Picture!! Delta's first 242 MTOW A330-300
May 30, 2015, 8:24 am
#76
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
I'll be honest, as people might have guessed by now, I'm not particularly fond of Airbus aircraft, but, given static conditions (I.e., parked at a gate and on ground power), I won't dispute that the coach and first class seating configuration of deltas A319/32X is more comfortable than the MD 8X/9X/B73X/B75X. Similarly, I won't dispute that the business cabins on the A33X are more comfortable than the B76X. I also appreciate the fact that the A33X offers a below-deck FA Crew rest, which I don't believe is available on the B76X.
My Airbus issuers aren't centered around passenger cabins and comfort. Most of that is decided by the carrier anyway. They just need to learn how to competently design aircraft that puts pilots in control and let pilots make the final decisions on flying the aircraft. An airplane is not a google car or a toy quad copter you buy at an Apple Store!
May 30, 2015, 8:28 am
#77
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wayne, PA USA
Programs: DL MM, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, HHonors Gold
Posts: 7,242
I would take an 80's designed plane at 8-abreast like the A330 over the 9-abreast coach cabin on the 787. If you have taken a ride in what AA/UA/NH have done to their 787, I can't imagine you'd feel differently. The Airbus product is MUCH-more customer friendly than what is being done with the Boeing monstrosity.
Oh, and may I present Phillipine Airlines, which is pleased to offer "Premium Economy" in a 9 abreast configuration on their A330s
Last edited by jimrpa; May 30, 2015 at 8:46 am
May 30, 2015, 10:20 am
#78
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,404
From Singapore...
Singapore Airlines flies to JFK, IAH, LAX, and SFO
United flies to ORD and IAD
DL has...
40 new 739s delivered so far, 60 more on order
45 A321s on order
25 A350-900s on order
25 A330-900neos on order
9 more of these new 242T A333s on order
18 787-8s coming starting in 2020
You can also expect an order in a couple of years (IMO) for the initial MD88 and older A320 replacement (I'd guess 100 planes to start off), delivery probably around 2020
Singapore Airlines flies to JFK, IAH, LAX, and SFO
United flies to ORD and IAD
DL has...
40 new 739s delivered so far, 60 more on order
45 A321s on order
25 A350-900s on order
25 A330-900neos on order
9 more of these new 242T A333s on order
18 787-8s coming starting in 2020
You can also expect an order in a couple of years (IMO) for the initial MD88 and older A320 replacement (I'd guess 100 planes to start off), delivery probably around 2020
May 30, 2015, 11:02 am
#79
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Paradise
Posts: 1,617
I also think that the next new sheet designs from both Boeing/Airbus will take into account that people are simply wider today than decades ago and build frames optimized at 18" at exit limit capacity.
May 31, 2015, 4:39 am
#80
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 7
May 31, 2015, 4:47 am
#81
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 7
Misinformed
Does your objection have to do with cabin configuration or basic aircraft flight control system performance? Or is it based on something else?
I'll be honest, as people might have guessed by now, I'm not particularly fond of Airbus aircraft, but, given static conditions (I.e., parked at a gate and on ground power), I won't dispute that the coach and first class seating configuration of deltas A319/32X is more comfortable than the MD 8X/9X/B73X/B75X. Similarly, I won't dispute that the business cabins on the A33X are more comfortable than the B76X. I also appreciate the fact that the A33X offers a below-deck FA Crew rest, which I don't believe is available on the B76X.
My Airbus issuers aren't centered around passenger cabins and comfort. Most of that is decided by the carrier anyway. They just need to learn how to competently design aircraft that puts pilots in control and let pilots make the final decisions on flying the aircraft. An airplane is not a google car or a toy quad copter you buy at an Apple Store!
I'll be honest, as people might have guessed by now, I'm not particularly fond of Airbus aircraft, but, given static conditions (I.e., parked at a gate and on ground power), I won't dispute that the coach and first class seating configuration of deltas A319/32X is more comfortable than the MD 8X/9X/B73X/B75X. Similarly, I won't dispute that the business cabins on the A33X are more comfortable than the B76X. I also appreciate the fact that the A33X offers a below-deck FA Crew rest, which I don't believe is available on the B76X.
My Airbus issuers aren't centered around passenger cabins and comfort. Most of that is decided by the carrier anyway. They just need to learn how to competently design aircraft that puts pilots in control and let pilots make the final decisions on flying the aircraft. An airplane is not a google car or a toy quad copter you buy at an Apple Store!
The flight control protections are a part of an extremely well designed and highly refined network of safety enhancements. As a case in point, if the Miracle on the Hudson flight was in any plane other than an airbus, the aircraft would have likely stalled and the outcome far less memorable. Fortunately for Sully and crew, the flight controls remained in normal law and the aircraft was prevented from stalling the aircraft even with full aft side stick.
May 31, 2015, 6:57 am
#82
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 5,292
Does your objection have to do with cabin configuration or basic aircraft flight control system performance? Or is it based on something else?
I'll be honest, as people might have guessed by now, I'm not particularly fond of Airbus aircraft, but, given static conditions (I.e., parked at a gate and on ground power), I won't dispute that the coach and first class seating configuration of deltas A319/32X is more comfortable than the MD 8X/9X/B73X/B75X. Similarly, I won't dispute that the business cabins on the A33X are more comfortable than the B76X. I also appreciate the fact that the A33X offers a below-deck FA Crew rest, which I don't believe is available on the B76X.
My Airbus issuers aren't centered around passenger cabins and comfort. Most of that is decided by the carrier anyway. They just need to learn how to competently design aircraft that puts pilots in control and let pilots make the final decisions on flying the aircraft. An airplane is not a google car or a toy quad copter you buy at an Apple Store!
