spin88

once you say that that there is "a half inch of seat room" between the 737 and the A320, I almost stopped listening. The 737 has a cabin width of 139" and the A320series has a cabin width of 146", so the actual difference is 7", i.e. slightly more than 1" per seat. While airlines like United going with the cheaper/crappier equipment try to hide the fact, math does not lie.

But I will still express some About your assertions on sales for the A320neo vs. Max8 (my figures and links below):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...and_deliveries (1985 Max8 orders)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...and_deliveries (3587 A320neo orders).




Boeing has been victimized by a board that is focused on short term wall-street returns for a long time. They have passed up many opportunities, and the 787 mess was a direct result of trying to off-site the costs of development. Sad to say, but once the McD management took over, Boeing has never been the same.

I think passengers do notice, and there is a difference in NPS type scores for the A/C. Part of why B6 and VX gets such high scores is that they are all airbus. But I don't think that many (most) passengers would attribute the difference to the A/C type, i.e. airbus vs. Boeing. Its an association that no one pushes, and you only figure out once you fly a lot. And unless Airbus pushes in the general public the association (something they were likely loath to do because in some areas e.g. the B777 in 3-3-3 vs. the A333/340, Boeing was clearly more comfortable) I think it will be a difference people notice, but can't attribute.

A good example, my parents just flew to Hawaii on VX. They said it was much more comfortable than flying UA as they usually do. It was MCS vs. E+, so pitch is similar. I doubt they attributed it to the seat width, but knowing them, I have no doubt that the extra space was part of it.

minnyfly

Totally agree. I believe that confirmation bias is what most people are "feeling". I never noticed before being informed, and I still don't notice anything definitive in the width department after knowing the details. The difference is simply way too small and impacted far more by outside factors. Think about it. Stick a finger on both your shoulders. That's it.

I find an inch of pitch to be quite noticeable. An inch or less of width isn't at all, and the variables of empty seats alongside and/or size of seatmates is far, far more impacting to your comfort. I've been much more miserable in an 18" Airbus or MD seat than a 3-4-3 77W just because of who I was next to or where the window was positioned if I'm on the end.

Been in both of AA's standard A321 versions, and the only major thing I notice in the space department is the extra pitch (which has nothing to do with Airbus vs. Boeing). But outside of that, I'd rather have the newest UA 739s. The Sky Interior is much nicer (mitigated though if the plane has the latest Airbus interior), and UA's mid-cabin lav is much better positioned for economy passengers. If it has the old interior, it's pretty much a wash between the two.

I haven't had the "pleasure" of flying DL's A321 yet, but the specs say it's cramped. No thanks. Little chance I vote it higher than UA's planes. Maybe you're now used to the DL 739 and are using that as a point of reference for the 737. That's arguably the most cramped airplane flown by the legacies.


My guess is that you haven't been in DL's Airbus Space-Flex lavs.

fly18725

Reliability is a statistic. You can argue against it with anecdotal information, but it doesn't change the statistic.

Th FAA and EASA, the European regulatory agency, determined the 737 airframe requires less maintenance than the A320. I'm sure exactly why, but I know they look at lots of data.

riphamilton

my gripe with the mid-cabin lav in the 737 is that its location ruins what are otherwise the best E+ seats. if i'm in row 7-8, perhaps even 9, i'd rather walk to the back than deal with the lav.

i'm not anti-mid cabin lav. it's not nearly as bad in the sCO 757; door 2L and the galley opposite the lav provide sufficient buffer.

i don't think this "news" that UA is looking at the MAX10 and A321neo is anything significant. of course UA is considering both aircraft - it'd be news if they weren't.

my guess is that UA will place a large MAX10 order that allows them to swap units for the 797. my hope would be a c-series order, but i would give that less than a 10% chance because of scope clause issues.

LarryJ

Don't forget the "thunk--thunk" from the brakes.

Lots of airplanes have PTUs, including the 737. I'm not sure why the A320-series PTU is so much louder than the rest.

minnyfly

That's all fine and dandy on the A321 until you're the one with the bloated bladder in the front row of economy with the service carts between you and the loo.

UA's 739s give you a way out either direction. Small price to pay IMO. There's enough E+ seats to find a good row.

notquiteaff

I assume you know what Mark Twain supposedly said about statistics

My point is that it doesn't make sense to me to just take the data on delay and cancellations from who-knows-how-many airlines and mash them together into a single number without considering that that individual numbers may just not be comparable. The simple example I gave were simply meant to illustrate that. There are other factors that I didn't mention, e.g., average aircraft age. Is that factored in?

Can you point me to a source for the 99.3% vs 99.4% numbers that explains to me how they were derived?

I found this Boeing blog -- is that your source?

http://www.boeingblogs.com/randy/arc...e_between.html

Seems I am not the only one questioning some of the methodology behind statistics used by aircraft manufacturers based on DOT-collected data.

https://leehamnews.com/2013/06/18/th...and-737-costs/

I suspect the decision makers at United aren't just going to make their decision based on some marketing numbers (statistics) from Boeing or Airbus. I also doubt that they factor in passenger comfort, based on other recent decisions.

username

As much as I love Boeing and own their stock, I like the 320 much better than the 737. I am not a tall person but the cabin ceiling on the 320 seems higher and the plane is taller. The landings on the 737s are terrible most of the time for some reason. I also like the UA 320s lav faucet a lot better. It is really hard to wash and rinse the hands clean on UA's 737 faucets (except for the ones with the blue/red buttons).

I flew a few times on US Air's 321s and really like the cabin. I guess the L2 door is too close to the engine so they can't board from there. 757 is a lot better on that front.

Kacee

Yeah, there are basically no really good Y seats on the UA 739. 7 and 8 are too close to the mid-cabin lav, and 21 has the thin seat cushion and tiny armrest at the window.

It's just not a passenger friendly aircraft, and I'm pretty sure the MAX will be even worse.

Worcester

The Airbus aircraft are also likely to be built in the US?

sbm12

There is a final assembly line (FAL) in Alabama. Most of the component parts are built in Europe and shipped over for assembly. And the current plan is a peak of 8 frames/month, I believe, while the European FALs push out planes at a notably higher pace. So, yes, some of the US carriers are getting deliveries from the US assembly plant but most still come from Europe.

dmurphynj

Ahh yes, forgot the brakes! I also find the pumps for the cargo door extremely loud.

As a passenger, I'd still prefer the Boeing. The PTU noise is the tip of the iceberg. Something reassuring about a plane with full mechanical controls available. There's plenty to like about the a320 I guess, but there's a feeling of comfort and trust I have for the 737.

Of course if I had to pick my favorite narrowbody of all time, it's the 757, hands down. No question.

riphamilton

This is probably the sole FT debate that there is consensus on.

Productivity

I see this time and time again, but it always seems to be cherry picking an argument. Boeing builds the 777 and 787 with no direct mechanical control yet you probably have full faith in them, but compare it to an Airbus plane and you say you are reassured by direct mechanical control.

Just seems to be a very selectively applied point.

mahasamatman

I'd have to go with the DC-3.