Why do alot of people hate Airbus.

[ATrude777]

Hey guys time for me to post mine.

I have always been for Boeing. I actually loved McDoneel Douglas (see user name ) and having been associated with TWA for so long all they flew were Douglas, MD's and Boeing, never Airbus. So I was always happy that I could fly TWA and not get a single Airbus. Then Boeing took over MD. Oh well, still not an Airbus. Then TWA did the unthinkable (for me at least), they ordered A318's and A330!!! I was appaulled! Then I started to hate Airbus even more. I refused to fly United, America West, NWA any airline that flew an Airbus product. So i shifted to Southwest Airlines, because they flew an all Boeing Plane. Now I got stuck on SWA and have never gone back. However, I am starting to liek Airbus A320 and i admit the A356 is just STUNNING!!! I love its beauty. But to fly one? I do not know. I am curious what its like to fly one. Maybe Ill get a chance but forever as long as I am booking a flight if I have to choose Boeing or Airbus, I will choose Boeing.
Alex

[Leftseat86]

Clovis does have a BIG point. But the new computerized airliners have made them safer. Auto land makes landing near flawless and perfect most of the time, but yet less fun. It also reduces work load and strees in the cockpit which there obvisosly needs to be less of it.

It hasn't made them safer. FBW did not keep AA587's rudder on. Computers did not help the Air Transat pilots who dumped all of their own fuel, and narrowly avoided ditching their A330 in the sea. Alpha floor did not keep the Air France A320 from plunging into the trees at Habsheim.

I can pull out hundreds of examples. The illusion of autopilot's total control contributed to Eastern #401 flying into the everglades.


You just think you are safer because you don't know...

[Airbus_A320]

FBW did not keep AA587's rudder on.

The A300 doesn't have FBW.....

The A320 was the first to introduce it.

[ATLcenter]

Boeing vs. Airbus is just like

Capitalism vs. Socialism

&

Babe Ruth vs. Barry Bonds (ONE cheats to attain what the other has)

THAT IS MY OPINION

Yea, when push comes to shove, most if not all companies cut corners. I dont' expect Boeing to be the apex of commercial honesty and I certainly don't expect Airbus to be a highlight in a free market economy.

To the topic at hand, I more or less like both just as much. When I was younger, I used to be a die-hard Boeing fan until I realized they both sell the same thing- aircraft. And Boeing may satisfy one airline's requirements while Airbus fills the gap for another airline. It's a shame Airbus has gone with the sidestick, but once again-if an airline wants it, then it's more or less its choice. When I travel, I usually try to mix both Airbus and Boeing (or MD, DC, etc, etc) aircraft together just to get the feel of the differences.

It's like Coke and Pepsi, which is Atlanta's A vs. B. Except they call it Coke and Yankee Juice.

[JJR]

In an attempt to make airplanes more "user friendly", they have almost taken the pilot out of the cockpit. Computers are great, but when they get glitches, even a small problem could turn out to be a big problem. I think there is too much relying on computers in aviation. A pilot who can "fly" the airplane has a better chance of survival, than a pilot who can't fly with out the computers.
-Jay

[ACman]

It hasn't made them safer. FBW did not keep AA587's rudder on. Computers did not help the Air Transat pilots who dumped all of their own fuel, and narrowly avoided ditching their A330 in the sea. Alpha floor did not keep the Air France A320 from plunging into the trees at Habsheim.

I can pull out hundreds of examples. The illusion of autopilot's total control contributed to Eastern #401 flying into the everglades.


You just think you are safer because you don't know...

Computers didnt have that much of a role in TS 236. The was TS technical and the pilots fault. The pilots fault that they did not see anything wrong. The A320 had a small flaw that is now fixed. So what your saying is we should just ditch computer controled aircraft and go back to old ones? Air travel is safer because of Computerized airplanes.

I love technology and everything, but I still want to be able to actually fly the airplane. Automation isn't all good. For example, I believe that an airbus wont allow you to overstress its airframe. What if you're about to hit somethin (say another airplane) and the only way you wont hit it is to yank back on the controls and overstress the airframe a bit. I'd much rather take my chances with bending the wings a bit than hittin somethin. That's just me though. Boeing's policy on automation is to have stuff to remind the pilot to do stuff, so the pilot actually gets to do it. Airbus just has the plane do everything itself and say 'hey, I just did this so we're all set'. Thats not real flying, that's monitoring the system that is monitoring the system.

Airbus has a system which will deactiveate it when the TCAS system in intruded. So you can do what you feel with the plane basicly.

Not to mention you are replacing perfectly good DC-10s with 330s

Ahem, the 330 has TWO engines and TWO pilots and is newer. The DC-10 (even though i love her) has THREE engines and THREE pilots. The A330 burns less fuel, is quieter, newer, less pilots (which mean less money on S/O). I bet if Boeing had replacement for the SC-10 like the 330 you wouldent be complaining.

[Leftseat86]

Computers didnt have that much of a role in TS 236. The was TS technical and the pilots fault. The pilots fault that they did not see anything wrong. The A320 had a small flaw that is now fixed. So what your saying is we should just ditch computer controled aircraft and go back to old ones? Air travel is safer because of Computerized airplanes.



Airbus has a system which will deactiveate it when the TCAS system in intruded. So you can do what you feel with the plane basicly.



