Attn A320 pilots

[JasonW]

I am doing a short presentation on the A320 family of aircraft in my transport category systems class and would like to add some pilot feedback. For anybody who has flown an A320:

1. What is your general opinion of the aircraft?
2. Is there anything particular that you really like or dislike about the aircraft?
3. How does it compare to other aircraft you've flown?

I would greatly appreciate any feedback. Thanks in advance.

 

[J32driver]

I'm pretty new to the aircraft. I'm enjoying it.

Plus side:
Extremely comfotable cockpit, very roomy and quiet
Systems are simple and very well laid out
Performance is good. Stuff it in, shut the doors, GO. W&B usually isn't much of a concern
Fly-by-wire controls make the airplane very easy to fly in most phases of flight

Minus side:
FMS system is a capable, but not as user friendly as other aircraft I've flown. VNAV descent guidance is my biggest complaint.
Fly-by-wire controls offer zero tactile feedback when trying to control the airplane during gusty/windy approaches.

Overall, I very much enjoy the Airbus.

 

[GVFlyer]

The biggest problem with the aircraft is that it is made in Toulouse, France and not Seattle, Washington. Each aircraft purchase puts brie and burgundy on the table for some French citizen who despises the USA, but does little for any US worker. Yes, Yes I know about US products that may be supplied by vendors that would constitute a small percentage of total content. Tired argument...

The other issue with the aircraft is the French design philosophy. They think pilots are of little value and something to protect the airplane against. Subsequently, if you look at the accidents at Strausberg, Bale Mulhausen or Merignac, you will see that they all occured because the pilots could not overcome the aircraft flight control systems. Additionally, when the automation is working the pilot is left out of the loop - when the autopilot or autothrottles move the flight controls or change the power setting nothing moves in the cockpit. When the pilot is flying, the flight control system offers no feedback to assist the pilot in judging conditions.


GV

 

[Groucho]

A319,320,321

I agree with the first poster. The aircraft is the most comfortable I have ever flown. It's like riding around in your living room chair. Performance is good, the A321 is a pig in climb the 320 OK and the 319 performs quite well.

The first poster doesn't like the FMS. Our company has both Boeing and Airbus products and let me tell you there is no FMS yet built that can do everything ATC wants and do it easily. The early FMS on the Bus is not as good as the Boeing but the new Thales units are quite good. We have them on order for a fleet retrofit. There are two versions and we are getting the ones without the bugs.

GVflyer does not appear to fly the aircraft, from the looks of his data, and he can certainly criticize it if he likes but a pilot must monitor any automated aircraft. The more automation, the more monitoring. This is true of Boeing, Airbus, or any highly automated machine.

All in all, it's a good ship with good support and it stands up well and performs well.

 

[skiandsurf]

The biggest problem with the aircraft is that it is made in Toulouse, France and not Seattle, Washington.
GV

Probably the best part is the fact that it is built in France. Could you imagine if Boeing had no competetion...yikes.

Actually, the cockpit is very spacious and comfortable. Noise levels are very low. Automation, when figured out, is very nice. FMS not as user friendly as the Boeing FMS. The radio select switches are confusing. It is very easy to get yourself off a radio frequency, if not paying attention. The sidestick is very comfortable after 3 or 4 landings, its a no brainer. The cabin is very comfortable. The overhead storage is big, you can put roller boards in wheels first ( line them up side to side vs end to end). Back to the cockpit, the table makes the "front office" a "front office".
737 vs A320................A320.

 

[reepicheep]

A counter-intuitive, human factors nightmare, limp-wristed prissy little french cream-puff of an airplane.

On the plus side: comfortable, roomy, quiet, good a/c in summer.

But from a pilot's perspective (something obviously not considered in Toulouse) it's vastly inferior to the Boeing product.

 

[Donsa320]

A-320

As usual, those who have not flown the airplane have the usual complaints. I typed in the -320 in 1989, before any were even in the United States. We did the walk around on the oral with a slide show. My type rating was about number 15 issued by the Feds. Other than having to go back to a 2 pilot airplane, I was very happy with the 320. It did everything the B-727 did on half the fuel and one less engine and crewman. It handles crosswinds fine, nice in turbulence with load alleviation, got struck by lightning and nothing happened, fly by wire is great so all in all, no complants from me. In fact as I neared retirement I was offered the 747-400 or stay on the 320 at 747 pay rates. I took the Bus. Anybody who would prefer 14 hour JFK to Narita non-stops to pleasant SFO overnights can have the 74.

And BTW, Airbus airplanes have more Lockheed in them then anything else. When the L-1011 line was shutdown, Lockheed engineers were recruited for the A-300. Take a good look and you will see the Lockheed influence.

DC

 

[xrated]

Subsequently, if you look at the accidents at Strausberg, Bale Mulhausen or Merignac, you will see that they all occured because the pilots could not overcome the aircraft flight control systems. Additionally, when the automation is working the pilot is left out of the loop - when the autopilot or autothrottles move the flight controls or change the power setting nothing moves in the cockpit. When the pilot is flying, the flight control system offers no feedback to assist the pilot in judging conditions.


GV

Those accidents happened, not because the pilots "could not" overcome the aircraft flight control systems, it was because the pilots didn't know the systems well enought to turn them off. I'm not sure what GV is saying about the pilot being "out of the loop" when the automation is working. True, the controls don't move (its got autoTHRUST, not autothrottles) but we do have nifty engine gauges that tell us what the airplane is doing. Its not difficult to moniter the gauges. The system is safe, and it works. Just have to adjust to the differences like you do any time you change aircraft types.

 

[GogglesPisano]

1. Comfortable, ergonomic cockpit (ever been inside a 737?)
2. Desiged from scratch for ease of workload (ever worked a 737?)
3. The tray table is awesome.


OTOH, the FMS was inferior to the RJ's I flew and the LCD's left more information out. The radio panels were a bit counterintuitive as well.

 

[Say Again Over]

Subsequently, if you look at the accidents at Strausberg, Bale Mulhausen or Merignac, you will see that they all occured because the pilots could not overcome the aircraft flight control systems by GV

Another ignorant statement by someone that doesn't have a clue.