A320 Vs. 737NG - Not Flame Bait

[Heavy Set]

Alright, I was bounced out of another thread because I raised this question. I know that this question has been asked before. I am NOT TRYING TO START A FLAME WAR.

I have noticed that there are a number of pilots on this forum who have flown BOTH THE A320 AND THE 737NG. Given that a number of us are trying to get on the LCCs (like SWA, JetBlue AirTran, Frontier and ATA) and most either operate 737NGs or A320s (or are looking at operating them - like AirTran), I thought it would be interesting to hear from EITHER pilots who have flown both (like Slug - a SWA pilot) OR highly-opinionated pilots who love the one they are flying (either 737NG or A320).

So:

1. If you have flown both, which do you prefer and why? Which, if given the option for the rest of your career, would you select to fly?

2. In your opinion, why is your airplane better than the other?

3. What is the best/worst thing about your aircraft (either 737NG or A320)?


This might be highly relevant for the AirTran guys out there who will likely be flying one or the other - besides flying the 717.

This post is not meant to offend - I know there were similar posts to this in the past... Thought it would be fun and informative - especially for the lucky people who are interviewing to fly these airplanes... I have flown neither aircraft (just older-generation aircraft for me), but I personally like the Airbus - nice side-sticks and a comfy cockpit for the long-haul flights...


Thanks!

 

[SWA GUY]

737NG

 

[Networ-King]

A-320 all the way......

Better performance, range, cockpit room, avionics, a tray that can hold a 110 pound flight attendant, payload, range, a second tray that can hold another 110 pound flight attendant, normal switches on the overhead....not the toggle sh*t, cargo room, DV windows that you can actually fit through in an emergency after getting fat on all those peanuts, speed, electric seats, cat 3b autoland, hhhhhmmmm and thats just off the top of my head......


yeeeaaahhh the bus, driving the bus....................at Kmart.

 

[fokkerjet]

.......a tray that can hold a 110 pound flight attendant,........ a second tray that can hold another 110 pound flight attendant,...... DV windows that you can actually fit through in an emergency after getting fat on all those peanuts,.......

Is that what we're calling it now? I think I may have missed a meeting.

 

[mad691]

Seems Airtran just can't make up ther mind yet. Right down to the penny.

Boeing and Airbus Intensify Their Sales Pitches to AirTran
By EDWARD WONG


ales executives from Airbus and Boeing have been meeting with AirTran Airways this week to try to land what would be one of the largest aircraft orders this year, Airbus and AirTran officials said yesterday.

The executives have been meeting at AirTran's headquarters in Orlando, Fla. The order, for 100 planes, is valued at several billion dollars and will be announced this summer, said Tad Hutcheson, AirTran's marketing director. It would be the biggest order placed so far this year in terms of the number of planes. AirTran intends to take delivery of the first aircraft next year, Mr. Hutcheson said.

Advertisement


AirTran, a low-cost carrier and one of the few profitable airlines in the United States, called for proposals in March for 100 aircraft. Airbus and Boeing began wooing the company immediately, and talks have intensified in recent weeks. AirTran is considering planes from either Boeing's 737 family or the Airbus A320 family — exactly the types of jets that have proved to be popular with growing low-cost airlines.

"We've got a team talking to the airline this week," said Mary Anne Greczyn, an Airbus spokeswoman. "Orlando is a very busy place this week. Everybody who's got a horse in this race is down there."

Ms. Greczyn added that sales representatives from the major engine manufacturers were also in Orlando talking to AirTran. Engines are the most expensive pieces of equipment on a plane.

Airbus has been sending sales executives from its North American headquarters in Herndon, Va. The company is based in Toulouse, France.

As for the progress of negotiations, Mr. Hutcheson simply said, "It's a buyer's market out there."

The order is critical for both airplane makers. Boeing, based in Chicago, is depending on it to show the industry that it can compete favorably against Airbus, especially among low-cost airlines. Airbus, meanwhile, is seeking to increase further its lead over Boeing in terms of numbers of orders landed this year.

A Boeing spokeswoman declined to comment on the negotiations.

