Fifi slimline
03-01-2014, 06:35 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
Originally Posted by Moombabeach
Sorry but the "Fifi" and "guppy" is a weird UAL thing, maybe time to let it go? It's an airbus and a Boeing 737......
03-02-2014, 12:34 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 166
Originally Posted by Moombabeach
Sorry but the "Fifi" and "guppy" is a weird UAL thing, maybe time to let it go? It's an airbus and a Boeing 737......
You guys are always accusing us of being rigid "brain surgeons" yet it's y'all who seem to be so inflexible on this point. Does it really matter what we call them? Why do you guys even care?
03-02-2014, 07:19 AM
#27
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Sacré Bleu!
Originally Posted by Toddnel
Where the heck did FiFi come from?
"No damn United airplane will ever have a stick in it!! Put in a yoke!!" I was told. So, Boeing did.
Who asked for that? Senior United Captains who find themselves on such buying committees; guys who undoubtedly had flown B-377s, DC-6s and -7s, DC-8s -10s, and the B-720 and 727.
A few months later, some United captains went to see the Bus on a buying tour. Northwest was the first big North American customer; so the Bus somewhat of an unknown.
I would guess these guys were somewhat more junior. To them, a sidestick was fine. Suddenly, United announces a huge order for stick-equipped airplanes that aren't built by Boeing or Douglas.
To the dyed-in-the-wool McBoeing crowd, this was heresy. Not made in America, sidestick, fly-by-wire (which only the F-16 had done to this point) and the ever popular "Airbus---even the name sucks." (Which I will admit is pretty funny).
So, pilots looked for way to insult and denigrate it. Final assembly of the A-320 was largely done in France (some is now done in Germany, and China; Mobile Alabama in 2018). So, thinking it was a "French airplane," they started calling it Fifi (pronounced "fee-fee," as in a Moulin Rouge can-can girl's name).
The FMC of the Airbus is slightly different from Boeing. It has no Execute key. I was told that Boeing made the software proprietary, so Airbus had to make theirs different. It means that when you put in the last digit in a field, it takes it. You can't say "Does that look right to you?" and then execute.
You just have to change your habit pattern to put in all but the last digit before you ask that question.
It did lead to the stereotypical "What (or Why) is it doing that?!?!" derogation of the A-320 and its FMC architecture.When I was hired (99), I didn't know much about the bus. I had never flown on one even as a passenger, and couldn't tell an A-300 from a 767. I didn't know that the wings are made in the UK, the empennage in Spain, the aft fuselage in Germany, and the forward fuselage in France. I didn't know the Brits did the human engineering for the cockpit layout, and proposed the sidestick. I think the UK makes the FBW electronics.
I was going through 747-400 school with a great Captain, when I was barely off probation. When 9-11 happened and I knew I was going to get bumped, I remembered what he had told me while going through 747 class:
"There are two kinds of pilots--those who hate the Bus, and those who have flown the Bus."
I like the Bus. I like the sidestick, the logic in handling emergencies, the roominess, the quiet, the tray, the seat, and the far-better air conditioning. "Fifi" is fine, but it isn't really French. Neither is California sparkling wine.
The worst part of all this? The 777 and 787 having a freaking wheel between your legs, even though they are both FBW. My biggest disappointment is that Boeing doesn't build as smart or comfortable a cockpit as Airbus. Thanks, United buying committee on the 777.....
I have no desire to fly the 787. But I would like to fly the A-350.
03-02-2014, 09:59 AM
#28
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
I prefer Boeing to Airbus, with the exception of the 737.
I have flown 3 FBW aircraft, 777, 320, and the Hornet. They are all a bit different. Not right or wrong, but different.
As much as I like the sidestick, it has contributed to accidents, not the least of which was the AF 447.
When I first flew the bus, I was concerned that I couldn't see what the other pilot was doing. But at a major in the US, it was never a factor. Flying with 500 hour FO's in 3rd world countries, it was a HUGE factor. You cannot see what they are DOING, you can only see what they DID.
