![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 news ![]() 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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FA: 2 VHS - BOEING 777 and BOEING 767 In-Cockpit Videos - | Sara | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | March 17th 05 02:00 AM |
Airbus | Flightstick | Simulators | 0 | March 2nd 05 05:13 PM |
Airbus | Airborne | Simulators | 0 | March 2nd 05 05:13 PM |
Rate of turn indicator on commercial jets (Boeing / Airbus) | Mark | Simulators | 1 | November 1st 03 10:35 AM |
Israel pays the price for buying only Boeing (and not Airbus) | Tarver Engineering | Military Aviation | 57 | July 8th 03 12:23 AM |