AirTran uses a fleet of 64 Boeing 717's and 8 DC-9's. It is phasing out the DC-9's, used on shorter routes, and is taking delivery of nine more 717's before the end of the year.

Last year, Airbus scored a big victory against Boeing when it landed an order for 120 A319's from easyJet, the profitable low-cost airline based near London. That was the biggest commercial plane order placed last year, and the deal also included an option for 120 more planes. JetBlue Airways announced in April that it was ordering 65 more A320's.

On June 16, Emirates Airline signed a contract with Airbus at the Paris Air Show for 41 planes, including 21 A380's, the giant 550-seat aircraft that Airbus will roll into service three years from now. The Emirates deal was valued at $12.5 billion and generated a lot of talk at the air show. Airbus and Boeing executives at the show shied away from talking much about the pending AirTran order, despite their usual air of braggadocio at the show about potential orders.

Mr. Hutcheson said AirTran intended to place an initial order for either Boeing 737-700's or Airbus A319's. But the company could ask for options to upgrade those jets to larger ones from the same fleet families to give it more flexibility. That means the order could later be changed to include the larger 737-800's and 737-900's, or the A320's and A321's.

Depending on the plane type, the number of seats could range from about 120 to 180.

Mr. Hutcheson said the new aircraft would allow AirTran to add more transcontinental routes. AirTran's Boeing 717's cannot fly from the airline's hub in Atlanta to the West Coast. This month, AirTran began service between Los Angeles and Atlanta by leasing two A320's from Ryan International Airlines, based in Wichita, Kan.

Raymond E. Neidl, an analyst at Blaylock & Partners, wrote in an investors' note yesterday that "multiple expansion is warranted" in AirTran's near future and that he expected the airline to gain market share and remain profitable at least until 2005.

 

[fracflyer]

Which is the best?

Whichever one someone will pay you to fly.

 

[mad691]

"Which is the best?

Whichever one someone will pay you to fly."


You got that right!!!

 

[StopNTSing]

Having never flown the bus, but read a few pilot reports about the A320, one observation does seem fairly consistent from the reviewers. The level of automation is such that the pilot typically ends up doing very little actual flying in the traditional sense of stick, rudder, thrust levers. This leads to the natural question of will those motor skills and "feel for the airplane" tend to atrophy over time? Are you bus drivers still comfortable accepting a slam-dunk visual approach or other ATC curve-ball that requires some good old fashioned pilot sh*t? Please understand this is not meant to be derrogatory of the Airbus or the pilots who fly it, but it is a perception that I have wondered about. My airline (SWA) by virtue of how little automation we have in our 737s, seems to put a premium on pilots being pilots, not meter-monitors and button-pushers. But who's to say if that's really the best (read: safest) way to operate an airliner? Someone who's flown both Busses and Boeings give me your thoughts on this.

 

[trueblue]

We fly slam dunk approaches often in many places we fly, including JFK. The automation is quite high on the bus, as everyone knows, but there seems to be a prevailing myth out there that there is "too much" automation. The big red button on the sidesticks work quite well. It is very easy to turn off the automation very quickly when needed. We get half speedbrakes, for instance, when the autopilot is engaged. Simply by disconnecting the automation (again, very easily and often performed), we obtain full speedbrakes, thus aiding a slam dunk descent. We fly visual, non-automated approaches all the time. I've never flown a 737, but am quite happy with the bus. I just want to dispel any notions out there that it is automated to a fault. The automation is terrific and nearly revolutionary in the business; on the other hand, it is easily removed with a push of a button.

 

[Heavy Set]

I think Slug (a current SWA FO) has time on both the A320 and the 737NG. Also, there have to be many USAirways, UAL or America West guys out there who have flown both the A320 and the older-generation 737-300/400. I know we are looking primarily between the Bus and the NG, but I suppose an EFIS-equipped 737 is close enough (although a comparison with the NG would be preferred!!!).

Good replys thusfar - keep them coming. I wish I were an Airtran pilot in this position right now - salivating over both types...


