In reading the propaganda put out from the Airbus-EADS-Jaque Chirac-led consortium, the A380 will put every other plane completely out of existance in 10 years. WHATEVER! However, it is kinda cool looking....which begs the question: Do you think that we will see the A380 at IAH anytime soon? KL has 2 flights to AMS, and BA has 2 to GTW. The KL flights have a significant time between them, but the BA ones are fairly close, so do you think that BA might combine them into one massive flight? Is IAH able to handle the superjumbo?

"If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going!"

Eventually you'll see an A380, but probably not anytime soon. You're more likely to see it at other, larger international gateways in the US. While I would love to see one, I don't think I want to ride one just yet. Maybe I'm biased, but I don't trust those Airbus jets yet. I'll ride in one but I don't go out of my way to get into one.

Is this common?

We all have preferences of planes, seat, arilines, etc.
I can even see people wanting to "fly American," if that's how they want to choose what planes they get on (or "fly European" for that matter).

But I've never heard of a general mistrust of Airbus Jets...

Are you concerned about safety? Is there a significant difference in the safety records of Airbus vs. Boeing? Or is it just that Airbus is the new kid on the block?

enquiring minds want to know....

Mostly a safety concern. I don't trust Airbus' preference for hard-computer controls of a jet versus Boeings soft-computer controls. I am pretty sure Airbus has a worse safety record than Boeing. However, I don't have the facts to back it up and I could wrong. Overall both planes are safe and like I said, I'll ride in an Airbus because it is a generally safe product (compared to say a Russian made prop). I just feel more comfortable in a Boeing, especially when it comes to flying a new model. I'd rather let other passengers work the kinks out, so-to-speak.

Also I like the Boeing 777 over the Airbus equivalent. I find the Boeing 777 to be a more comfortable ride....less bumpy. I even prefer the 777 over the 747. I do try to look for specific planes when I fly (internationally), but that's only part of the decision.

And I'm sure some homeland pride factors in as well.

There have been flame wars about Airbus and distrust of its total fly-by-wire design going on in USENET and other forums for close to ten years now.

All I know is that I flew AF A340 from IAH-CDG, and it was one of the quietest jets in the worrld, but definitely not designed for my 6'2'' frame in coach. Not that CO is much better with their 777/767's, but the Airbus product, at least on European-flagged carriers, are definitely designed for the Euro-Body.

Considering that CO is an airline focussing mainly on thin intercontinental routes, beside some bigger ones justifying B 777 equipment and since CO is the main operator at IAH the only chance to see an A 380 there is, when Airbus makes a promo tour, however considering that some of the most stupid comments about Airbus came from Gordo they will likely skip IAH, although he is retired as well as the CO Airbus

Beside that human mistakes are still the main reason for airplane crashes, the newer Airbus cannot be flown into tragedy anymore, cause the computer will not allow the pilot to do so, it is a widely discussed topic, but would have saved 270 people on an American A 300-600 in Queens, NY in 2001 in an accident where the co pilot was simply doing a tragic mistake, an instruction which would have been rejected by the computer on the newer Airbus aircraft...

The A 380 will be a huge success, putting aside all those stupid Euro-US Boeing-Airbus discussions, it will be used by those really big intercontinental airlines connecting big hubs on several continents or within Asia, I guess.

Considering LH flies two 744`s to LAX , BKK or MEX from FRA within a few hours, those destinations alone easily justify an A 380.

Are you asking if the infrastructure (runways, taxiways, etc) or the passenger facilities can handle the A380? I used to often see that monster Antonov parked on the tarmac at IAH so I'm sure the runways et al could hand the A380.

Yes, but the Anonov can't park at a terminal. However, the A380 is designed to fit in the existing "box" at a terminal gate.
As for flying in it, I don't know. Even though I've flown 747's many times, I still look at them and can't believe they get off the ground!!

There are many more destinations that justify it (e.g., BA JFK-LHR (6 x 744 + 2 x 777 daily), QF LAX-SYD (2-3 x 744 daily), etc.).

The A380 may even benefit these carriers as it will allow them to consolidate 747 frequencies into fewer A380 frequencies, which will in turn free up the 747s for perhaps new markets.

Yes, human error does account for the vast majority of air tragedies. However it's usually a combination of factors with human error being an overriding factor in the cause of the ultimate crash. I think it's a bit too soon and arrogant to say that an Airbus can't be flown into tragedy anymore.

I thought the AA crash was due to pilot error, Airbus rudder system design and AA's pilot training program. Are you saying it was soley the co-pilot's fault?

How do you know the Airbus 380 will be a huge success? Don't you think it's a bit soon to know whether or not the 380 or the 787 will be huge successes?

BTW- Do you work for Airbus?

I had an interesting conversation with a NW A330 pilot last week and he told me that the newer AB's can not do unnatural things at the hands of human. He said the computer system will keep the AC in flight irregardless of what the pilot does. He said for example that no matter how hard you pull back or push forward on the controls the computer will only allow the plane to climb or decend at a rate that will keep it in the air.

I am certainly not an expert but this guy was very interesting to listen to. Made the ATL-DTW trip go quickly...

Well, they said that about the current AB models and they still crash for various reasons, including human and computer error. I think there is no true failsafe way to prevent human error or computer error. It's just a matter of philosphy. Do you trust a human to make the decisions when a crisis erupts or a computer? Either way there are risks. People shouldn't be fooled into thinking that a computer can solve all problems. Let's just hope the computers (on Boeing or Airbus jets) aren't windows based.

But anyways, this has gone off-topic (i.e., Continental FF related matter).

True that human factors are cited as a contributing cause to the majority of accidents. But automation is also deadly. It was the FMC of an ATR-72 (another heavily computerised aircraft made by an Italian company called Alenia that also builds parts for the A300, 310, 320 family and the new 380)that blocked the pilots from performing manuevers that would have given a chance of recovery from a fatal, inverted dive. In this case the rudder actuator was limited by an airspeed constraint - making recovery from an unusual attitide impossible to execute after the autopilot disconnected; unable to hold altitude due to ice accumulation behind the deicing boots.

Um, your problem was that you were in coach on AF. It has nothing to do with Airbus vs. Boeing and everything to do with how the airline chooses to configure its aircraft.
For example, most airlines' 777's seat 9-abreast in coach, with a 17.9" seat width, one of the more generous seat widths out there. However, Thai Airways, for example, outfits its 777-200s with 10-abreast, which probably cuts seat width down to one of the worst out there (no stats available, but prob <17"). I'd much rather be in a NW A320 (17.2") than a 777-200 on Thai. And obviously, seat pitch can be whatever the airline chooses. 31" or less sucks no matter what type of plane or airline you're on, 32" is OK, and 33" or more is pretty decent.

So, IMHO, there are so many more factors going into whether you are comfortable on a given aircraft beyond whether it's Boeing or Airbus. On the bumpiness comment, I would think that the current weather would have a MUCH greater influence on the smoothness of the flight than the aircraft type. I'm not sure that just because your recent Airbus flight was bumpy that it would have been any better in a Boeing.