Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Why would Allegiant Post A Job for Airbus Fleet Manager? Mistake?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Flyer1015 said:
It is like any other airplane. A previous commenter noted "if you don't understand the Airbus, it'll violate you quick" and another one "what's it doing now?"

Violation from the Airbus standpoint is usually in the climb/descent phases with improper VNAV planning, things like an incorrect mode. Other than that, you're in control of the airplane. You can still take the autopilot off, FDs off, and do what you need the aircraft to do. As with any new airplane, it'll take some time to get used to it.
Click to expand...

As another poster put it, as you get more experience on the plane, it's more like "There it goes again!" Truth be told, I'm new on the plane and at first I rejected the thought behind everything the plane was about. I'm slowly warming up to it and I'm really appreciating the amount of options it gives you to fly it. DES/CLB modes mixed with Auto Trust give me fits in nonstandard scenarios but the nice thing is that you can click it all off and fly it. I really appreciate the standardization of the panels and switches. I first gathered that from jumpseating on an MD-80.
 
Center tank "Caution Ecams" to turn them off and then back on...etc. It is a nice ride, but in the end...it is STILL FRENCH!! :D
 
tomgoodman said:
Well, not quite. Some of the DC-9 components had been replaced by new stuff that didn't always like working with the remaining old stuff. Think of a merged seniority list. :p
Click to expand...
HAHAHA, gotta love the "merged seniority list" comparison, funny but so true
 
Interesting that Allegiant would change the job title like that... Weird. Hope you guys do get some new birds to replace the Maddogs - plenty of European airlines shedding A320s and 737NGs...

I don't fly an Airbus, but I thought the following comment about the A320 from a NWA/Delta Captain was interesting when he said, "the Airbus will make bad pilots good and great pilots good." Everyone has an opinion... I agree that you can turn off much of the automation and fly it like normal - right?
 
rigger said:
Unless that is of course if it does not like what you are doing or thinks what you are doing will hurt you then it will do what it thinks you should have been doing all along.....kinda like an old legacy capt....used to do back in the day!
Click to expand...


If you understand the software, you will never get into that situation. It uses very basic rules. You can also turn all the stuff off if you don't like what it's up to.
 
reepicheep said:
Put it this way....would the Air France accident over the Atlantic have occurred if it was a 767?
Click to expand...

Would The American 757 have flown into the monitains of Cali Columbia if it was an a320?


It's a bad thing to speculate this way, it depends on the pilots knowledge of systems and airmanship more than a bus vs boeing thing.
 
Very true.....
The AFrance thing is sad......they flew out of the complicated part (unreliable airspeed) and hooked on the easy part (push the nose down to get some airspeed)
Like almost all, the transript is a sad, sad thing....
On the Boeing vs. Airbus thing, if the Airbus had a nice big yoke, when the capt came up and sat in the Jumpseat, he would have seen the dude in the right seat holding full back stick the entire time......at least until 2000 ft or so....
 
reepicheep said:
Put it this way....would the Air France accident over the Atlantic have occurred if it was a 767?
Click to expand...

I think a 757 went down in S. America due to taped over static ports, stalled as well IIRC.
 
GuinessGuy said:
Very true.....
The AFrance thing is sad......they flew out of the complicated part (unreliable airspeed) and hooked on the easy part (push the nose down to get some airspeed)
Like almost all, the transript is a sad, sad thing....
On the Boeing vs. Airbus thing, if the Airbus had a nice big yoke, when the capt came up and sat in the Jumpseat, he would have seen the dude in the right seat holding full back stick the entire time......at least until 2000 ft or so....
Click to expand...

I don't buy the Airbus v Boeing arguments, or side stick v yoke. This is about type specific training and basic airmanship. The flying pilot in the right seat was betting his life that holding the stick full back would work. And the captain coming in and sitting in the Jumpseat!?!?!?. How about getting in the captain's seat and figure out what's going on?
 
Last edited:
Dizel8 said:
I think a 757 went down in S. America due to taped over static ports, stalled as well IIRC.
Click to expand...

There was no tape over the static ports on the 757 that crashed in Cali, Colombia.

They flew off course due to poor FMS design and lack of Navaid confirmation then hit a mountain during GPWS recovery due to the speed-brakes not retracting even when they applied max thrust.
 
Beetle007 said:
There was no tape over the static ports on the 757 that crashed in Cali, Colombia.

They flew off course due to poor FMS design and lack of Navaid confirmation then hit a mountain during GPWS recovery due to the speed-brakes not retracting even when they applied max thrust.
Click to expand...


FWIW he didn't say Cali, just "South America". Reference the crash in the link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroperú_Flight_603
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top