Thanks

 

[PCL_128]

Trueblue:

Can the "big red button" disconnect all aspects of the automation? I was under the impression that there were some things that could not be overiden, like the 30 degree bank limit. Is that not true?

 

[PROFLYER]

I'm sure one of the experienced Airbus types could explain it better, but I believe bank on the Airbus is limited to around 60 degrees. The 30 degrees is the limit on normal roll law, meaning the aircraft has neutral stability up to 30 degrees. If you go beyond 30 and let go of the stick, the aircraft will return to 30 degrees bank. The same theory applies to pitch.

I haven't flown either, but if I were in the JBlue/SWA dilemma, I would go with whoever calls first. Both are great companies with great A/C.

 

[Heavy Set]

Just a reminder - this is less of a "SWA vs. JBLUE" comparison and more of a A320 vs. 737NG comparison. Heck, I'd fly for either one if they called!!!!!!

 

[kwijybo]

Whatever you like

It is a 67 AOB roll protection, and 33 positive stability, with a 15 down and 30 up protection as well. If you need to go Blue Angel there are two computers to turn off, then those protections are removed. There is also an AOA protection that I if I ever get an EGPWS warning and pull full back stick, I won't have to worry about stalling as I try to get away from the cumulo-granite.

The big red button turns off the AP, the little red button on the thrust levers turn off the ATHR, then you got yourself an airplane. It is not that hard to handfly and approach, but it is nice after a redeye to know you got all that backup.

As for the comparrison, the 737 drivers always comment on how much room we have in the flight station to get up and move around in, not to mention all the different footrests we have. That might not seem like much, but if I am going to never change airplanes, I do put a premium on pilot ergonomics. The side stick is also cool.

The rest is in the eye of the beholder.

Oh yeah, the best part of the Airbus is that you don't have to pay for the airplanes you buy, they just give them away.

 

[Slug]

737 for me

Okay, I finally have a few minutes to chime in. Little League/Travelling baseball takes a lot of time.

I spent 10 months on the bus at UAL and have been on the line at SWA since mid march.

Both airplanes have their definite advantages and disadvantages; no duh. As far as ergonomics the bus wins hands down. It is significantly more comfortable in all cockpit aspects from sitting for four hours to trying to get the darn flightbag on the outside of the seat. The -700 (NG) is much better than the -500 and -300s however. I like the sidestick to fly with, but it is kinda unnerving when the other pilot is flying and you can't see the control inputs in pitch or roll that they are inputting. (probably more so for the Captain than the F/O).

I also like the ECAM system (basically, computerized system schematics) for monitoring the systems and their malfunctions. It is a good review duing those 4 hour cruises to sit there and flip through the schematics for the systems.

But, for every other aspect I like the 737 and the way we as pilots are kept in the front of the loop. This is probably more a mentality of SWA vs. UAL. This goes from startup to shutdown. Although we "did" performance data at UAL it was more just putting the variables in the MCDU (computer) and watching the computer posting the numbers on the speed tape. Engine start is more hands on in the 737. If there is a problem the crew is more involved in fixing the starting malfunction. These are just a couple of the things I've noticed in my short time. As far as flying, the 737 is more hands on. I know I'll get lambasted for this one, but its true. Yes, we did fly the airplane at UAL (again it may be a UAL mentality vs. JB and SWA), but it is definently more hands on at SWA. We got slam dunked and kicked the A/P off quite frequently, but not as frequently as the 737. I despised the auto-throttles. First your engine management was done with a speed wheel. The other thing I didn't like was the auto-throttles not moving. Picture this: you are coming down final with gusty winds. You've got V approach in the window, the computer is adjusting for reference ground and spooling the engines up and back to maintain computed speed. With the low slung engines the nose is pitching up and down and the only way to tell what the engines are doing is to watch the engine instruments (great crosscheck) or learn to listen to the spooling. I kicked off the Auto throttles quite a bit, but some Captains kinda looked funny at you when you did (again a mentality?).

I simply feel that my skill as a pilot is much better/proficient in the 737 vs. the A320. I like both and would gladly fly either, but for the "pilot" I would go with the 737.

Just my inexperienced opinion.

Slug