Boeing and Airbus

Those of us that read a.net will know just how often the airbus versus boeing debate crops up. On reading the latest debate (argumement) I realised that this would be an interesting discussion to set for us in here seeing as VS operate both types of the a/c.

I am a British at heart and despite what Blair wants us to think we are European so therefore I'm more pro Airbus, plus I like to see Boeing compete against a viable alternative (something it has never had to do). This isnt too say that I dont like Boeing- far from it, the 744 is a super bit of machinery as is the 737, by all accounts crew find the 744 easier to work on as well and as a pax there is no greater feeling (other than concorde) than boaring one of those jumbos! On the other hand the sight of a 346 is also just as impressive- it is soooo long!! With the A380 on the way- what do we all think? Boeing or airbus and why? Will we see Airbus overtake Boeing? What about the US long haul market- airbus to dominate in the future?

To be honest, I don't know why A.net is fighting.
Airbus and Boeing are good companies
but If I had the choice flying transatlantic it would be a A340, A330, B744, B777, B764 aircrafts.
and on medium/short haul
A320/19/18 or B737-700-800-900 or B717.

I flew over from LAX to LHR aboard VA8 - 747 service, That was my seventh of eight flights aboard this beauty. But while in the UK, I took a flight up to Manchester with BA - A320 Service, with the A319 on the return.

I absolutely love the 747, and do not think there is anything close to it's reliability, service, and track record. It is also a beautiful machine. Not to mention more safety systems than almost any other commerical airliner. Little history on the 747...

When Boeing decided to build a super jumbo (the 747), they were very concerned about safety. As no commercial aircraft to this time had ever carried so many people.

If they built the 747, it meant the possibility of headlines that 450 people died in a crash. The Boeing board of directors were concerned that if that happened, people would stop flying the 747 and Boeing would go out of business.

The engineers assured them they could build an uncrashable airliner, one with so many levels of backup systems that a crash would be pretty much out of the question.

Most people don't know it, but the 747 has TWO sets of main landing gear, so that if one set doesn't work, they still have the other set.

However, Boeing has had notible competion in the past (Douglas). When Boeing decided to build their super jumbo. Douglas, the competition, decided not to build such a large commercial aircraft. But when Boeing started taking orders (50 at the start), Douglas suddenly decided to build their big plane, the DC10. They (compared with Boeing) rushed through the design phase (according to the view of many) and did not produce as good a design.

You may remember the Sioux City crash involving a DC10. All three hydrulic lines were routed side by side. Something that you will not find on the 747. When a engine blew on that particular DC10, it took out all three hydrulic lines. Not a good thing to happen on a large aircraft.

In the test phases for the B747, Boeing put that aircraft through almost every scenero that could be thought of, from dragging the tail on the runway, to near inverted flight.

For sure one day the B747 will retire, but for now... to me it is a leader.

Now, as for Airbus, as I said, I had my first chance to experience the A320, and A319 while in the UK, and absolutely loved it. The airline that I fly here in the States, operates the B737. I found the A320 to have more room, and (to me) the ride seemed a bit smoother (even in turbulence), and was definately quieter. In my research, I found the 320, and 319 are of good design, and should be admired.

To me it has nothing to do with global politics, or national pride. Belive me, I am involved in both. However, the global airline industry is such that good competition can do nothing but provide great aircraft!

The great thing about the 744 in Virgin's configuration (well, the ex-LHR ones) is the flexibility in choosing your Upper Class Suite.

Upstairs for sleep.
Zone A for a real front of the house experience and some relative quiet
Zone B for more of a buzz and proximity to the bar

Each area has its own distinct character, best seats and general ambience. IMO the A346 is just a long tube with what seems like far too many seats in it. The seeming move to a more A346-oriented operation at LHR does not endear me to VS... the 744 is just a very special plane.

BC

Exactly!!!

And even if you are on the upper deck, you can still go and "explore" a majoity of the other sections!

