MHO, I will take the 757 any day of the week. Flys like a real airplane, hardly ever perfomance limited, incredible climb and most airlines use it for both short haul and medium long haul. But the pax hate it when full.

Complaints about the 777-gotta really look to find them. Terrible ground lighting at night in the cockpit (wow, that's a deal breaker), uh that's about it. But it really is a 767 on steroids. We fly every version from the 200, 200lr, 300, 300er and now the freighter. Put those big GEs on a 200 with the 300 wing and we're talking some serious stuff. The 300 with Rolls engines is a dog.

 

Still waiting on the FEDS on that one...

Whale

 

Maybe it is just me, but it seemed pretty evident that the guy was being pretty tongue and cheek about it all.

 

I've been flying and instructing in the 777 for some time now and have to say, it's the best plane I've flown. You asked for some specific comments so here it goes:

1. ECL (Electronic Checklist) - it's the best thing since sliced bread. Everything (other than performance calculations) can be done from the ECL. Parts of non-normal checklists that are deferred to other normal checklists are deferred automatically. It is a quantum leap forward in managing non-normal situations. According to the guys who have flown both, the A380 ECL is light years behind the Boeing.
2. Cockpit seat - it sucks. It's hard and uncomfortable and proper adjustment is anything but intuitive.
3. Fly-By-Wire - Pretty good. Where the Airbus gets all wrapped up in various and changing control laws, Boeing has made it pretty transparent to the pilot. In some ways that's a trap also. Because it's fly-by-wire, it works best when "pointed and left alone". Because it's almost transparent to the pilots, they tend to use a lot more control inputs than is actually required or desirable. It's interesting to note that the guys who hand-fly it the best usually are coming off one of the Airbus FBW aircraft. The -300 is a very pitch sensitive aircraft, particularly when single engine.
4. Performance - I'm going to have to take issue with Skyone on that - it's a big airplane and by definition, will be operating closer to edges of the envelope, particularly in non-normal situations and in relation to runway lengths etc. than smaller types. It carries a lot of payload a long way, has lots of cargo volume (-300 has more than a 747-400) and a fairly light DOW. I find that performance/payload wise, it's a very flexible aircraft.
5. Reliability - My experience is that it is very reliable. The engineers tell me that it rarely breaks but that when it does, it tends to be more of a drama than the Airbus which breaks all the time but fixes up rather quickly (reboot the aircraft).

I could go on but I won't. I could probably go to the 380 in a few years but honestly have no desire to. If the 777 is the last airplane I fly in my career that will be okay with me.

 

Gillegan,

I agree with most of what you say, except....When was the last time you were at 410 in the 777. Doing a four hour flight with half a load and we can still be limited to maybe 380. I have yet been to 400. Good news is .84, no problemo.

I don't think I want to take a 777 into LGA on a wet runway, no matter what the weight.

Of course we are comparing big airplane to really big airplane. My Bentley is better than your Maseratti.

I do remember having to take off in a 757 on a very cold day for a very very short flight (ATL-SAV), having to use TOGA power because of some P&W issues. We had to pitch up to 25 degrees in order to keep below flap limit speed prior to thrust reduction at 1000 ft. Mr. Toad's wild ride. Do 25 nose up in a 777 going to Doha and I don't think it will work. But you would be better versed than I, if that were a reality.

Final for me; the 777 is truely a gentleman's aircraft, the 757 is a blue collar worker's aircraft. I haven't flown the 757-300 so that might be altogether another story. But then again, I flew the MD11 and liked that, so I might just be a little off.......

 

What does that make the DC-9, a POS?

 

I disagree (flown both), as does Boeing and Gulfstream:

The sidestick is great for comfort, especially on long haul flights, but safety should trump comfort (same logic applies to Airbus TL's, they should move like Boeings). If that means I need to eat my meal on my lap, then so be it.

 

You brought out the exact point I was about to. It might be nice to have the clear space in front of you, but I like the visual feed back delivered by control wheel in the Boeing and Gulfstream philosophy.

 

I sent you a PM......

 

Concur. The thought of the ECL scared the bejesus out of me. I envisioned getting lost in it. The reality is that it's close to idiot proof (and I'm the proof).

I thought they were fine.