5 Major Differences Between Airbus And Boeing Aircraft
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 май 2024
- Are you team Airbus or Boeing? If you are fond of commercial aviation, there are no doubts you have been asked this question before. It’s also the source of endless debates down in the comments section of most aviation articles and RUclips videos!
In today’s video, we take a look at five ways in which the two major manufacturers differ from one another.
Article: simpleflying.com/airbus-boein...
Our Social Media:
/ simpleflyin. .
/ simple_flying
/ simpleflying. .
Our Website
simpleflying.com/
For copyright matters please contact us at: legal@valnetinc.com 
Развлечения
The major difference nobody has mentioned is, at least Airbus do not lose their plugged doors at 15000 Feet altitude.
I'm annoyed at you! even before watching the video I was going to mention the habit of American aircraft ol just dropping parts off,But you beat me to it! I saw this phenomenon for the first time in the middle 50*s at an airshow at Finningley air base near Doncaster.A Douglas B66 just threw an engine - fortunately while it was still on the tarmac.
@@peterpearson1675 Don’t be annoyed, by mentioning what you know, it adds value to the argument that the designers need to do something about shoddy planning and execution. It might just wake some people up that not everything that Boeing produces is good.
Well for starters, the doors are not supposed to fall off (search for "The front fell off")
Airbus has had some incidences of doors popping off on the ground, however.
@@spaceranger3728 Didn't know about those, thanks for the correction.
Airbus has a reputation for tightening all nuts, bots and fasteners on their aircraft, installing software on their aircraft that don't fly the aircraft into the ground and doors that dont fall off in the air?
They also make sure customers and regulators are informed with their designs and additions.
And they also make sure that safety critical items have redundancy data input.
The difference needs to be that Airbus emphasize quality over schedule.
That caused Germany itself to buy Boeing helicopters instead of the homegrown Airbus ones. Boeing could deliver faster. (And after Ukraine Germany wants to rebuild its military faster)
Correction: Is. The difference IS ……
The difference is Airbus focus on high level of comfort, and boeing is more focused on maximize income
True everyday
Garbage. Blindfold a passenger and it would be impossible to tell the difference. Tall-poppy slayers are funny.
@@MyBelchTell that to the 737 Max passengers. I bet they can tell.
@@ResizeFilmsbut the MAX customer can enjoy an open air view during a flight....
@@MyBelch just sit in front of a plug door. You will notice a difference...
One falls out of the skies, the other one doesn’t. Biggest difference imo.
HAHAHAH
Negative. Not funny.
Interesting insight. On an editorial note: It only makes sense to abbreviate "fly by wire" to "FBW" in writing, not in spoken language since it takes longer to say "double-U" than "wire".
Airbus: Doors do not fly off.
Boeing: Doors sometimes fly off.
All you need to know right there 👍.
Airbus don't rely on upgrading 60 year old designs past the point where they are safe.
They did upgrade a 40 year old design, but it was easier thanks to the good ground clearance the A320 has
the a330 neo is based off of the a330 which is based off of the a300...
Yes, yes they do. All iterations of the A320, A330, A319, A321 are from the same design. You don’t know much about aviation do you?
You can tell when you're on a Boeing; people have their fingers crossed, they've got their rosary beads in their hands, they're clutching lucky rabbits' feet, they're boading in bouyancy aids and parachutes....
Bit like the Russian passengers on Aeroflot years back; they all used to clap when the aircraft landed, sort of thank you to the gods.
maybe Boeing passengers should take that up as well
You forgot the Boeing open door design
In Hawai they had a Convertible version as well once..
Airbus is much more technically advanced
They have beautiful sexy Airplanes too,
Indeed Airbus planes are more high tech and when Boeing is trying to catch up with them what we get is MCAS and 2 deadly disasters.
In case anyone ever wondered, why the name Boeing has that unusual spelling:
William Boeing's father was born in Germany and relocated to the US. His last name was originally spelled "Böing", with an umlaut, Americans couldn't handle it, as their alphabet doesn't have the character (well, only few languages besides German do). So He did was was (and still is) the official rule - replace the ö with oe when you are dealing with people or systems that can't handle the ö. Ans so Böing turned into the Boeing we know today.
