Airbus vs Boeing

[Steff]

You travel in style SW!!!

I'll buy you a drink some day but only if you take me to the above bar.  

[El_hefe]

Took a transatlantic trip on a 757 in coach last month, what a piece of s!%#. About as comfortable as taking the bus, never again... they shouldn't use it for a long haul like that, I can only assume it's cheaper to run than a proper jet.

[Steff]

Ah yes I forgot about the 757. You are quite correct. It is a nasty piece of flying shit!!! The Tuk Tuk of the sky.

[daveduke007]

777-300ER's from Manchester to BKK via Abu Dhabi and back, will do for me

[f0xxee]

Given my choices I would tend to prefer a slow boat to China for my money: I can always swim or float but will never master flying.
However as time doesnt permit my to go by boat, I choose by carrier. At the moment my preference is Vietnam Air. Crazy as it sounds I do 8 hours a month on Vietnamese helicopters and see the safety and maintenance Audits of the same helicopters as they are contracted to my employers. And they are extremely well vetted. (Eurocopters) As such I carrry this trust over to the Vietnamese fixed wing transports too. Vietnam Air are trying to build their SE Asia market and are both cheap, professional and a new fleet. And the pilot more often than not is falang. There. I said it.

[deepthroat]

(El_hefe @ Nov. 27 2010,03:41) Took a transatlantic trip on a 757 in coach last month, what a piece of s!%#. About as comfortable as taking the bus, never again... they shouldn't use it for a long haul like that, I can only assume it's cheaper to run than a proper jet.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the comfort level of the seating arrangements is entirely dependent upon the airlines and the "configuration" they select, and has very little to do with the manufacturer of the plane.

In other words, you can fly on the same Boeing 737 in coach and have 3 completely different experiences depending upon whether the plane is owned by Delta, United, or Cathay Pacific as each has their own specifications and configuration which determines seat width, number of seats in a row, etc.

Isn't that correct?

[pacman]

Yes.

I flew an AirAsia Airbus a while back & I have never seen a narrower seat in my life. A big person just would not fit in one their economy seats. Now that AA are targetting other markets, especially Australia, they are going to need to rethink their seating policy.

[seamus]

I wonder what might have happend if the British had got this right !

Certainly one of the most tragic stories of the jet age revolves around the unfortunate de Havilland Comet. Building on the British lead in jet engine technology following World War II, de Havilland developed and flew the first commercial jet aircraft in 1949, several years ahead of rival Boeing in America. Known as the D.H.106 Comet, the ailiner used four of the new de Havilland Ghost 50 turbojet engines mounted in the wing root leading edge of an otherwise fairly typical commercial airliner of the day.
Because it represented such a revolutionary advance in commercial travel, the Comet was put through an extensive series of test flights and certifications over the next three years. These 500 hours worth of flight crew training and proving flights included long overseas flights, tropical operations, and high altitude takeoffs.

Having successfully completed these tests with no apparent difficulties, launch customer BOAC received permission to begin commercial operations in early 1952. The first hint of trouble with the design came exactly one year later when a Comet mysteriously crashed shortly after takeoff on 2 May 1953. Two similar crashes in early 1954 forced British authorities to ground the entire fleet pending investigation. Over the following months, extensive tests were performed on the aircraft to determine what could have caused these mysterious accidents.

The answer finally came after a fuselage had been submerged in a tank of water and repeatedly pressurized and depressurized to represent repeated flight cycles. After several thousand of these cycles, fatigue cracks were found to be spreading from the square edges of the windows in the passenger cabin. These cracks would eventually reach a critical size where they would grow rapidly resulting in a catastrophic depressurization that would destroy an aircraft in flight.

All Comets then in service or under construction were either scrapped or modified with rounded-corner windows to correct the fatugue problem. Nevertheless, it took four years for the aircraft to be recertified for commercial service. By this time, the much improved Comet 4 series was available, equipped with better engines, greater fuel capacity for increased range, and a lengthened cabin for additional passengers.

However, the four year hiatus in Comet operations had driven most prospective customers to the rival Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8. These designs soon claimed the bulk of the market. Only about 90 Comets ever reached commercial operators, and most were removed from service by the early 1980s. A few additional aircraft were used by the military, but only the Nimrod, a Comet derivative, remains in use. Had the Comet not been plagued by a fatal design flaw, Britain might well still dominate commercial aviation today

[deepthroat]

Great information Seamus. Didn't realize you were a history buff (as am I).

"Nimrod" was an unfortunate choice of nomenclature.

[seamus]

Not as thick as people think I am

[Jake_Sully]

Are most 777's 3-3-3 or 2-4-2? I've only flown on the 2-4-2 configuration and I liked it.

[Steff]

Depends on the airline. I've flown mostly the 3-3-3 configuration. Bulkhead in economy (row 18) is 2-3-2. First class often have the single seat pods which I love. I don't know if you every noticed the size of the engine but I am sure a 6 foot man should stand up in it. Huge.

[Jake_Sully]

[Jake_Sully]

It really is huge. The European girls are all over it!



Apparently it's almost as wide as the fuselage itself:

[guydesavoy]

I'm strictly a 3-4-3 man on short haul. I take the 4.

First class I'm one on one.