A320 or B-737NG a better pilots a/c?
01-10-2006, 12:43 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Office Chair
Posts: 640
Just another side note...
A transition course from the A-320 family to the A-330, A-340, A-350, or even the A-380 takes less than 2 weeks. How long does it take to transition from the 737 to any of the other Boeing products? Should the 737-200 even be the same type rating as a 737NG?
A transition course from the A-320 family to the A-330, A-340, A-350, or even the A-380 takes less than 2 weeks. How long does it take to transition from the 737 to any of the other Boeing products? Should the 737-200 even be the same type rating as a 737NG?
01-10-2006, 07:25 AM
#13
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: A320 PIC
Posts: 34
I currently fly the A-320 series and have years in a 73', including the 400 EFIS, but no time in a 737NG.
The only airplane I was "Jones'n" to fly before retirement was the 757. I think the 757 is the best looking airliner currently flying and is a hot rod with wings. Put some flames and a set of glass packs on it and you'd be all set. If you could make the engines sound like R-2800's it would be perfect.
I find the 'Bus a competent airplane but I certainly don't think it is better than the 737NG, it's just different. What I don't like about the 'Bus is poor cockpit lighting, maybe if the dome light was brighter (and red), it wouldn't be so irritating at night. You also get reflections from the center pedestal lights on the windshield at night, (or your shirt, if you use the map light).
I MUCH prefer the FMS software on the Boeing vs the Legacy or Pegasus versions on the Airbus. There's a huge difference in this regard between the two aircraft, and I think Boeing won, hands down.
Flying with the side stick from either seat is no big deal, you adjust quickly.
The Airbus is one rough riding sum'bi*ch in turbulence, rides like the wings have no flex at all, DARN!!, spilled my coffee again!
No tail skid on the 'Bus...scraping the tail is a BIG deal $$$$$$$.
The APU on the 'Bus has alot of air available for pack operation on the ground, very comfortable on the ground year 'round.
Crosswind operations, especially landings, are "different".
The airbus cockpit is much quieter than the Boeings I've flown, but that's not saying much. I always wondered why the Boeings were so noisy...supersonic airflow where the windshield blends into the cockpit "roof", the large angle between the windshields and the clear view windows, localized air turbulence? I don't know, but whatever the reason, IT SURE IS LOUD.
The only airplane I was "Jones'n" to fly before retirement was the 757. I think the 757 is the best looking airliner currently flying and is a hot rod with wings. Put some flames and a set of glass packs on it and you'd be all set. If you could make the engines sound like R-2800's it would be perfect.
I find the 'Bus a competent airplane but I certainly don't think it is better than the 737NG, it's just different. What I don't like about the 'Bus is poor cockpit lighting, maybe if the dome light was brighter (and red), it wouldn't be so irritating at night. You also get reflections from the center pedestal lights on the windshield at night, (or your shirt, if you use the map light).
I MUCH prefer the FMS software on the Boeing vs the Legacy or Pegasus versions on the Airbus. There's a huge difference in this regard between the two aircraft, and I think Boeing won, hands down.
Flying with the side stick from either seat is no big deal, you adjust quickly.
The Airbus is one rough riding sum'bi*ch in turbulence, rides like the wings have no flex at all, DARN!!, spilled my coffee again!
No tail skid on the 'Bus...scraping the tail is a BIG deal $$$$$$$.
The APU on the 'Bus has alot of air available for pack operation on the ground, very comfortable on the ground year 'round.
Crosswind operations, especially landings, are "different".
The airbus cockpit is much quieter than the Boeings I've flown, but that's not saying much. I always wondered why the Boeings were so noisy...supersonic airflow where the windshield blends into the cockpit "roof", the large angle between the windshields and the clear view windows, localized air turbulence? I don't know, but whatever the reason, IT SURE IS LOUD.
01-11-2006, 09:58 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B747FO
Posts: 148
I am on the bus, it's ok, weak on the power side and lots of little quirks(but that maybe the software we use). I have also been on the 757, now thats a nice airplane. Lots of power, flies real nice and easy to land. I want to go back to 757, also our trips are better on that fleet.
Last edited by nw320driver; 01-11-2006 at 10:50 AM.
01-11-2006, 10:42 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
our new 800's are coming with the vortex generators on the nose just forward of the windows. supposed to make things quieter but i honestly didn't notice much noise reduction.
we still transition from round-dial 300's to NG 900's in the same day. other than momentarily hunting for the button you want and the fact that the round-dials have mechanical flight instuments and no map displays (not to mention terrible broken-down seats) there really isn't much difference. the cockpit is the same cramped and poorly-designed space with no real room for storing other than a very small bag.
we still transition from round-dial 300's to NG 900's in the same day. other than momentarily hunting for the button you want and the fact that the round-dials have mechanical flight instuments and no map displays (not to mention terrible broken-down seats) there really isn't much difference. the cockpit is the same cramped and poorly-designed space with no real room for storing other than a very small bag.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