Boing's much better.
@WarriorAsgardian Your probably joking, But Airbus and Boeing are great and I like both. A true Avgeek loves all not some only idiots choose.
@@williamreid2053 Airbus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boeing
@valenting6157 Airbus is not Greater than Boeing they are the same. Each aircraft has its ups and downs. The 747 will always be the Queen and the A380 will always be the Whale. In the end I love all aircraft not just one manufacturer or one aircraft.
Boing just blew the side panel in flight. POS
Provided nobody crashes into them, contemporary Airbus offerings tend to land with all of their parts still attached
Airbus has had a very good result with the saving all lives after the Japanese crash.
Airbus had nothing to do with it. FFS.
@@MyBelch They built the airplane, that’s not “nothing .” Of course, there was luck, and Japanese social behaviour involved.
This isn’t any criticism of Boeing. They are having a challenging time, but they’ve survived worse.
True! It’s a testament to the amazing engineering work by Airbus, the A350 structural design and rigidity performed remarkably.
That composite design allowed the evacuation of all passengers safely. Impressive.
@@ResizeFilms If everyone died, the predictable gobshites would blame the pilots or air crew.
@@MyBelchyes they did. The engineering and design of the plane helped keep flames from spreading. This is intentional design.
OKAY!!!!
I heard that "dog bark" sound when I was flying EasyJet earlier this month, and I thought it was someone sawing the fuselage open! haha!
Gremlin on the wing with a hacksaw.
Boeing has major production problems deeply embedded within the quality control culture of the company, the safety standards are nowhere near Airbus. It’s a fact.
That’s the main difference.
True.
Absolutely
also all their jets are ugly in design interior wise and exterior wise,
I GUESS
@@LexlutherVIIthey’re pretty much the same. Except from the fact that Airbuses have the mask and different nose shape, I can never differentiate the 2 when I’m in the ramp. The Boeing wide body’s are better in the eyes than Airbuses in my opinion. Interiors are the same, dependent in airline, manufacturers don’t do the interior design, you do realize that, right? I prefer the Boeing flight deck to the airbuses also. I do not normally fly airbuses anymore though. I’ll pick a wide body Boeing over an airbus any day. Boeing can keep the MAX aircraft, give me an NG. The NG is a more durable aircraft than any other model Boeing has made and airbus.
Normally over the years i didn't care which make of plane i was on . But over the last few year's. I stay away from Boeing when i can .. 😢
Aren't just the new ones trash?
Same here...
Some things to add. 737 doors are plug type, which means the door is larger than the door frame, requiring the door to first enter the fuselage, before being pushed out, and viceversa to close it.
On the PTU, the 330 does not have a PTU as it has an electric pump for green, blue and yellow systems. The 320 family only has blue and yellow electric pumps, so the PTU is active when operating single engine from either side. In the 737, it's referred as "back to back" pump, which is essentially what it is, and it dates back to the 727, and the DC9 and DC10 had them as "transfer pumps", but without the noise as their cycle frequency was slower than the Airbus. There are procedures in place for the Airbus crews to turn on the yellow pump during single engine taxi as to not to annoy its passengers.
Alaska air got grounded.
That same door just blew off of an Alaskan Airlines 737 MAX mid flight 🤣
your comment aged like milk
Here we are after the door blew off. Now we know better
Are you a time traveler?
I’m team Lockheed L-1011 TriStar
🙈
Shame Lockheed also designed the F 104 by doing so they historically managed to leave approximately 400 Widows behind
the 737 door was designed in the 60s and you feel every one of those years when you try to close the bastard 😠
This comment aged interestingly
Let me guess. Closing the 737 door involves applying force with the knee.
@@mach6893 the opposite, you have to somehow both push and pull
@@JoaoPessoa86 Oof.
😂😂😂😂😂
I was AMT on 737-200 & 300's build in the 1980's and Airbus A319 & 318's built in the early 2000's. I can confirm that it is much more difficult to close the doors on the 737 vs the A320 family aircraft with which I have experience.
