAT ON THE 787. IF YOU DONT KNOW HOW , TRY SAAB MOTOR CARS , ( IF THEY ARE TOO MUCH THEN EVEN JOHN DEERE TRACTORS WOULD HELP MORE THAN YOUR PRESENT TORTURE DEVICE"

I agree with you fourgolds

SAAB's seats are the best in the world... I drive a Saab 9-3 Viggen and you can sit in those seats forever. It's a shame that aircraft builders havn't put anything that can compare into commercial aircrafts =)

Why on earth would someone buy an A340?
Maybe to feel more comfortable on the polar routes.

Air Canada pilots preferring Boeing?
 

Someone on the net claiming he is a AC 767 pilot, is claiming Air Canada pilots and maintenance folks far prefer the Boeings over the the Airbus types. He quotes:

Quote from 36 year airline pilot in letter to AW&ST,
April 14, 2008:

"One third of my time has been in Airbus models and while they are quiet and comfortable, they are sub-standard to Boeings in every measure except acquisition cost. The common belief among pilots and mechanics is that they are 'throwaway' aircraft. As the A330 age has approached 10 years in many fleets, maintenance and decreased reliability have gone through the roof."

Can anyone confirm / deny this?

2 cents
 

Can't speak for the wide body airframes, we operate about 10 1994 A320's and these aircraft have been to hell and back, they still fly straight and I have been AOG on only one occasion in four years, very reliable, I personally believe that Airbuses do better if flown, leaving them sit on the deck will create problems.

control column
 

I respect your opinions however regarding the control column the only positive thing you must admit is that there is a mechanical linkage with the other one that allow you to "feel" what the other guy is thinking . this is I believe heavily missed on side stick controls configurations.

From a pilot's point of view....
 

... and of course in disagreement with the bean counters, I would say: neither :p I love the MD-11 - what a gorgeous plane. Makes me somehow still feel proud to be a pilot :ok:

Oh yes!! The MD11 had the best flying office, by far.

My best of:

cockpit space: MD11 / 777 / AB
view: MD11 / AB+777
seat: MD11 / AB / 777
noise: MD11 / AB+777
yoke/sidestick: AB / 777+MD11 (best would be ss with feedback)
ride: 777 / MD11 / AB
RAs: MD11 / AB+777
Em descents: MD11 / 777 / AB
gen Emergencies: 777 / AB / MD11
Checklist work: 777 / MD11 / AB
FCP: MD11 / 777 / AB
Throttle concept: MD11 / 777 / (AB go back to the drawing board, the fix stinks!)
Brakes: AB+777 / MD11
Landing performance : 777 / AB / MD11's weak spot!
X-wind: 777 / MD11 / AB
Hard landing danger: 777 / AB / MD11
Taxiing: neither (go back to the drawing board, all of you!)
FMC: neither (just include the goodies of the competitor and yours will finally be fine)

Now everyone has his priorities, so the objectively perfect one does not exist.
For me it would be the MD11 cockpit/FCP/AT, with AB sidestick (moving feedback please), including the electronic checklist of the 777, on a 777 airframe.

GMDS
 

Thank you! Very interesting! Send this to Boeing and AB!:D:D:D

Empati

Amen to that!!
Loved flying it:ok:

I like your discussion. It shows that you have no problems whatsoever :O I would understand if you would complain about a loud turboprop or a Russian airliner, but the differences between A and B is so small and neglectable that it's not worth an argument.

On the other hand I have to smile about your wishes for the designers. Airbus will never do movin throttles and feedback units on the sidestick. That's the trick behind it: Because you only have a stick, you save hundreds if not thousands of kilos of weight, millions of costs and uncountable hours on maintenance. That's why this concept is so powerful.

Let me say this after having seen both worlds: I don't need moving throttles, and I have enough feedback from other sources when it comes to monitoring pilot.

Dani
(currently flying the mighty F100)

Mnttech....I agree with you completely on this one! I was able to get some time in a 744 and 320 class D sim around 1997. At that time, I had a PPL/IR and about 8 hours multi time in a duchess...TT was about 160 hours. I did the 320 first and had NO problem flying it. APU/engine start, taxi, take off, flew 3 ILS approaches (one autoland), land full stop, taxi back and shut down.
On the 744....well, I got it into the air and that was about it! I was porpoising all the way through the approach and cratered on every attempt. :eek:

Was great fun though! No way I will ever be able to do it again after 9/11. :suspect:

Dani, I don't think they saved hundreds on kilos....each AB is heavier than the B in it's class (320 -737)
For ex ,the 318 has an EW of 40 T ,and the 700 has about 39T (the 300 has 33T ) .And the 318 should be compared with the 600, which smaller than the 700.

