Airbus vs Boeing
 

What’s wrong with the B777?

Having recently converted from Airbus 330/340 to B777 I can now categorically state that the Boeing is in fact a piece of junk.

Here are the problems it has:

Control Column…where is the table? Fly by wire but artificial feel added to make you think you are flying a conventional aircraft…why? Old Americans? In fully reclined (normal) flying position yoke obscures the PFD/ND displays.

Too much air coming in and unable to turn it off. Especially that little triangular vent by your left knee which blows air in your eyes when you are trying to sleep with your head on the ridiculous control column.

Clumsy sun shades that need to be clipped on and then restowed; they should be pull-down items like the vastly superior airbus.

Ridiculous crank handle for opening window. Airbus opens with the one handle that Boeing already has.

Massive tiller; my arm is sore thinking about it. What do Boeing not understand about fly by wire.

Uncomfortable seat with centre harness strap that crushes your jewels. Does not recline enough.

Outrageous seat rails above the floor. Airbus are under floor like they should be. Wreaks havoc on your leather soled shoes and have already damaged one pair when electrically sliding it backwards.

Chair armrest obscures the CM1 RMP in the (normal) reclined position.

No flap limit speeds on the speed tape on PFD…what?????

MCP too far away from CM1. Major effort from (normal) reclined position to order any weather etc or check system displays.

Boeing procedure also sucks saying is an EICAS driven plane and no need to check system displays. This is purely poor airmanship whereas Airbus suggests a system check about every 30 minutes. This has saved my bacon a few times already and I will not follow Boeing recommendation.

By the way I don't like the Boeing and would go back to the Airbus if I could but that isn’t my decision.

Oh Lordy you're gonna get it:ouch:

Boeing is a nice plane
Airbus is a nice plane

alphabetized to exclude bias:}

:ok:Take a concrete pill
Harden up.
You are not paid the bucks for nothing

Legend has it that Boeing is built for pilots, while Airbus is built for those that want to be pilots:E

But seriously folks... both good and bad attributes are inherent in both aircraft.

More
 

Other things:
Trim...elevator and aileron trim! excuse me??? What part of fly by wire are we not grasping here? Also the behaviour of the rudder trim with engine out:ugh:

The fold out side table is too low and the emergency torch (on the floor!) is too close to the wall to allow a standard size flight bag to fit beside your seat.

Oh my, this will be a nasty thread :ugh: :ugh:

I do pity those unfortunate enough to have to sit beside you, it’s going to be a looooong flight!

Give me 30kts across and I'd take the Boeing every day. That said, the big bus is a nice place to work...

WooHoo

way to go,

Big Bus is FAr Superior!!!!!!

Real Men have a stick between their legs!!!!
they don't need the one from Boeing!!!!!:}

INCOMING!!!!!!!!! :E

OFF TO,
RnR

I'll just sit here smug and happy in my E-jet, and laugh at both of the big boys. ;)

Where are you supposed to put your in-tray, paperweights, stapler and a photo of a loved one on a boeing?? :}

Having also converted from Bus to 777 , here is my take.

All in all a very different experience. Kinda like soccer and rugby. Both ball games but quite different.

There are many differences but overall heres,s my impression ( some things may seen mundane but they are relevent when you are spending so much time on the flight deck.

What I dislike on the 777 predictably is no table or sidestick. Also the lighting to read charts etc is very poor compared to a bus.Also the seats believe it or not are very uncomfortable on the 777.( they say the guy who designed the seats on the 777,s wife was sleeping with a pilot)
For an aeroplane that was designed with the consultation of pilots I find this dissapointing.
I mean why should we have to struggle to read the charts sitting in discomfort !!! Also the audio speaker on the 777 is for some reason on the floor , so a little more difficult to hear , almost requiring full volume( for me ,compared to the bus) . Mr Bus put it more in line with where your ears are !!! The FMC is more instinctive on the bus although I am going to give Boeing a little latitude on this as I have been operating it for 4 months v 7 years on the bus. Allthough the use of multiple colours and a far more instinctive and faster thinking FMC does make me prefer the bus. Being able to string the alternate when doing diversion planning in the hold etc is a huge plus given modern fuel policies. Again I have to say I prefer the bus for its FMS.
Taxi with FBW on the bus is also like power steering versus a much heavier tiller on the 777. Again on that I prefer the bus.