Would agree with that. Flew the 737-300/500/700/800 for around 15 years, and now the A320 for the last 10. Additionally arming and disarming the slides is much easier on the Airbus and allows for the simple safety of automatically disarming them if the door is opened from the outside.
The doors in the 737 and 747 are so outdated , they just swing around, whereas all airbus have doors that open in parallel, the A380 has doors that open electrically, just press a button, no Boeing offers that comfort.
Nowadays the doors of brand new Boeing’s 737 even blow out in mid-air.
At 2 minutes: the yoke doesn't control the rudder: foot pedals are used instead, but the rudder is rarely used on large commercial aircraft in normal flight. The pilot may employ it when countering side winds and windshear, however.
Can I just say I'm a flight attendant for qantas and work on the 737 and cannot wait to switch over to the A321XLR
Team Airbus
Fly-by-wire exited before Airbus. They may have been the 1st to install that tech. into commercial aircraft, but it has been in military aircraft since before Airbus.
Pretty sure the Concorde used fly by wire too.
@@ViktorFromDKConcorde is Airbus. Technically
yup, fly-by-wire existed before Airbus implementation, try 1930 Tu ANT-20 was FBY. just a few years before Airbus, maybe. HE 111 was also FBW. Ratehr douses Airbus claims.. and then there are those others applications, Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (Flying Bedstead) , British Hawker and Su T-4....
All others before airbus were analog fly by wire airbus implemented the first true digital fly by wire with a flight computer controlling the flight surfaces
Did the vid say Airbus invented it? No so why are you making the argument. The vid simply says of the two companies it was Airbus to first install it. Pay attention before commenting.
Airbus gets the credit for producing the wide body twin jets. Until that wide bodies were 3 and 4 engines.
boeing invented the widebody so yeah..
@@Planetrainguy But Boeing's widebodies focused on capacity back then. A300 is way more influential to today's jet on how to get efficient.
@@steinwaldmadchen i still prefer boeing tbh
Like the 767?
@@mikeplummer26 767 was launched 4 years after A300 flew its maiden flights, and its enter into service was almost a decade later.
Also many of the technologies incorporated onto 767 was first adopted on A300 - composite materials, supercritical wings and two crew cockpit, if not the twinjet widebody concept itself.
Airbus started exactly the same way as the Concorde. The company Airbus was founded later as a merger of some of the involved companies
I'd like to point out that Airbus was not the first company to use flyby wire.
Also some other key differences are the Shape of the nose cones (Boeing super pointy, Airbus is more round), The cockpit window (Boeing airplanes have a distinctive V) and the Ailerons (Boeing have midwing ailerons (or flaperons) whereas Airbus have a large double aileron at the tips (triple on A380)).
Airbus was not the first company to use fbw, but Airbus is the first company to have implemented FBW on a civilian aircraft (A320).
@@styren2815 Not even this is accurate, as Concorde, undoubtedly a Civilian aircraft that predates the first A320 (the A300/310 didn't have FBW), had FBW. But they were the ones to introduce it into the mass market.
A350 rather pointy, it would apply for a320 and maybe a330
@@Colaholiker To be exact, A320 is the first aircraft to equip with digital FBW, which every FBW we see today are using. Concorde was the first with FBW, but that's in analog form. Also Aérospatiale, one of the Concorde's designing company, initiated Airbus and brought their experiences in Concorde project with them.
@@steinwaldmadchen very good description!
Tbh, I don't think that a digital FBW would have been possible with the technology available when Concorde was designed.
Speaking of companies that became Airbus, due to all of that, Airbus actually held the type certificate for planes that predated the company. Concorde was one of them, the Carvelle was another.
I like Airbus because of its better flight navigation system to follow the flight... weirdly, i spend more than half the time following where are in the journey and looking out of the window to the see the town/city we are flying over🙈🙈
If it's a Boeing, then I ain't going.