Ahem, the 330 has TWO engines and TWO pilots and is newer. The DC-10 (even though i love her) has THREE engines and THREE pilots. The A330 burns less fuel, is quieter, newer, less pilots (which mean less money on S/O). I bet if Boeing had replacement for the SC-10 like the 330 you wouldent be complaining.

First of all, had Transat 236 been blessed by a flight engineer, I am sure they would have been in better control of the situation, having someone whose JOB is to watch fuel guages and monitor pumps, flows and cross-feeding is ALOT safer.

Having a two crew cockpit for such large aircraft only makes them MORE DANGEROUS as the pilots are responsible for accomplishing more tasks in an event the automation screws up. With such a complex fuel leak, having an FE would have been alot of help, since FE's are baisically mechanics/pilots on the flightdeck.

What was the flaw in the A320? It was mostly pilot error, but the illusion of saftey created by alpha floor and Fly-by-Wire is a contributing factor in the crash.

I don't that they are replacing -10's with 330s...because I wouldnt want them replaced by 772's or 764's either...

Air travel is getting more dangerous in my opinion because pilots are not used to flying aircraft anymore...they are too used to pushing buttons. When push comes to shove they have more trouble hand flying than letting the plane do the work. This is BAD. This is not good. We need pilots who know how to FLY.

If you don't agree that a three man cockpit is safer than a two man cockpit, especially on longhaul flights, then you are not of the same opinion as many veteran pilots.

[ExpressJet145]

What I cant stand is someone being so biased against a company because what, there fricken french and your american? Thats just ignorance. And for those who havent ever flown on an A320 or whatever for that matter and talk smack about it, you have no room to talk. Try it first before you bash. .

PS - Im not angry lol. Just saying whats on my mind.

How did TWA order A318s, was that project even in existance at that time?

[Kevin_Ho]

haven't you been reading what we've been posting? If that was the reason then we wouldn't really be able to explain our reasons, we would have just said "uhh....because".

No I did not and do not read the previous posts.
I was just to suggest an answer straight from what he's asking, origional answers will always alter after read other people's posts.

[DAL767-400ER]

How did TWA order A318s, was that project even in existance at that time?

Well, the A318 was still a computer-generated image back then. IIRC, TWA actually wanted to order 100 100-seaters, but since neither Boeing nor Airbus were willing to base production on such an instable airline, TWA could not order more than 50 planes at either company.
And my take on A vs B:
Both make good planes, but IMHO, Boeing makes the better one. There is a reason why they sold over 5000 737s over almost 40 years. Regardless, Boeing also had some bastards (planes that sold nowhere near as often as expected), like the 743, 764, 731, 74L, 736, 739(for now) and even the 717.
Airbus only had the A342 and A318.
What I also like about Airbus is that they generate jobs in Germany, something that rarely happens here anymore.
What I don't like is that I didn't get one of those jobs .
It's all a matter of perspective, and also the way the airlines lay out their cabins. Personally, I never thought that the A32X was that much bigger than the 737 on the inside, even though Airbus always focused on that.

[G-MIDY]

I've flown on both the A320 and 737, and well there was no noticable difference as a passenger. Long haul and comfort wise i prefer the 777 to the A330 but the A330 is a beautiful aircraft especially with those sexy flexing wings. Both companies make exceptional aircraft its just Boeing need to axe those lousy boring designers and stop sticking with tradition. BTW to those who argue Fly by wire is dangerous, be quiet the A330/340 has one of the best safety records in the industry along with the 777 which is also Fly by wire! #2 BTW Alpha floor only activates when the airspeed goes well to low it acts exactly the same as the TOGA on any other aircraft. Pilots are well trained for their jobs 6 month simulator checks, multiple engine failures are also practiced in simulators. If i was on a modern aircraft now-adays i would have more confidence then i would in a rusty old DC-10, computers tend to be flawless now-adays theres nothing else to say about it...

[MaDbOy]

I think, with the recent growth of A VS B flame-fests, people should not forget why they got here, thats our hobby, aviation.
We all share this, right?
atm i prefer an Airbus over a Boeing, simply because I haven't flown one, nothing more, nothing less.

now i am wondering, on russian forums, are there I VS T Threads? lol

[GreekNYC747]

AtcVector claims AIRBUS is arrogant. But isn't his posting arrogant too? No logical arguments, just spewing hatred and irony. He reminds me of a guy on Airliners.net who had a catch phrase after each posting claiming: When European will realize that their opinion doesnt matter anymore? He was forced to remove it and replace it with a less arrogant but still insulting remark. Why do we have to take sides? At least LeftSeat86 gives a very credible and logical explanation on why he doesn't like Airbus planes. I can definitely accept his arguments since they come from somebody who knows.

[Kubus_gt]

What's really funny in this whole A vs B thing is that Embraer is becoming stronger from it.

[DeltaRules]

I haven't got a problem with either Airbus or Boeing...I like the A330 as much as I do the 757 or the 727 (the L-1011 beats them all though ). I can see where people are pro-Airbus, anti-Boeing or vice versa because of where they're from though...that's what I thought most of it was.

One day when we are both old...we should buy a J-3 Cub. Now thats a real airplane.

The sad thing is most of the people on this forum will not understand my post simply because what they know about flying starts with A380 and 777

I went in up in a Cub two years ago next week (I think). I've been on 777s, A330s, DC-10s, a 747, but even then, the Cub ride was one of the coolest flights I've ever been on. I wouldn't mind having one of those myself.

DeltaRules