Airbus v. Boeing

[metrofo]

Hey JimNTexas, dont be a dumba$$. It has nothing to do with "refuse to crash" logic but has to do with knowing to retract the speedbrakes on an emergency gwps climbout. The A320 would have done this for the crew automatically on the gpws maneuver and when you miss the top of a mountain by 300 feet, that makes all the difference in the world. There is sometimes so much going on that we can forget to do some basic things that would otherwise save our butts.

 

[Dieterly]

The vaunted Airbus flight envelope protections have cost many more lives than they have saved.

I hope you are not dumb enough to believe that are you?

 

[Aerosmith]

Airbus and Boeings are BOTH wonderfull aircraft. Spare me for the national chauvanism.
Boeing with its archaic steam gauges still work after all these years. Airbus on the other hand is an aircraft designed for PILOTS!
I have only tried the Airbus in simulators, but the design, layout, handling qualities etc impressed me a lot.
....and never heard a bad thing from an Airbus driver.
Boeing hasn't moved up in the next century yet. When I attended the 737 "next generation" differences training, I was surprised at how little Boeing has evolved over the last 40 years. A few nuts and bolts, a couple of extra CRT's, a different overwing exit etc.

Point is, I will fly any of them and will do it with a big grin on my face.

 

[JimNtexas]

Hey JimNTexas, dont be a dumba$$. It has nothing to do with "refuse to crash" logic but has to do...

That makes sense about the speed brakes, but you need to
chill dude.

"Refuse to crash logic" is a real concept that is in flight test right now. I thought maybe airbus had it, that's all.

sheesh.

 

[bobbysamd]

Boeing v. Airbus

When I attended the 737 "next generation" differences training, I was surprised at how little Boeing has evolved over the last 40 years . . . .

I heard that a lot of Boeing goes back longer than forty years, back to the original 707 (B-367-40), B-52s, whose development begin in the late 40s, and B-47s, whose development started in 1944!

Everyone says a Boeing is a Boeing. I hear that Airbuses are great airplanes, but I would be leary of too much computerization.

 

[Rush Limbaugh]

Having a huge majority of my flight time in fly by wire airplanes, I have never seen the system do anything other than what was advertised. In fact, not only have I never seen it but the flight control system has never failed in the life of the F-16. It is an outstanding system and it may not have any manual reversion but it is quadrupal redundant. Every once in a while an over eager Lt will put a Viper out of control by assaulting the limiters in both pitch and bank at the same time. I doubt this is a problem in the Airbus because they don't do a lot of BFM. I have also never seen or heard of any problems in the black jet either.

And the side stick...believe me, once you've flown with a side stick, it is hard to go to anything else. An old F-16 friend of mine now flies an Airbus (too bad he's furloughed) and told me he always had a hard time not aerobraking on landing because it was just the natural thing to do with a sidestick. Cool airplanes have sticks and awesome airplanes have sidesticks.

 

[katanabob]

Forget Airbus and Boeing, just assert the superiority of Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas products.

 

[TriStar_drvr]

Lockheed. Plows through the bumps at .84 while those lightweight Boeings and Airbuses are slowing down and reporting moderate turbulence.

However, like Aerosmith said,

Point is, I will fly any of them and will do it with a big grin on my face.

Amen to that. It beats working for a living.

 

[SpeedRacer]

Da Bus Baby!!

Having flown DC-9's and C-141's and the back of a 727 to compare with, I have to admit the A300 or 310 are pretty good airplanes.

As long as another tail doesn't freakin fall off.........

The pay is pretty good flying the "widebody" bus......

Adios,

 

[Tri-holer]

Just a gut feeling and with no time in the Airbus, it is worth as much as the paper it is printed on.

Gotta love the Boeing. Only flew the 3-holer but loved every minute. Don't like the rumors that I've about the computers and their logic overrulling that of the pilot's BUT I am sure that if I went through systems training and actually flew the airplane, I would become an enthusiastic Airbusser.

As said before, I would fly them all with a smile on my face.

Grolsch Beer says "You never forget your first girl." How true. Probably always prefer the stuff from Seattle but not necessarily for the right reasons.

 

[Cardinal]

absolutely NO manual reversion available

This is a common misconception, but I believe in the case of total electrical/computer failure, there is limited manual reversion - just elevator trim and rudder. Have fun, but you could probably survive it.

 

[EagleRJ]

And Airbus isn't soley built by the French, it's a European Consolodation. The different components are built all over Europe. Just like Boeing.

True, Airbus is a consortium, and because of that, it cannot produce a failed product, since it receives government subsidies. Boeing has produced several planes that they bet the house on (747, 777, 757/767). If the products failed, so would have the company. That's what causes the motivation to produce such excellent products. Airbus doesn't have to worry about taking a risk with the A380, since if the program fails, the governments involved will just write the expense off.

 

[AAflyer]

If it ain't Boeing I ain't going!!!

I love the Boeing products. First jet was a 727, enjoyed the next generation 737-800, and still think the 757 is about the nicest plane ever made.

I have heard the guys that fly the Airbus like it so I guess to each thier own.

AAflyer

P.S. I will put my typing skills up against any Airbus pilot

 

[enigma]

Boeing, I don't care if the bus does have triple dissimilar redundency, I just don't trust a system that depends upon electrons. They have a tendency to turn into queertrons at the worst possible time. I would really like to see manual reversion for the FADECs as well as the manual rudder and elevator trim.

I have discussed this with jumpseating bus drivers, and have been told that it is possible to land the bus after the loss of all flight control computers. NWA pilots relate that they only train to use manual reversion until they can regain the computers, while Cactus pilots have said that they actually train to make full manual approachs to a landing.

I still think that I'd be happier trusting my life to skydrol instead of electrons.

regards,
8N

 

[dispatchguy]

A couple of things about the Airbusses I dont like, albeit minor...

Youre all cruising along, cockpit's all quiet, and the F/As call the flight deck - that loud-a$$ buzzer about sends me thru the circuit panel over the jumpseat every time

And, couldnt they have chosen a nicer voice for the RETARD calls? Some cute little monique or something