But i like both Airbus and Boeing. The first time i have flown onboard an airplane was the Boeing 737 Classic back in 2008 i think and i was just a kid at the time and not an Avgeek and since that year I have flown onboard the Boeing 737 8 times and i have also flown onboard the Airbus A320 10 times.
By "classic" do you mean a 737 300/400/500? Out of curiosity, what airline was still operating them in 2008? I flew on a 737-200 in 1977, and from my seat just behind the wing, I had a great view of the "clamshell" reverse thrust mechanism. It looked like the back of the engine fell off! 😅 I'm glad to say that the CM56 doesn't use that system.
@@theharper1 In the case of Indonesia in 2008, i think the airline that flown the Boeing 737 classic are Lion Air, Batavia Air, Sriwijaya Air, and Garuda Indonesia.
@@nurrizadjatmiko21 thanks! That makes sense.
Boeing was once synonymous with Quality. I liked their planes and trusted the name. Sad.
@@theharper1 I flew in a 737 400 in 2019 from Warsaw Chopin to London City Airport..Need to Congratulate LOT the Polish Airlines for still managing to fly a metal Coffin even in 2019..
The main difference is the lower landing gear of the 737 airplane designed at the origin to facilitate boarding and unboarding. It now becomes the source of many difficulties and setbacks as it is impossible to change the engines or to lengthen the fuselage easily.
exactly... why don't they just retire the 737 and bring out a clean sheet design...
Sure, in the name of all things, holy makes me wonder why they did not do a complete redesign at least 15 years ago, it has been their number one selling jet. Now, I'm fortunately, it has been reduced to the origins of salvage yards in 2 or 3 different places on the planet. Someone at Boeing needs to tell them to get off their ass and get the 777X into service. You're losing money Boeing, Yes, even more, I didn't think that was possible.
@@23merlino 797 is supposedly designed to replace the 737.
Here's one:
Airbus doesn't have plugged doors getting blown out during flight
I've just boarded Airbus A320-200 last week, it is AWQ (Indonesia AirAsia) PK-AXX, a pretty decrepit plane, which has its paint visibly chipping away. We can see the paint around the front door flaking. The cabin however is kept fresh, albeit pretty aging. The Airbus we all know are not shy at letting know what happened, the loud whine of the cargo door motor, the PTU barking, and rattly & noisy nose wheel doing its thing perfectly audible from my row 6 seat (it whines and squeak when the plane is turning on taxiway). The landing gear extension of course are marked with loud bang of them unlatching. Listening to all these, feels like sitting in a factory shop floor than a flying lounge. While the cabin is pretty spacious, its head space is pretty lacking. My head bumped into its old stye overhead cabin luggage rack. Also not to mention that we sit pretty high and close to the top rounding ceiling already.
However, two days later, I was whisked into Singapore Airline's 9V-MGM, a 737-800 operated by one of the world's best airline. Now, it doesn't have a PTV (since it was taken from their subsidiary, Silk Air). No TV is not an issue for me. But even the world's best operator could only do so much to compensate the plane's awful platform. It has a nice 787-style Sky interior with a contoured overhead bins that swivel down when opened, creating more luggage space, and swivel up when closed, creating more headroom. Giving it to Boeing that this is the best overhead cabin design. But, it is noticeably the crampier cabin. Sitting at the back row, the very familiar jet blast rattling the rear passenger windows always give me fresh memories at how awfully loud they are, and how close 737's engine is to the fuselage of the aircraft. When on cruise, a sudden change of flight level or compensating the wind will prompt the auto-throttle to command more thrust, and as passenger sitting at the back, you can feel the window suddenly rattles and audibly louder noise. Overall, I only hear positive reviews about 737 from pilots and overly geeky aviation enthusiast that cares more about plane type than actual passenger experience. Objectively, if you don't care about plane geek stuff, go with Airbus A320, it is only noisy when it is doing something. Even experiencing them from a cheap low cost airline, is still a marginally superior experience to a 737 flown by the world's best airline.