I haven't flown in the back of the bus for over a year. I just flew a leg a few days ago. I forgot how roomy and quiet it was compared to Boeing narrow bodies (including the 757).
I don't know how we can try to sell a premium product when the products we sell is below average.
Overall, at UAL, I would much rather fly the bus.
And this does not even take into account that I can eat my meal like a human being, on a table, and pee standing up without the toilet seat flopping down.
I have flown 3 FBW aircraft, 777, 320, and the Hornet. They are all a bit different. Not right or wrong, but different.
As much as I like the sidestick, it has contributed to accidents, not the least of which was the AF 447.
When I first flew the bus, I was concerned that I couldn't see what the other pilot was doing. But at a major in the US, it was never a factor. Flying with 500 hour FO's in 3rd world countries, it was a HUGE factor. You cannot see what they are DOING, you can only see what they DID.
I haven't flown in the back of the bus for over a year. I just flew a leg a few days ago. I forgot how roomy and quiet it was compared to Boeing narrow bodies (including the 757).
I don't know how we can try to sell a premium product when the products we sell is below average.
Overall, at UAL, I would much rather fly the bus.
And this does not even take into account that I can eat my meal like a human being, on a table, and pee standing up without the toilet seat flopping down.
03-02-2014, 10:12 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
United was the launch customer for the 777. I was told when senior UAL pilots went to see the cockpit mock-up, it had a stick.
"No damn United airplane will ever have a stick in it!! Put in a yoke!!" I was told. So, Boeing did.
Who asked for that? Senior United Captains who find themselves on such buying committees; guys who undoubtedly had flown B-377s, DC-6s and -7s, DC-8s -10s, and the B-720 and 727.
A few months later, some United captains went to see the Bus on a buying tour. Northwest was the first big North American customer; so the Bus somewhat of an unknown.
I would guess these guys were somewhat more junior. To them, a sidestick was fine. Suddenly, United announces a huge order for stick-equipped airplanes that aren't built by Boeing or Douglas.
To the dyed-in-the-wool McBoeing crowd, this was heresy. Not made in America, sidestick, fly-by-wire (which only the F-16 had done to this point) and the ever popular "Airbus---even the name sucks." (Which I will admit is pretty funny).
So, pilots looked for way to insult and denigrate it. Final assembly of the A-320 was largely done in France (some is now done in Germany, and China; Mobile Alabama in 2018). So, thinking it was a "French airplane," they started calling it Fifi (pronounced "fee-fee," as in a Moulin Rouge can-can girl's name).
The FMC of the Airbus is slightly different from Boeing. It has no Execute key. I was told that Boeing made the software proprietary, so Airbus had to make theirs different. It means that when you put in the last digit in a field, it takes it. You can't say "Does that look right to you?" and then execute.
You just have to change your habit pattern to put in all but the last digit before you ask that question. It did lead to the stereotypical "What (or Why) is it doing that?!?!" derogation of the A-320 and its FMC architecture.
When I was hired (99), I didn't know much about the bus. I had never flown on one even as a passenger, and couldn't tell an A-300 from a 767. I didn't know that the wings are made in the UK, the empennage in Spain, the aft fuselage in Germany, and the forward fuselage in France. I didn't know the Brits did the human engineering for the cockpit layout, and proposed the sidestick. I think the UK makes the FBW electronics.
I was going through 747-400 school with a great Captain, when I was barely off probation. When 9-11 happened and I knew I was going to get bumped, I remembered what he had told me while going through 747 class:
"There are two kinds of pilots--those who hate the Bus, and those who have flown the Bus."
I like the Bus. I like the sidestick, the logic in handling emergencies, the roominess, the quiet, the tray, the seat, and the far-better air conditioning. "Fifi" is fine, but it isn't really French. Neither is California sparkling wine.