OK so what do I like about the boeing then !
Well here is the crux. Where it counts , the abnormals ,Boeing is far superior, The Eicas and systems I feel are far simpler with more redundancy and a simpler overall pholosophy.
If it all goes pear shaped . I would prefer to handle the Boeing philosophy. With the only exception I find being engine failure on take off that is much busier on the 777 than the bus.
I also cannot see the need for having built in the need to trim the 777 just to comply with the requests of pilots. Truthfully the way most modern airlines automation policy , 90 % of the time crews hardly hand fly and trim anyway. So again while its more traditional to trim . I think Airbus got that right.

However on the bus the flight controlls demand roll rate ( a pain in a strong crosswind as you almost have to adjust then centre then adjust then centre) Its all a little messy. The 777 however the roll is aileron deflection ( bank) which is exactly what you want in strong winds.
I do prefer ( handling) the 777 , she is much more solid and stable in almost every regime.
I have found her lovely to land , however most airlines that operate both types seem to have many many more hard landings regularly on the 777 than on the Bus. I am trying to see why , but I do believe it has something to do with the Flare Law in the bus and probably related to motor skills on the sidestick being easier to replicate for regular flare ( inspite of what they say about looking out the window , assessing your sink rate etc which of course is primary.)

If Mr Boeing is listening please give us a more comfortable seat on the 787 , and much better lighting. Would,nt it be logical to have a light that actually shines on your approach charts !. Update your FMC , put in a faster processor. Keep the flight controll laws , but give us a sidestick and a table.

Stop press

Sorry in my previous post I meant.
I found the engine failure on take off easier on the bus than on the 777. Seemed to confuse that. ( probably something to do with 95 hours in the last 4 weeks) a little shattered.

Hummm, this post has been up for almost 24 hours and only 15 responses........ I would have thought 15 pages.

As a ex flight engineer off of the 707 and a sim tech who has flown both the 777 and the A320 in the same day, I would have to go with the Boeing as a better airplane. The 777 FMS seems more straight forward. And I like both the moving throttles and the flight control logic of the 777.

I will say that I have put non pilots in both, and most younger kids can fly the heck out the A320. Must be all that computer joy stick time.

BTW, I always had a table in the Boeing!

. . . and not to forget to mention the much more spacious B777 cabin. :ok:

Can you handfly an Airbus?Didnt think so.
I think inadvertently you have highlighted the one underlying difference between the two.Boeing's design is pilot-oriented,Airbus imposes its design on the pilot.They "disconnect" the pilot from the plane with little or no sensory feedback and in return try and dazzle you with some gimmickry.You know pilots are just people,some stupid,some not so stupid.I read the thread started by Strong Resolve a while back and noted the staunch and stubborn opposition to almost everything he said in spite of the clarity and sanity of what he was actually saying.Humans have five(some say six) sensory channels;yet Airbus arrogantly ask the system-operator(for that is surely what you unwittingly become) to follow whats going on with one.Revolutionary?Yes.Modern?Yes.Clever?No.

Give me a Bus any day. Boeing aircraft are like John Deere tractors. Sound, simple and reliable.......Nothing fancy. Good if you want to plough a field.
:eek:

I hope the 787 is the best Boeing can do rather than the best they can do whilst maintaining backwards compatibility with older aircraft.

I've flown both Bus and 777 and like both, but what frustrates me with the 777 is that it is a newer aircraft than the Airbus yet some aspects seem dumbed down so to be like older Boeings....Almost like putting a hand crank start on a new car because that's how they're always done it!! Even though they have the technology to go much further.