That being said, after flying with A350 back in November 2022, I guess it is just "meh" experience. Sure it is a new plane, quiet (not quieter than A380), and comfortable (but not that much more compared to A330) but it is not anything special from passenger experience. It is just "a new plane" and that's it, people who knows are more hyped about it, but if we are being honest, it shouldn't differ or improve that much. It still retains a heck ton of weird mechanical Airbus noises, including landing gear unlatching bang when extending, and that Airbus widebody PTU kick when wheel brakes are applied.
Boeing's 787 is a far more novel and superior experience in this class. It has a nicer cabin, quieter, and much bigger windows. The only thing negative about 787 is its narrower 3-3-3 economy row layout. It is also the first Boeing that let passengers know what's going on mechanically, especially that hydraulic pump noises that for some reason can turn on whenever it feels like it.
As ALWAYS, passenger comfort is down to the Airline and its maintenance regime. Singapore Girl! are one of the best.
If Im in MSFS, than I prefer boeing. If I was flying IRL I would prefer airbus. Im 6’-3” and the space in the airbus cockpit is nice to have
Years ago when I worked at the airport I clean the airplanes ✈️ before and after so it was my job to open the doors it was a fun experience!
Is one of them that stuff doesn't fall off Airbus planes???
Have flown both for years...Airbus always a better trip for some reason
its great there is competition.. can u imagine whole world relying on just one plane maker ... no competition no urge for innovation
agreed... hopefully will get it's act together soon and stop flogging a dead horse, the 737 needs to be replaced with a clean sheet design...
and an awful lot of people unemployed and not just in the Aircraft factory
The rudders are activated by the pedals, not the yoke or sidesticks
To be honest, it doesn't matter if Boeing or Airbus, its all about seat width --> love flying longhaul in 767 beause seats are 18" with 2.5" armrests compared to 17" with 1,5" ARmrests in A350 or 787. Same shorthaul: there i prefer A320 neo .. better seat with and way more silent than 737 max
Correct. Blindfold these partisan commenters and they'd have no idea what plane manufacturer they were on. The seat is the ONLY thing that matters to 99.9% of passengers.
The seats are determined by the airline not the aircraft manufacturer. Having said that, Airbus aircraft seem to be quieter and generally more comfortable (in respects other than seats) than Boeing aircraft.
Nonsense jingoistic claptrap.@@theharper1
@MyBelch 😅🤣😅😅🤣 thanks for your considered response. I have no idea how describing one's own personal experience matches any of the terms you puked onto RUclips. Like it or not, my personal experience is what it is, and no word salad from you or anyone else affects it in any way.
The yolk does NOT activate the rudders, nor does the sidestick. Both use rudder pedals to control yaw.
I have always said that the parentage of UA causes some of its loyalty to P&W engines and Boeing planes. What's more, after Walter Varney sold his first airline to Boeing, he went back and founded a second airline, which he called Continental Airlines. Today UA and CO are one airline. Amazing.
Continental was the best airline on the planet. United was, and still is, the worst. United destroyed Continental.
A380 !!! So quiet , so comfortable, so much space above head
The A380 has even electrical doors, no effort for the crew to close and open them anymore.
747 much better
@@crazygamingyt7245 from yesterday. I bet you never flown the one nor the other
@@crazygamingyt7245 50 years ago maybe 😀😀😀😀
Back in the day I found the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and Vickers VC10 to be quiet and comfortable yet the DC-10 had a poor safety record in early service (the cargo door problem); the VC10 had impressive performance and still holds the subsonic trans-Atlantic speed record but poor sales.
I like Boeing specifically because of the 757. It’s a really great plans and always makes me smile when I see one
and the 747
@@WarriorAsgardianare you on meth or pcp?
@@WarriorAsgardianbro are 5 or something
@@WarriorAsgardian - Arrrgh "Boeing bad! Airbus gud!" I've seen better arguments on the playground.
As a passenger all I care about an aircraft are the sizes and pitch of the seats. I don't care about food/no food, window shades, pretty cabin colors, blah, blah.