I personally love the 747s. I also agree that there is no feeling like boarding one and have missed my chance of ever flying in Concorde (which was a dream of mine [:(]).

I flew on an Airbus earlier this year with Air France and was in Tempo (Econ) which was so tight and cramped I felt miserable for the whole flight.

I really think it depends upon class of service. I've not been in Y on VS yet, just PE and UC of which the 747s really do well. I also haven't been on the VS Airbuses (first time this Christmas) however, The BA 747s in Econ are comparable and I found this beter than the Airbus of Air France in the same class.

I do, however, think the 777s are also very good, comfortable and spacious.

I think that it's interesting how VS fly three types of aircraft (if I'm correct on this number) the 343 346 and 747. I wonder why sometimes as its often been suggested that airlines that run the same aircraft in their fleet (i.e. Southwest) can really cut costs and offset ticket prices (or boost profitability) with one set of trained mechanics, tools and facilities. I know, from conversations with friends in the business, that running too many types of aircraft is often the reason for undue expense.

Just my $0.02 worth.

JC.

Sorry... I missed your other questions...

I don't think Airbus will overtake Boeing, nor do I think they will be in Boeing's shawdow either. As written earlier... both are fine companies.

As for the US long-haul market... it will be interesting to see what happens when the 380 emerges. But again, my thoughts at this time are that Airbus will not dominate.

I'm definitley in the 747 camp. Again like corbenjames i'll now never get to fly the Bird so for me the next best thing is turning left on the jumbo, or upstairs at least.

The 346 is just a big metal tube, comfy, a little bit quiet (but still quiet noisy to me) and from the outside just not as damn sexy (well as sexy as a plane can be)

I didn't know the 747 had two sets of landing gear either, my new bit of knowledge for the day

Dean

I'm in the 747 camp too.

Since the first time I flew on one in about 1972 they have symbolised the glamour and prestige of Tran-Atlantic or long-haul travel and the history/Nostalgia alone gives them an edge over Airbus. Everytime I fly the 747 there are echoes of travel from my childhood and it will always feel like more of an occassion than flying any other a/c. Until a few years ago it was a rare event indeed to fly anything other than a 747 across the atlantic - now I guess with VS it's about 50/50 (he says as he waits to board VS46 - which being a Wednesday is a 346). The added attraction of the upper deck PE seats give it an added appeal.

Having said that operators are unromantic, unnostalgic and basically (as we have said many times on this forum) in it to make a profit. I can appreciate that flying a range of a/c which are compatable in the cockpit makes commercial sense and I guess that VS did the sums before they decided on the 346 route. I too find the 346 a fairly soulless animal and I guess it's hard to say why.

Following the demise of Concorde, I guess the 747 remains one of the few easily recognisable commercial a/c in the sky and in an increasingly changing world I guess there is something slightly reassuring and comforting about something so familiar.

Phil (Buffy)

EDIT to my last post, I am a 747 fan.[8D]

All those Jumbo fans, read Jeremy Clarksons blurb on it in his new book "I know you got Soul", I guarantee it'll sum up exactly why you love the jumbo.

Dean

Once again v-flyer triumphs!

If this debate had taken place on another forum, it would have degenerated into a personal slanging match between the fans of either side. Here, however, although I detect an historical bias towards the 747, there is reasonable discourse and respect for others point of view.

Personally, I have only flown 747 trans-atlantic except for one 777 flight which was nothing like as good. Perhaps irrationally, I prefer 4 engines. After Kegworth this translates into, one engine to fail and one engine to shut down in error - this still leaves two to keep you in the air! The only Airbus I have ever been on was to/from LHR to Zurich with Swissair. It was very comfortable, but the competition was 737; the best was BCal DC9 for European travel, IMO.

Part of the allure of the 747 has got to be the existence of "upstairs", whatever the configuration.