I'll be honest, as people might have guessed by now, I'm not particularly fond of Airbus aircraft, but, given static conditions (I.e., parked at a gate and on ground power), I won't dispute that the coach and first class seating configuration of deltas A319/32X is more comfortable than the MD 8X/9X/B73X/B75X. Similarly, I won't dispute that the business cabins on the A33X are more comfortable than the B76X. I also appreciate the fact that the A33X offers a below-deck FA Crew rest, which I don't believe is available on the B76X.
My Airbus issuers aren't centered around passenger cabins and comfort. Most of that is decided by the carrier anyway. They just need to learn how to competently design aircraft that puts pilots in control and let pilots make the final decisions on flying the aircraft. An airplane is not a google car or a toy quad copter you buy at an Apple Store!
My assumption is that if the plane is permitted to fly passengers it meets safety standards. There doesn't seem to be an inordinate amount of Airbus product dropping out of the sky compared to Boeing, so I trust the flight controls and the men/women using them.
May 31, 2015, 8:00 am
#83
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: Delta skymiles DM + 1MM
Posts: 8,144
My objections are around the cabin configurations. If I have to fly coach, I will not fly the products described above. If I have to fly at all, I will fly another airline to avoid DL's 737-900....it is horrible in both cabins ((last week I even flew Spirit and the BFS to avoid F in a DL 739)).
My assumption is that if the plane is permitted to fly passengers it meets safety standards. There doesn't seem to be an inordinate amount of Airbus product dropping out of the sky compared to Boeing, so I trust the flight controls and the men/women using them.
My assumption is that if the plane is permitted to fly passengers it meets safety standards. There doesn't seem to be an inordinate amount of Airbus product dropping out of the sky compared to Boeing, so I trust the flight controls and the men/women using them.
May 31, 2015, 8:36 am
#84
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 337
I have over 14,000 hours as a pilot on A320's and A330's and can tell you categorically that the pilot is ALWAYS in full control of these fine aircraft. You've likely been misinformed by the misinformed on how these aircraft work.
The flight control protections are a part of an extremely well designed and highly refined network of safety enhancements. As a case in point, if the Miracle on the Hudson flight was in any plane other than an airbus, the aircraft would have likely stalled and the outcome far less memorable. Fortunately for Sully and crew, the flight controls remained in normal law and the aircraft was prevented from stalling the aircraft even with full aft side stick.
The flight control protections are a part of an extremely well designed and highly refined network of safety enhancements. As a case in point, if the Miracle on the Hudson flight was in any plane other than an airbus, the aircraft would have likely stalled and the outcome far less memorable. Fortunately for Sully and crew, the flight controls remained in normal law and the aircraft was prevented from stalling the aircraft even with full aft side stick.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669720/how-lousy-cockpit-design-crashed-an-airbus-killing-228-people
Also- not sure what idiot pilot would have stalled the "miracle on the hudson flight". I think this is simply scaremongering.
May 31, 2015, 8:39 am
#85
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,404
My only objection to the 737-900 in FC is the tiny lavatory. Otherwise, the mood lighting is fun and the seats seemed OK at least for fairly short flights.
May 31, 2015, 9:06 am
#86
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 5,292
Edited to add: If F was 16 in the same space as the 20 now, I wouldn't have a problem. Y is just horrible.
May 31, 2015, 10:58 am
#87
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Bonvoy Titanium, Hyatt Explorist, Hilton Diamond, UA 1K, AA Exec. Plat., DL DM, National E.E.
Posts: 253
As a case in point, if the Miracle on the Hudson flight was in any plane other than an airbus, the aircraft would have likely stalled and the outcome far less memorable. Fortunately for Sully and crew, the flight controls remained in normal law and the aircraft was prevented from stalling the aircraft even with full aft side stick.
Why would any skilled airline pilot have to pull full aft except to avoid imminent ground/obstacle contact (and only when you have tons of airspeed)?
May 31, 2015, 6:20 pm
#88
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 7
From about 100 feet until the aircraft hit the water. The side stick was abruptly pulled to it's full aft limit and remained there until impact. The flight control system prevented the aircraft from stalling and gave the max AOA available (just below alpha max) and therefore the minimum sink. If this was a conventional aircraft without protections an aerodynamic stall would have been difficult to prevent or at the very least the AOA would not have been optimized as it was.
Last edited by Jetman330; May 31, 2015 at 6:36 pm
May 31, 2015, 6:40 pm
#89
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 7
They aren't - sorry. This doesn't mean that Airbus planes are inherently inferior, just that they subscribe to a design philosophy that is counter intuitive and has a knack for causing undesirable issues in times of intense stress.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669720/how-lousy-cockpit-design-crashed-an-airbus-killing-228-people
Also- not sure what idiot pilot would have stalled the "miracle on the hudson flight". I think this is simply scaremongering.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669720/how-lousy-cockpit-design-crashed-an-airbus-killing-228-people
Also- not sure what idiot pilot would have stalled the "miracle on the hudson flight". I think this is simply scaremongering.
May 31, 2015, 6:48 pm
#90
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando, FL Area
Programs: Delta SkySponge ExtraAbsorbent, SPG Gold
Posts: 29,988
From about 100 feet until the aircraft hit the water. The side stick was abruptly pulled to it's full aft limit and remained there until impact. The flight control system prevented the aircraft from stalling and gave the max AOA available (just below alpha max) and therefore the minimum sink. If this was a conventional aircraft without protections an aerodynamic stall would have been difficult to prevent or at the very least the AOA would not have been optimized as it was.