So you will care about the difference chat is most important from that perspective between the 737 and the 320 - the 320's fuselage is somewhat wider, which, given the same number of seats, equates to more sideways space per passenger. 😉
Both Boeing 737 and Airbus doors are easy to open both inside and outside. The front door even heavier than the rear is easier to do cause your just letting the door do the work. All you are doing is guiding the door in position. I can confirm this as i have open both Airbus A321 and Boeing 737-800 doors as part of my job as ground crew for an airline
I have flown several times last year mostly on Airbus planes and I never heard the "dog bark" noise.
What is the "dog bark" noise?
@@RandomGuy9 Did you watch the vid?
All true Boeing doors flip open. It's just that on the 777 and 787, Boeing uses a design they licensed from Airbus. The doors on the 747 also flipped open, except for the emergency doors on the upper deck. Those emergency doors were gullwing doors, just like the over-wing emergency doors on the 737. Only the 737 doesn't have an emergency slide.
Isn't it the 767 where the doors open upwards, like they did on the Lockheed TriStar?
But from 707 to 757, you are right.
Why the British and Soviet/Russian aviation industry did lose their market share completely? BAC 1-11, BAE 146/RJ, TU-134, TU-154, IL-62 where world wide used models.
Well in the British case, we didn't have a massive Airforce, to use on R&D or the massive monetary backing that gives via government.The 707 was a direct result of the lessons learned with the Stratocruiser
I now only fly on Airbus aircraft I no longer trust Boeing.This obviously makes flighting more expensive but what price do you put on your own life
Airbus focuses on quality aircrafts.
Boeing focuses on money and don't care if they fall apart mid flight or fall from the sky...
Boeing vs Airbus ….. I go for Airbus ….. or just Boeing 747
I've been Cabin Attendant for 12 year... I flew B737-200 and 300... Theirs doors are heavier and more difficult to operate, specifically the rear doors... Airbus planes were designed and thought in each detail...
Boeing relied on older but proven designs I guess. Or tried to keep attendants strong and fit in case you have to fight the weaker Airbus counterparts. In that case you would have an advantage over them.
Boeing reached its peak with the 777-200/300, whatever they did after that gives room to critic.
They better man up because simply producing a functional will no longer be enough, the customer needs both reassurance and something to look forward to flying into.
Time to innovate!
(That from a Frenchman, loving his Airbuses, I want competition to be healthy and among equals).
post McDonnel Douglas hostile takeover was the worst thing to happen to boeing tbh
6:28 FDR-era antitrust regulations force split: Boeing, United Technologies, United Airlines
The existence of the 747 makes my Boeing bias never go away. Probably (sadly) won’t matter to younger people considering the 747 is largely extinct in passenger flights but those who were kids when they flew the 747, that second story spiral staircase was always amazing and alluring to just climb up for no reason.
Did you ever fly in an A380? I was a huge fan of the 747, but the A380 is quieter and more comfortable. After flying on an A380, I was surprised how noisy the upper deck of a 747-400 was. Don't get me wrong - I really enjoyed flying on the 747 as a kid, when it was possible to go up the staircase to visit the flight deck, but the A380 is better as a passenger experience.
@@theharper1 I think my 747 impression within my mind is heavily biased. I did fly a emirates A380 and a Lufthansa A380 before and I prefer those in terms of comfort room given to each passenger. Especially since somehow they shoved a shower and a bar into it.
I do look forward to flying the Hawaii route ANA A380s since those are the most 1-1 comparison against my 747 experience. (My 747 nostalgia comes mostly all from ANA and some from JAL)
@Windows98R fair enough. I've flown the 747 with many airlines, including a top deck flight from Haneda to Sydney on one of the last Qantas 747 flights. A380 on Malaysian and Lufthansa and I'll never fly Lufthansa again. It was a perfect example of how you can have a great aircraft screwed by a bad airline. I flew back from Haneda with my wife on an ANA 787 and we had premium economy to ourselves. 😅 Agreed, I'd rather be flying JAL or ANA.
It’s very difficult to steer cows like BA stock or management you only can lead them to water can’t force them to drink lol
Team Airbus!