I just checked out in the 777 after 10 years flying the A320. I have also flown all the Boeings from the 707 on. While the Boeings seem more solid I like flying the bus. The 787 is going to be a common type rating with the 777, but the cockpit looka a lot more star Wars like and seats look completely different. You can blame the yoke on the old pilots at UAL. they were the launch customer and had a lot to say about the design. A little irony here I have had a lot of FO's say they really like flying the bus, but if they had to go to war the would want a Boeing, and now the USAF has chosen the A330 as their new tanker.

Airbus FBW family.....Custom designed originals

B757......very nice to fly, but, at the end of the day it's the b*ast*rd child of a drunken night out between a B727 and a B767

B767.....Custom designed original, very nice to fly, but seriously old fashioned compared to the bus

B777...slghtly warmed over B767 with some FBW bits to make it appear modern

B787....plastic B777

type rated on MD80, A320/321, B757, B767. Loved them all, but give me a choice and it's the Airbus every time. Despite what Rananim, thinks they're great for hand flying too.

Bus14

I would definitively fly a B-727 than any Airbus.
The airbus is booooring. :ok:

Control column - agree; it's sad that we never got to see a proper force-feedback sidestick with cross-cockpit linking. Boeing had the chance to do it properly and out-Airbus Airbus but blew it.

Gale-force air conditioning - agree; I end up taping over most of the vents on a long flight otherwise I feel like I've been sandpapering my face. There's a major blast of air from the gaps between the overhead panels as well. :ugh:

Sun "shades" - agree; completely useless, too small and not dark enough. Luckily there are plenty of newspapers available. :p

Window handles - neutral; could live with either, don't open the window that much anyway.

Tiller - agree; the blasted things always seem to have some sort of bias one way or the other, so it won't a) go in a straight line without input leading to b) applying a steady force for the whole taxi, either on the tiller or the rudder pedals. This is mucho annoying on a long taxi out. :ugh:

Uncomfortable seat - agree in spades; I think the designer of the Iron Maiden was teamed up with a concrete technician to make these. I've slept on floors that were more comfortable. :mad:

Seat rails - agree; another design triumph.

Flap limit speeds - disagree; They seem to be present, or do my eyes deceive me...?

MCP distant - sort of agree; the EICAS/COM/synoptic panel is a bit of a stretch from the LHS but think of the poor occupant of the RHS who can barely see the N1/EPR gauges as they're so far away.

EICAS - disagree; seems to work OK. Why do you need to check things constantly, have you not heard of Sudoku? How do you know if something is good or bad if there are no published limits for it and the systems are self-configuring? You have to be careful not to manufacture a "problem" where none really exists.

Trim - agree; what's the point of trim on a FBW aeroplane? Do you ever want to be out of trim? Answers on a postcard...:rolleyes:

Overall there's plenty to complain about but I do get the feeling that I'm flying a very safe aircraft. I don't think the handling is enjoyable but it works and I can't think of anything better in a 40kt crosswind. It has thrust asymmetry and envelope protection but they don't get in your way during normal operations and can be overridden if you don't like what they're up to. A few mods to increase the comfort level at the front, some FF joysticks and we're ready to go. Here's to the 787 doing at least some of this...

Airbus v Boeing (v Douglas etc...)
One thing only to remember, in the words of the old song "Love the one you're with"

....
And the eagle flies with the dove
And if you can't be with the one you love
...
love the one, love the one, love the one your with
.....
Don't be angry
Don't be sad
Don't sit cryin' for good times you had
etc etc
:ok:

Typifies nicely the chasm between the two camps.The Airbus afficionado is basically a tech-junkie,probably queues for the latest iphone/ipod and then throws it away when something shinier comes along in 6 months.I've had the same mobile for the last ten years and wont be changing it anytime soon.But translate this tech-addiction to flying and you have a problem.Flying doesnt change and neither do humans;they're lousy monitors especially in the only available channel that Airbus give you(optical),and they need multiple cues in as many sensory channels as possible to function optimally.
When Airbus introduced their wonder-machine way back when, they said it was so easy that a kid could fly it and that it would put an end to pilot-error.How wrong they were.:D

"Gale-force air conditioning - agree; I end up taping over most of the vents on a long flight otherwise I feel like I've been sandpapering my face. There's a major blast of air from the gaps between the overhead panels as well."

