Is one more fun to fly? Is one model safer than the other? Plus: How they measure up in the looks department
The worldwide fleet is split roughly 50/50 between Boeing models and Airbus models. (Boeing, as most people know, is a U.S. product, while Airbus is a European consortium headquartered in France.) It’s true there are significant differences between the two, in their operating philosophies and basic systems architecture. But how, exactly, they are different, and what this means to the pilot, is something that would take many boring pages to answer — and even then would be confusing to the layperson. Trust me, the typical reader doesn’t need me to go there, and it’s better to avoid trying to explain this nitty-gritty altogether rather than risk a cartoonish comparison similar to the one that Palmer provides. His explanations were pretty simplistic.
Contrary to what a lot of people think, there aren’t two “camps” of pilot out there, with one that swears by the Boeing camp and another loyal to Airbus. Sure, a pilot might prefer one over the other, but it’s probably just a case of whatever he or she is used to. And as I’ve discussed in the past, seniority determines virtually everything in a pilot’s life, including which aircraft he or she gets to fly. Most pilots bid their preferences based on which assignments are the highest-paying, together with various quality-of-life issues — what will give me the best schedule, the best commuting options and so on. Whether it’s a Boeing or an Airbus is really secondary.
I’m often asked if pilots consider one model “better” or “safer” than the other. The long answer to this question would require nuanced comparisons between autoflight systems, fly-by-wire technology and the like — once again, for most of you, a wholly boring conversation. The short and perfectly acceptable answer is no. Both planes have their own pleasant or annoying idiosyncrasies, and although there might be some merit to the argument that Airbus relies too heavily on automation — under certain conditions, Airbus flight control software precludes manual inputs from the crew entirely — we’ll eventually wind up at a statistical stalemate. In conventional wisdom, Airbus is the more “controversial” player, but both plane-makers have endured scandals and controversies, from the air data sensor malfunction that may have played a role in the 2009 Air France disaster (Airbus), to the rudder design problems that caused at least two fatal 737 crashes (Boeing).
“If it’s not a Boeing, I’m not going,” reads a sticker you’ll sometimes see on pilots’ flight cases or on the bumpers of their cars. It’s a cute rhyme, but don’t read too much into this.
A Boeing is a Boeing; an Airbus is an Airbus … but not. Even those aircraft within the same “family” can be vastly different from one another. Pilots transitioning from model to model, be it from an A320 to an A330, or from a 737 to a 747, will undergo a full training course, usually lasting several weeks. The only exceptions for this are the Airbus A330 and A340, and Boeing’s 757 and 767, which allow for simultaneous dual qualification. Yours truly is a 757/767 first officer. I might fly a 757 from New York to Los Angeles, then a 767 on the return.
A common question is whether planes “feel” or “handle” differently from one another. They do. Seldom will you find two aircraft types with identical flying characteristics. A 757 “feels” quite different from a 767, for instance, even as the two are otherwise so similar that they share a common certification. The former is heavy and somewhat sluggish on the controls; the latter, even at double the size, is much lighter and more sensitive.
But how important is this? The hands-on controlling of an aircraft is only a small part of what goes into “flying” — along with navigating, systems managing, communicating, etc. Thus you don’t compare airplanes the way you compare cars.
Handling and performance are only part of the criteria. You’d be surprised how often simple ergonomics and comfort are cited for the reasons that a pilot likes or dislikes a particular model. For example, one of my big reasons for disliking the ATR was because the air-conditioning system was so weak.
My memory is balky when it comes to how fast these planes went, how high they flew, or how powerful their engines were. But I remember how they smelled, how they sounded, and how the rest of their intangibles otherwise excited me — or failed to.
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."