The worst part of all this? The 777 and 787 having a freaking wheel between your legs, even though they are both FBW. My biggest disappointment is that Boeing doesn't build as smart or comfortable a cockpit as Airbus. Thanks, United buying committee on the 777.....
I have no desire to fly the 787. But I would like to fly the A-350.
"No damn United airplane will ever have a stick in it!! Put in a yoke!!" I was told. So, Boeing did.
Who asked for that? Senior United Captains who find themselves on such buying committees; guys who undoubtedly had flown B-377s, DC-6s and -7s, DC-8s -10s, and the B-720 and 727.
A few months later, some United captains went to see the Bus on a buying tour. Northwest was the first big North American customer; so the Bus somewhat of an unknown.
I would guess these guys were somewhat more junior. To them, a sidestick was fine. Suddenly, United announces a huge order for stick-equipped airplanes that aren't built by Boeing or Douglas.
To the dyed-in-the-wool McBoeing crowd, this was heresy. Not made in America, sidestick, fly-by-wire (which only the F-16 had done to this point) and the ever popular "Airbus---even the name sucks." (Which I will admit is pretty funny).
So, pilots looked for way to insult and denigrate it. Final assembly of the A-320 was largely done in France (some is now done in Germany, and China; Mobile Alabama in 2018). So, thinking it was a "French airplane," they started calling it Fifi (pronounced "fee-fee," as in a Moulin Rouge can-can girl's name).
The FMC of the Airbus is slightly different from Boeing. It has no Execute key. I was told that Boeing made the software proprietary, so Airbus had to make theirs different. It means that when you put in the last digit in a field, it takes it. You can't say "Does that look right to you?" and then execute.
You just have to change your habit pattern to put in all but the last digit before you ask that question.
It did lead to the stereotypical "What (or Why) is it doing that?!?!" derogation of the A-320 and its FMC architecture.When I was hired (99), I didn't know much about the bus. I had never flown on one even as a passenger, and couldn't tell an A-300 from a 767. I didn't know that the wings are made in the UK, the empennage in Spain, the aft fuselage in Germany, and the forward fuselage in France. I didn't know the Brits did the human engineering for the cockpit layout, and proposed the sidestick. I think the UK makes the FBW electronics.
I was going through 747-400 school with a great Captain, when I was barely off probation. When 9-11 happened and I knew I was going to get bumped, I remembered what he had told me while going through 747 class:
"There are two kinds of pilots--those who hate the Bus, and those who have flown the Bus."
I like the Bus. I like the sidestick, the logic in handling emergencies, the roominess, the quiet, the tray, the seat, and the far-better air conditioning. "Fifi" is fine, but it isn't really French. Neither is California sparkling wine.
The worst part of all this? The 777 and 787 having a freaking wheel between your legs, even though they are both FBW. My biggest disappointment is that Boeing doesn't build as smart or comfortable a cockpit as Airbus. Thanks, United buying committee on the 777.....
I have no desire to fly the 787. But I would like to fly the A-350.
03-02-2014, 10:20 AM
#30
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Originally Posted by APC225
The one instance that I would disagree with the stick vs yoke would be the stall accident into the Atlantic. It would have been absolutely obvious to all three pilots that they were working against each other. I'm sure the airbus has indicators showing that this is happening, but they were either missed or ignored. Seeing one guy pushing on a yoke while the other was pulling on a yoke would have given each other and the captain the realization that they were working at cross purposes. Whether a single accident caused by aircraft control confusion due to no yoke negates the advantages of a side stick is arguable.
I think they knew the stick was full-aft, but the one or two times he unloaded, they got a stall warning...because that was when the airspeed finally went above 60 knots. Stall warnings are inhibited below 60 kts so you don't get nuisance warnings while taxiing or landing rollout with gusty winds.
Thinking that unloading was causing a stall, he pulled back....to avoid it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