Hello Templar,
I detect a case of the Devil’s advocate in you. As a fellow Devil’s advocate, perhaps I may respond!
From Boeing to Airbus 330/340, I find various good points and bad points. I need time to think of good points for the AIRBUS family.
1. Great VLS indication, and far better than B767 (absolutely ignorant about B777). I love it in relation to bank, config, speedbrakes, and G loading ( I try & avoid aerobatics if pax on board).
2. Surprisingly good low altitude performance! But crap as you get into the higher altitudes. However this is justified by Airbus’s so-called [OPTIMISED] philosophy (French left-bank academics at work!)
3. Nicely integrated FMGS, but no doubt on par with B777 and inferior to Gulfstream/Falcon.
4. I do not think Airlines (e.g. Air France, Lufthansa, China Eastern, Emirates, Qatar etc. would give a flying f**k if you had a tray or not! So that is not part of the equation. In fact, the tray tends to spill my champagne into my Lobster coz Airbus did not have the expertise to design it to be level!!
5. What is interesting is whether there is any feedback from the Control Columns / Thrust Levers. The opinion is divided in this respect based on the accident record.
6. Does point 5 have any effect on pilots when under extreme stress as a result of Upset/ Extreme change/low experience on type?
7. Massive tiller on Boeing designed for wimps with limp wrists transitioning from Airbus. Very good foresight on Boeing’s part!
8. Regarding the Airbus tiller, I normally play with my balls my every hour, so I have no problem handling the tiller.
9. Regarding the excessive airflow, my Training Capt suggested I was a stupid f**k for not being able to turn it off. Perhaps your trainer was more subtle and gentler than mine!
10. Excellent sunshades taken from Citroen - absolutely superior - no question!
11. Regarding the seat recline, I must admit that the Airbus seats are PURRRFECT for studying the overhead panel thru one’s eyelids - tho my FO insisted that it was PURRRFECT for him too.
12. My company has insisted on removing the chair armrest due to consistent complaints from the flight crew that they were too comfortable.
13. My company also insists on us knowing the flap speed limits - absolutely untenable - we are fighting this point in the Labour Courts.
14. My company does not have a problem with MCP distance since we do not have a policy of discriminating on the basis of one’s arms’ length. We have been actively recruiting in the southern hemisphere.
15.I find it bizarre that on a 4-eng aeroplane (A340), a 2-eng failure can result in a dual Hydraulic loss, resulting in a manual gear extension and loss of Nose-wheel steering with a landing commit point whenever the gear is extended! I would have thought that with a 2 eng failure, Airbus would have designed the systems to support the pilots’ workload rather than loading them up.
16. I would suggest ignore EICAS coz Airbus systems fail with regular monotony, so sit on the edge of your seat all the time waiting till you discover the fault on ECAM.
My initial humble opinion. Standing by for the inevitable arrows in my back!!
HA56

You're all wrong and getting far too technical about it! I work on, (notice the work on, not fly!) the 737, A319 and the 777. Ignoring the 777, the basic differences between the 73 and the 319 are obvious. The 73 comes complete with fluffy dice, a pine tree air freshener and go faster stripes, whereas the Airbus has a tartan rug and a box of tissues on the back parcel shelf and a round tin of travel sweets in the flight deck! The Airbus is the Rover 416 while the 737 is a Mark II Ford Fiesta XR2i! See, it's easy when you don't get technical! :p

I'll get my coat.....

JSL

Dani

You can get a rumbling, feedbacking joystick at Sears or Carrefour around the corner for just 5$ and maybe 20 gramms more. - And if you don't need feedback: Good for you. I still do because even with all the gimmicks installed, I still fly primarerly with my extended spine and this needs feedback!! Call me old and I couldn't give a damn .....

Posted by Alexban:
I didn't say that A is lighter than B, I say that you save weight with FBW and/or sidestick.
The overall weight differences might stem from other sources like fuselage/wing design, hull size and interiour quality - all of which an A seems to be slightly more robust/comfortable.

You can also get a nice soft TV chair with remote command and drink holder at Sears or Carrefour - comes to about the same level of comfort as some plane seats :E Still I'm not sure if that would be the right set of furniture. You would be the first ppruner to complain about "it's too soft, to old, the fabric too warm, the imprint patterns too ugly"...

Dani

AvWeek has been publishing letters from every guy who has been within 1 mile of an airport as a response to the A330 winning the tanker bid. One wrote the Airbus can't "take a hit". ??? I flew -135s for a while and we never boasted about it being able to absorb hits. ???