Isn't some of that the equipment cooling air? And you tape it off?:confused:

“Flying doesn’t change and neither do humans”

How wrong! Flying does change. I hate to have to state the obvious but that statement means some of us don’t see this point: Flight dynamics may be constant for a given configuration, mass, and velocity, but the act of how we as humans use the technology at our disposal to get an aeroplane from A to B hasn’t stopped evolving for over a hundred years. If we stifle this evolution with the attitude of “well it’s worked alright for the last ten years” we never would have had the A320 and all that has evolved from it.

I for one am looking forward to see what innovations are just around the corner.

FullWings . . . "taping over the air vents" . . .are you one of those guys who doesn't wear a T-shirt and easily gets cold chills, and then thinks that the cockpit temp ought to be 26c? :confused:

I run the cockpit temp at or nearest to 22c [Int'l comfort standard] and tell my copilot to bring a sweater if he has a problem with that. :ooh:

Regarding air vents: nothing to do with the temperature, just the volume & velocity of the air that comes out of them. On a long night sector, it goes down the back of your neck, up your sleeves, dries your eyes out, etc. On one of our aircaft that is set to force 11-12, I had to fold up a bit of newspaper into a makeshift hat to avoid going numb around the ears!

It's a personal viewpoint, of course, much in the same way that some people can stand on a glacier at midday without sunglasses and others wouldn't even be able to open their eyes. I fall into the latter category, if you haven't guessed already...

Boeing and Airbus are for sissies,
Try flying the MD11 and douglas metal :ok:

I think they tried the ploughed field approach at Heathrow earlier this year????:confused:

The game is quite simple: if you can't handfly Airboos to happy landing in direct law (and that's very manual indeed), you cannot put Airboos type rating on your licence. Your opinion holds true for every non-pilot, though.

The best airplane in the world is the one you're paid to fly. If you want a happy and long lasting friendship with her, love her good sides and learn to live with her bad sides.

Boeing or Bus? Whichever gets me bigger paycheck and more free time (in a vain hope they're not mutually exclusive) - even if it's Cessna.

Wow I love reading this and FULLWINGS your post is really really funny here seriously.. :D:}

Very entertaining to read about the gale force air vent. HAHAHAHA

Lets see.....Airbus seats by Recaro no wonder they are so comfy.
Boeing cockpit designed by 4'2" midget with a change purse for a flight kit. "This should be plenty of room for 3 (at the time) crewmembers". PS. Per boeing engineers, the 707,727,737 was designed for a 5'2" pilot. I guess thats why my 6'7" 275lbs of muscle just didnt fit!

I guess thats why my 6'7" 275lbs of muscle just didn't fit!

At 6'7, I'm sure you'd have a hard time fitting anywhere!:)

Reclined:
 

Am I mistaken or misunderstanding the many references to reclined or sleeping...in the cockpit?

templarknight
Six days ... not bad.. but I think you've been rumbled!
TP

reclining is all it means--
 

when sitting on butt for hours on end, a simple consideration of mechanics would conclude that if one could reduce the vertical force upon one's back, and butt, the less pain and resultant discomfort and after years, malfunction of lower back and hip area.

i find that only after 4 hours, i must stand up, if only in the flight deck. and that is only on the 737-800.

Seawings
The airplane flys for 17 hours and with two pilots we can fly for about 10 hours so yes we do (and are permitted to by the company) rest/sleep in the cockpit.
Foxtrot India
As above yes it is going to be a long flight but your comment is to be expected. Just because someone has a moan doesnt mean they are going to be an arse to fly with. I dont like the Boeing; I prefer the Airbus, hence the thread.