Although, when the 747 launched, it was thought that the bulge upwards at the front was to give PanAm flight crew enough room to sit on their wallets;)

I few out on a A340 to NY ages ago and I found the Y seat better than the 744 comming back.

That said I dont neccessarily prefer on a/c over the other.

I like both - its true I fly 747's a lot more maybe 85% of the time but I think thats a fair reflection of the 747's global dominance.

I'm really excited about the A380 I think it'll be a great plane, effectively it has three full stories the bottom being used for cargo.

I hope airlines use some of the space for a lounge etc it'll be a shame if all the extra space is just seating.

The A380 wont overtake the Jumbo..its position is too dominant..its like someone trying to beat coke in the soft drink market.

I think as time goes by though boeings dominance will shrink at least in the 747 market. I hope as well as size that speed will be a consideration of future birds design.

Jonathan,
I have doubts that the A380 will ever appear and if so, will not be the big seller expected.
It rather reminds me of Howard Hughs's seaplane, too damned big for its own use.
It keeps getting put back, and VS even seem to have gone for alternative Airbuses in the meantime. Only a few airports can take it, I know this was a problem for the 747 but this was solved quite quickly and relatively cheaply, but the cocts for the A380 are much more.

The first (fixed-wing) plane I ever flew on was one of BA's 747-200s, to Hong Kong the long way around, LHR-FCO-CCU-HKG, back when we still weren't friends with the Eastern Bloc.

I don't remember the specific aircraft now, but this was in 1981, she was almost brand new, and I spent 2 hours on the flight deck during the FCO-CCU leg.

For a long-haul widebody aircraft, the 744 wins for me every time. For a versatile wide-body (at home on shorter flights, as well as longer sectors), it's hard to beat the 767, but the A300/A310s are nice to ride.

Narrowbody, the A320 family beats the 737 hands down, except maybe for climb performance. Certainly in the pax comfort stakes, the A320 wins for me. However, I'm still a fan of the MD80's that SAS fly! (See my LHR-ARN trip report: http://www.v-flyer.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2708)

However, as BC pointed out, a lot of it depends on how the airline configures the aircraft interior. It really makes a big difference, from the choice of seats, the seat pitch, are there any individual air-nozzles (you can leave them out as an option to cut costs!), circulating areas, locations and number of lavs, galley configuration, etc.

Apart from there only being two lavs for UC on the main deck, the VS LHR 744 config is really nice.

Cheers,
Mike

747 for me, but Y on the 340-600 is not at all bad.

I don't think I've flown long haul on anything other than a 744, but just on looks alone it gets my vote! It's gotta be the best looking commercial plane in the skies

Cheers

Michael

To me, the Boeings have a personality about them, the Airbus is clinical, with no soul. Also, still not convinced about fly-by-wire technology

quote:Originally posted by AlanA
Jonathan,
I have doubts that the A380 will ever appear and if so, will not be the big seller expected.

I think too much money and not to mention Airbus's reputation has gone into the A380 for it to fail.

Also the initial order numbers are enough to justify it

as long as the main hubs support the smaller hubs will catch up at a later date (assuming its proved itself)

Virgin converted some A380 options to A346's this was because VS wanted to expand routes and the A380 is probably too big for new routes.

The official reason VS delayed the 380 was down to suppliers not being able to deliver on time to Virginise the a/c

There was a story on Points West last night talking about Filton's involvement in the project. Lots of pictures of the prototypes (think I counted 3 or 4)and talk of the first flight - Spring next year!

Alex

I personally love the 747- i always remember my excitement as a 6 year old being told i was flying on a 747 of VS and not a L1011 of TWA to MCO- I was over the moon! I guess from that day my first 747 and VS flight i have been hooked with VS! (now I am showing my young age!).

The 747 is a fantastic plane but i feel rather like the 707 that went before one day it will be put into the history books- whilst boeing have tried to keep it current (with the 744er) it still doesnt have the space or beautiful 'white' feeling of a/c like the 777 or 346. Although this is really only true of the older 747s.