And just as pilots seem to be quite parochial about their airplanes, no doubt mechanics are the same. Some think Boeing makes great airplanes and some think that McDoug makes great airplanes. Neither will agree the other company makes great airplanes.

according to speed news http://tinyurl.com/6s3otm 364 Boeings in storage with some from the 60s.

"" http://tinyurl.com/5ztgcw 78 Airbi in storage some of which are more than 20+ yrs old.


Funny thing is there are a few DC-3s and the youngest is over 60.. hardly a 'throwaway'

Surely you jest: Boeing builds a stronger/tougher plane than Airbus. Take a look at any old airliner from the pair and the Boeing will typically be in better condition.

If an Airbus, any Airbus, is 'more comfortable' than a Boeing in terms of turbulence encounters, then my definition of comfortable has been wrong for a long time.

You mean when I look at a brand new 737NG and it looks already like an old airliner ;)

Or do you get your opinion from the fact that there are still these old 727 and 737 classic all around the world, falling apart and crashing all the time (ok ok, I know, it's because of maintenance).

Dani

Let's wait and see what happens, if one day 35 year old A320s will be operated in - let's say - Indonesia or Africa.... Should be rather interesting :rolleyes:

They wont, because AI doesn't give aircraft to dubious operators. And they say "stop!" after 50 000 hrs (100k and 150k can soon be purchased, but only with checks).

Wileydog3 quotes a genius - There's a DHL crew who would like to have a word with him... :}

No, from the fact that the cockpit interiors in the Airbus's fall apart far quicker than the Boeing's. Also from talking to ground engineers that have worked on both - So far all have said that where B might use a nicely made forged bracket to hold something in place, A would use a bit of bend sheet.
Sure it's lighter, but it's not going to last as long. And as we found out further up the thread a 320 isn't lighter than a 737 anyway, so where is the extra weight?

It's in the:

Fold-away table
Clamp that blocks opposite sidestick movement
Clamp that blocks autothrottle lever movement
Artificial pitch/roll demand signal generator and actuator
Converter of FD/FPV logical signal to silly bird display
Retrofit of instinctive V/S-thumbwheel to confusing turnknob
"Too soft and comfy seat" (see silly comment above)
My zillions of logbook entries, because "I am the first ppruner to complain" (same same -> above)

GMDS:}

This is all way too complicated.

It is this simple:

The problem with an Airbus is that it is an Airbus (cheap, flimsy, disposable airplane).

The problem with a Douglas is that it is a Douglas.

A Boeing airplane (any Boeing) is superior to all others because... it is a Boeing.

It is that simple.

TWA Pilot:- 100% agree with you.

CX spent 25% of our maintenace budget on 4 A340-600's !! incredible piece of un-reliable plastic junk,

And to those mis-guided fools that think you actually fly an Airbus....................nope, you have a computer keeping it at a constant G ( for the manoeuver being attempted ) therefore any wing drops, nose drops etc are basically corrected BY THE COMPUTER, not you. Some don't get the concept and greatly overcontrol the side stick and thus make it look bad. Set it, leave it alone.

So you are ALWAYS in a mode Boeing call control wheel steering, ie Flying the machine through the computer.

Except for below 100' ( or is it 50' ) when you get direct law.

So enough of "I hand fly the Airbus" No you don't:= the computer does.

I've flown the Airbus Sim a lot ( 320 330 and 340 ) and I can say that anyone could fly a bus after being told the basics of how to massage the side stick.

On a Boeing you still need to actually FLY the Aircraft, just like a C 150.

In a big bus or a big Boeing, I know where I'd rather be, and it's got a side stick. That said if its 30 kts across and I'm at the end of a 12 hour day... ah sod it, I'll keep with the bus, not hurt me yet!

GExxxxxxxxx
 

Quote : "I've flown the Airbus Sim a lot ( 320 330 and 340 ) and I can say that anyone could fly a bus after being told the basics of how to massage the side stick. "
That is about the best compliment you could make for the safety of the Airbus.
On the same vein, I haven't heard of anybody complaining about the DC-10 or the MD-11 handling through the CWS...Another case for the goose and the gander, perhaps ?
Another way to look at things - and a lot more accurate than your post - is that the 777 FBW is what you get from a 'Bus with degraded modes. Think about dumbing down a perfectly sensible syatem !

GE90115BL2, I used to think much along your lines as well, but with a new job I was required to start an A330 type rating and through the course of it I was converted (no pun intended)
As I wrote earlier, both types do the same job quite well - But they do it differently. This doesn't mean that one is inherently better or worse than the other, just different.
If you like hand-flying and a relatively simple aeroplane, you should like a Boeing.
If you like managing the machine and operating some very clever gadgets, then you should like an Airbus.