If there are any airline pilots here who have flown both, which type of
transition is easier: from Boeing to Airbus, or from Airbus to Boeing?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

>"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
> If there are any airline pilots here who have flown both, which type of
> transition is easier: from Boeing to Airbus, or from Airbus to Boeing?

Which Boeing and which Airbus? If the level of avionics is similar, a
professional pilot can adapt to either with proper training.

D. (an airplane is an airplane)

Capt.Doug writes:

> Which Boeing and which Airbus? If the level of avionics is similar, a
> professional pilot can adapt to either with proper training.

Given that the two companies have different overall philosophies towards pilot
ergonomy, I was thinking in a general sense, but perhaps with the B737/A320
range more in mind.

Airbus seems to favor the notion that engineers should fly the plane with the
pilot acting only as an attendant, whereas Boeing seems to believe that pilots
should fly the plane with the engineers as attendants. So is it preferable to
fly a plane that absolutely refuses to do what the engineers have forbidden,
at the price of memorizing all the AI that they've built into the aircraft and
having no option if one needs to fly outside the envelope in an emergency, or
is it better to fly a plane that will do whatever it is told in a more
predictable way, at the price of risking serious consequences if one tells the
plane to do something outside of its envelope?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Capt.Doug writes:
>
>> Which Boeing and which Airbus? If the level of avionics is similar, a
>> professional pilot can adapt to either with proper training.
>
> Given that the two companies have different overall philosophies towards
> pilot
> ergonomy, I was thinking in a general sense, but perhaps with the
> B737/A320
> range more in mind.
>
> Airbus seems to favor the notion that engineers should fly the plane with
> the
> pilot acting only as an attendant, whereas Boeing seems to believe that
> pilots
> should fly the plane with the engineers as attendants. So is it
> preferable to
> fly a plane that absolutely refuses to do what the engineers have
> forbidden,
> at the price of memorizing all the AI that they've built into the aircraft
> and
> having no option if one needs to fly outside the envelope in an emergency,
> or
> is it better to fly a plane that will do whatever it is told in a more
> predictable way, at the price of risking serious consequences if one tells
> the
> plane to do something outside of its envelope?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Trying to give a damn....processing....operation failed.

-------------------------------------------------
DW

"Darkwing" <theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com> writes:

> Trying to give a damn....processing....operation failed.

It could not have failed entirely, or you would not be posting this.

If you've never flown big iron, I can see why it might not seem interesting to
you.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

While the A-320 does more for the pilot than the B-737, don't interpret that
to mean that the pilot isn't allowed to fly it. Airbus philosophy isn't to
exclude the pilot but to keep the lowest common denominator of pilot in the
loop. Click-click, click-click, and I have all the control I need just as in
other jets I have flown. Punch 3 more buttons and I can do aerobatics. We
have options.

D.

>"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
> Airbus seems to favor the notion that engineers should fly the plane with
the
> pilot acting only as an attendant, whereas Boeing seems to believe that
pilots
> should fly the plane with the engineers as attendants. So is it
preferable to
> fly a plane that absolutely refuses to do what the engineers have
forbidden,
> at the price of memorizing all the AI that they've built into the aircraft
and
> having no option if one needs to fly outside the envelope in an emergency,
or
> is it better to fly a plane that will do whatever it is told in a more
> predictable way, at the price of risking serious consequences if one tells
the
> plane to do something outside of its envelope?

On Feb 19, 3:46 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> If there are any airline pilots here who have flown both, which type of
> transition is easier: from Boeing to Airbus, or from Airbus to Boeing?

They are very similar. You can even interchange the panels by right
clicking on the window and selecting "panels".

-Robert

CUB to 777 is an easy transition. Took me about 5 minutes in the sim. I now
have my type rating.....
- Barney
"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> If there are any airline pilots here who have flown both, which type of
> transition is easier: from Boeing to Airbus, or from Airbus to Boeing?
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Capt.Doug writes:

> While the A-320 does more for the pilot than the B-737, don't interpret that
> to mean that the pilot isn't allowed to fly it. Airbus philosophy isn't to
> exclude the pilot but to keep the lowest common denominator of pilot in the
> loop. Click-click, click-click, and I have all the control I need just as in
> other jets I have flown. Punch 3 more buttons and I can do aerobatics. We
> have options.

Is there an operating mode in the A320 that will give you unconditional direct
control of the throttles no matter what the aircraft's configuration or
condition, as if they were mechanically linked?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

>"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
> Is there an operating mode in the A320 that will give you unconditional
direct
> control of the throttles no matter what the aircraft's configuration or
> condition, as if they were mechanically linked?

Yes, and it is the second pair of clicks in 'Click, click,.. click, click.'
That's the sound of the autothrottles being disconnected (the first pair is
the sound of the autopilot being disconnected).

All that automation is wonderful, but with 35 primary computers talking to
each other, sometimes the lesser prioritized computers don't perform as
commanded when commanded. Just like with Windows and a full hard-drive,
there is some lag in some components. The autothrottles are slow to
recognize a slow machspeed condition when approaching mountain wave
activity, which incidentally was how the MD-80 autothrottles acted too.

I can land the A-319 in 3000' at midweight with idle reverse and without a
brake temperature warning. I simply go 'click, click,.. click click' and
land it like a Cessna.

Transition training in the Bus teaches pilots how to use the automation.
Then they fly with me and can't get the automation to fly right in the real
world. I gently remind them that they can turn off the automation and fly
the airplane. It works a charm.

D.