CRJammin

If you had a choice, which would you choose to fly, and why? Sitting in the respective aircraft jumpseats I like chatting up the pilots about the birds' handling, FMS intuitiveness, flying feel, etc. Nobody yet has voiced much complaint about the French and American staple narrowbody. But if given a choice, what's the better aircraft?

Has anyone flown both? That opinion would be interesting to listen to.

Later.

luv757

I fly the NG and I think it is a great airplane. I can't really comment on the bus at all having never flown it. I will concede some things are probably a little better on the bus. Most notably is the NG is still, to an extent, an older Boeing at heart. No EICAS and the overhead panel isn't as "elegant" as you will find on a 757/767/777. With that said though, it is a great jet to fly with plenty of power. The HUD is a fantastic feature and after getting used to it I really enjoy flying it. It is a great feature when shooting that ILS to mins. The HUD also gives us the option of hand flying a CAT III ILS. So, to sum up I think the NG is a great jet. The few things I'd have changed on it would have been to completely update the crew alerting system and panels to take full advantage of the modern displays but, due to Type Certification requirements to keep all 737 guys legal on all models they could only update so much.

geshields

I can't comment on the Airbus but so far I love flying the NG's. I wish we didn't have the fake "six pack" setup but it is needed to keep the type commonality.

I guess I am a Boeing guy though because I do like the traditional control column instead of the sidestick. However, it is somewhat of a pain while I am trying to eat my filet mignon at FL 390 that the flight attendants just brought me(ok...so I did make up that part)

All the Airbus pilots I know do like the sidestick setup and say that after approx. 1 hour you get the hang of it....

Kill Bill

the new 737's are a frankenstein's monster mix of 1950's and 1990's technology. they are also noisy as hell. even the new ones with the eyebrow windows blocked and the vortex generators are noisy. i flew my first one the other day and was trying to figure out what all the commotion was about.

in addition, the basic systems are still very old tech and the number of switches that could be totally automated with a little thought is staggering.

i spent about 5 years on the 757/767 and pray to the aviation gods that i won't have to spend much longer on the 73.

that said, i was beside myself with despair when i saw the cockpit mockups of the 787 and saw that ******* control column rising out of the floor like satan's horns.

you gotta hand it to boeing; thousands of airplanes and not one cockpit designed by a pilot. or maybe guys like setting the NG altimeter with that rube-goldbergish knob and not having a flat surface to eat from or any good way of holding jepps anywhere. it just brings tears to your eyes.

cactusmike

I have flown 737 200/300 and /300 EFIS as well as 9 years on Sparky the Wonderjet. I'm back on Boeings (757) and I love it.

The bus is more comfortable and the flightdeck is better laid out and uncluttered. The sidestick is better than a yoke and the systems information on the Eicas is more complete than on the Boeing. It's a wierd philosophy - Airbus gives you all the information but you can't do anything about it. Boeing lets you do more system-wise but you don't have the systems synoptics available inflight.

But flying - hands down the vote goes to Boeing. More power, bigger wings, more rugged construction. Fly by wire takes a lot of feel out of the experience of hand flying. With the autopilot off your control inputs are still filtered through 7 flight control computers. You don't trim because that is done for you. And just as you get into the flare the flight control laws change. It makes for a challenging aircraft to fly well without the automation. But that's the crux of the problem - Airbus wants, nay DEMANDS that you use automation as much as possible. I rarely used the autopilot below 10000 but I always used the autothrust. Nonprecision approaches are managed through the FMS and must be flown on the autopilot until MDA. Lots of wierd quirks like that. Boeings are a lot more straightforward.

FlightDirectorOff

Never even been on a bus so can't say much about them. I do like the fact that the 737 is still a mechanically flown airplane and IMO the NG's are a pleasure to fly. Also, living in WA kinda makes me root for Boeing.

I am quite glad to see that Boeing gave the 787 a control column. It's a freakin airplane and not a video game!

Kill Bill

so where do you put your meal tray for all the meals you'll be eating on your 10-hour legs? where do your jepps go? how do you cross your legs without banging your knee?

i like boeings, don't want airbusses--but i'd bet there was virtually NO pilot input into cockpit layout and design; unless it was the same "pilots" that designed all the other boeing cockpits.

contrails

Cactusmike said Boeings are a lot more straightforward.

I have not flown either but heard this from a check airman that has:
Exaggerated but I do see his point.

Kill Bill

i have no desire to fly other than boeings but boeing cockpits are NOTORIOUSLY bad. we've had about 150-plus guys go out on OJI's from either struggling to put their suitcases under the 737 jumpseat or trying to put their kit bags in ANY of the places provided on ANY of the boeings.

and, yes, i'm one of the 150; i had L4-L5-S1 surgery for this poor design and will have low-back pain and limited mobility for the rest of my life.

FLYBOYMATTHEW

The Airbus was designed for the 500 hour pilots flying them in 3rd world countries. The "what's it doing now" problems usually start happening when experienced pilots try to outsmart the computer. No doubt about it...if you don't understand the automation, it can bite you.

I believe you will find that most pilots will say they prefer the Boeing products because of their more traditional design. It's still amazes me that the A-320 is early '80s technology. Even though it's been relatively unmodified since its inception, it has been arguably the most advanced transport a/c in the world for the past 20 years.