But I guess I am rather liberal and open to change and new ideas hence my growing love of airbus plus i like to see hte small boy take on the big guy. The a320 is a brilliant a/c which is showing it is a great alternative to the 737- jsut think of how many sales beoing has lost to the a320 family in the US alone (Fronteir, United, US Airways, Northwest, JEtblue, Virgin America, Air Canada, MExicana) and you see how the airbus short haul product is rising. The A340 is a super a/c-whilst i was slightly dissapointed on my first flying of the 343 i think the 346 has made up for all its faults. The 330 feels the gap of the 767 nicely and it has been great to see many of our uk charters take on the a/c.

I am looking forward to the arrival of the 380- whilst many sceptics believe its a big silly mistake (which you could argue the 7e7 is as well) I personally think it is great. It will never be as successful as the 747 but it will fill a market- that is high density on popular routes. The a/c will change travel between the UK and Australia (4 carriers at least could operate the 380 on this route, QF,VS,SQ and EK plus Qatar and Thai!) and it will serve the b+s routes beautifully if they end up on those routes.

I personally believe that Airbus' next project the A350 when announced will be a big market for them. It will nicely replace the 330 and will take on a by then ageing 777-200 (BA and UA have already retired some 777s!). The 7e7 is currently finding it hard but then again Im not really sure what it replaces- boeing are saying it replaces the 767 but they continue to make 767s!

We are slowly seeing VS become an all airbus operator by the time the 380 arrives- VS will be dominated by airbus a/c but i feel we will always have a place for the 747 after all it is Virgin Atlantic and where would the carrier be today without the 747.

PS: But the VS livery jsut doesnt look right on anything other than a 747- it has always striked me as looking rather squashed on the 340.

[fozzyo]

For me the 747 Jumbo is the plane that sums up trans-atlantic travel now that The Bird has let the skies. [:(]

I haven't yet flown on an Airbus, so can't really comment on what they are like as a passenger. But Boeing and the 747 was really one of the first planes to develop look and reputation and that is probably one that a lot of people associate the glamour and excitement of travel with.

However saying that, if the Airbuses came long with more legroom and a better pitch in Economy then I would happily fly in one of them, comfort wins out!

Foz )

Hats off to Airbus over the last few years they really have ate into the global dominance of boeing..and in doing so becoming dominant themselves.

Boeing really only have themselves to blame! They never saw airbus as a threat

You can put me down for a 747 vote.

I totally agree with all the comments regarding the 747, its definantly a special aircraft to fly and IMO rules the skies.

However airbus is growing on me. I have flown the 346 four times this year and i have realised what a nice aeroplane it is. VS have also recently reached a major milestone with the A340 fleet aswell, they are currently the most reliable operator of the A340 in the world. Im sure you will agree this is an excellent achievement bearing in mind the 600 is still a relatively young aeroplane.

I noticed a few posts regarding airbus never overtaking boeing. I recall earlier this year, airbus done exactly that. For the first time in their history they overtook boeing in aircraft sales. (I am looking for an airticle on the net to back this up, will post it when i find it)

Im also intrigued as to this "second" undercarriage the the 747 has?? Are you refering to the separate hydraulic systems for the body and wing gears?? (sorry to go a bit technical on you all!!

To me the A340-300 or -600 are UGLY! The look like a stretched A330 (which is basically all it is with more engines [:p] ) and it just looks bad. So in the looks category my fav plane would be the 747-400, apart from Concorde (of course!). I haven't actually been inside a Long Haul Airbus, biggest probs an A321, so can't comment. But I think with any aircraft it depends on the airline, for instance VS's 747s compared to BA's are much nicer (brighter and seemingly more spacious). IMO 747-400s (don't like any others 100,200 or 300) Rule! Oh and I really like 777s, alas none for VS![V]
PS. Sorry for the over use of brackets