airliner-civil-aircraft-modeller.com

It's Friday so....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFrKzbgwgQs

What a pisser
Apparently the 380 was also going to "buzz the tower" but it went U/S
TOR

When I fly Airbus I wonder whether the guys up front would recognise a stall with an air data computer error and whether they could recover.

Among the fears I have with all types are:
Will the crew input the right numbers into the takeoff performance / power calculation.
Can they fly a manual ILS and can they fly a non precision approach.

with low cost Asian carriers I would worry even more but I would never fly those

otherwise don't care really Boeing or AIrbus, when it comes to long haul international all things being equal I just compare / judge the business class seating and that is operator rather than type specific.

(Actually when I think seriously about it I always feel a little happier in a Boeing just one of those inexplicable prejudices I guess.)

VH-WAL wrote: Actually when I think seriously about it I always feel a little happier in a Boeing just one of those inexplicable prejudices I guess.

Yep......I publicly and proudly acknowledge and proclaim my absolute subjective, personal bias for the Boeing product.
In my defence though when you have to manage yet ANOTHER U/S A380 at 0300 in the morning, (including trying to find hotel rooms and transport for 500 tired, grumpy, and pissed-off passengers, re-booking their flights, re-doing their itineraries, trying to come up with solutions for their missed-connects, trying to get the Customer Service, Baggage, Catering, Cleaning and Customs guys back to re-process, who have in all likelihood probably gone home by now), ya tend to get a little jaded and cynical in your views towards the reliably unreliable "best from Toulouse". And if it wasn't the 380s causing operational and network grief and mayhem it was the friggen 330s.
It may just be perception but the 747 and 767 never seemed to do this with such monotonous regularity.
It it ain't Boeing, it's probably not going
TOR

If it ain't Boeing, it's probably not going

I wouldn't include the 717 in that statement however!

In my experience, one of the most unreliable shitboxes they ever put wings on. (although to be fair, they are actually not a Boeing design)

And the guys in TSV are about to find out what I mean...

Scott.
CBR

scotty100368 wrote:

If it ain't Boeing, it's probably not going

I wouldn't include the 717 in that statement however!

In my experience, one of the most unreliable shitboxes they ever put wings on. (although to be fair, they are actually not a Boeing design)

And the guys in TSV are about to find out what I mean...

Scott.
CBR

Yep Scotty....in my experience the 717 (MD-95) would be a close 2nd behind those "things" from Toulouse in the unreliable aircraft stakes, (certainly at the Airport I managed). She does not deserve the "Boeing" name-plate that's for sure . It also doesn't help matters when the operator of the type in question decides not to have any spares or engineers at the largest port the type routinely operates through, so when you have the slightest technical hitch, BANG!!!.....an immediate 2 to 4 hour delay while you wait for a LAME to come in from CBR or HBA
TOR

Boeing for me !! With over 25 years refuelling aircraft ,Airbus are shit !! Boeing no worries at all . Airbus were fully automated, which meant untold computer problems. Boeing were automated also , but they could be refuelled manually if needed . You could always get the fuel on a Boeing , where the Airbus would just stop .

Scotty, I hadn't heard about 717 coming back to TSV, but we had then for several years when QF first got them, and they were operated as the last flight of the day to SYD to get in 20 mins before curfew, gee what could possibly go wrong there.
And Ray, you only spent a few years as ground staff, during the year or more of faulty 737 windscreens, it was almost a daily occurrence for massive delays, while you waited for the replacement to be fitted., no happy Boeing memories there for me.

I have a question, an honest question, for you folks who are so critical of Airbus products. If they are such rotten aeroplanes why are there many of them?

Leigh

F-27pax wrote:I have a question, an honest question, for you folks who are so critical of Airbus products. If they are such rotten aeroplanes why are there many of them?

Leigh

Simple sales strategy...... buy one get one free .
Boeing products are NOT subsidised by the EU, and therefore cannot be virtually "given away" at less than the cost of production.
And here is something else to consider......how is it possible to keep an unproductive and unprofitable A380 production line open indefinitely without orders???
TOR