The doors stay attached to Airbus planes🤔
We don't fly much, we fly a little over 20 k miles in a year but we do like sitting next to each other without a 3rd person looking at us. We try to get on a plane with only us sitting side by side, don't matter Airbus or Boeing! As long as we get to go there safely and comfortably. (It is only a ride,privacy for it is not too much to ask for. )
I like both. A lot actually but i do have things with both that i don’t really care for
A question. Airbus aims at making the cabins of their models similar and giving the various models the same feel. This way the training of pilots from one model to another is seriously reduced. As their planes are fly by wire they can do it. This to the delight of the airlines as the training cost is reduced and the pilots get more flexible. What is Boeing doing on this and what can they do ?
I read somewhere that the seats.
Does the cabin lighting/ Entertainment/ galley equipment between the two manufacturers differ or is it based solely by the airline company’s specifications from a third party? (Kinda like how interiors and seat designs are chosen)
I’ve had the opportunity to see the touch screen of a PAL A321 and A330 but I don’t recall ever seeing it on any Boeing aircraft.
Passenger stuff like seats and IFE are coming from third party manufacturers, not the OEMs. Cabin lighting is done by the OEMs although aftermarket products exist as far as i know.
I am from Europe and my choice is of airline is Wizzair. They only operate Airbus 320 and 321. I only trust Airbus, even before Max crashes.
Experience does count for something. When designing new aircraft, Boeing has been historically more adept at gauging the needs of commercial aviation than Airbus. Airbus, in some cases has been better at the execution of catering to those needs. In some cases, not all.
But it isn't like Airbus doesn't have the experience. After all, the company as such is a lot younger than Boeing, but it didn't materialize out of thin air (pun intended). They started out as a joint-venture of different, established independent planemakers, with the individual histories going WAY back.
@@Colaholiker In commercial aviation, Airbus, as a planemaker, is way younger than Boeing.
It's more like as a newcomer, Airbus simply didn't have the resources and more importantly, leverage to build the "right" aircraft.
For example, A300 and the original A340 have to stick with on-the-market solution, while Boeing could afford to bet big with GE90. A300 was also not certified for ETOPS in US until 767 was ready, almost a decade after ICAO permitted 90-minute flights.
And imho, Boeing should be shame of their poor executions, given their century-old experiences.
@@steinwaldmadchen That's borderline absurd. The A310, if I remember correctly, did get ETOPS, around the same time as the 767.
I've been around long enough to have seen the 707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777 and 787. Aside from the initial Max fiasco and earlier 727 wing design, tell me exactly which of the aircraft on that list was poorly executed. I challenge you.
No planemaker wants to gamble on a clean sheet design if the market wasn't needing it. I credit Boeing lately for making more of the gambles than Airbus, which basically seems content on borrowing elements of Boeing designs to minimize their own investments. Perhaps that makes them smarter, but certainly not better.
@@sainntAs I have said above, A300 was allowed by ICAO and many of the authorities to fly within 90 minute from diverting airports since 70s. Not by FAA until 767 was developed and Boeing lobbied for ETOPS.
And it's funny how Boeing fanboys keep saying Airbus is the copycat when many of the modern technologies were first introduced by Airbus. From supercritical wings to digital FBW to composite materials to two-crew cockpit on widebodies. Not to mention the first ever widebody twinjet A300 was in service before 767 was on the drawing board. And many of the achievements were done when Airbus was not even a company.
While I don't deny past Boeing aircraft had good reputations. When I grew up A330 was often seen as inferior to 777. Just that none of those applied to recent jets. Name a single Boeing projects these days that haven't plagued with issues. Do note that A350 reached 98% dispatch reliability at the same year as 787, despite the latter's 3 years head start.
The rudders are activated by the control yoke, you say?
Both are good
A for Airbus...
The seats are more comfortable on Boeing , they seem to have more cushioning. I’m talking about the coach seats.
from a passenger perspective i think the airbus a220 is the best airbus to fly in... 'strange' that it wasn't designed by airbus, rather bombardier a canadian company... even stranger that boeing didn't snap it up when it was up for grabs...
I like the colors, computer glitch white, lostadoor blue and loose wheels don’t squeal black
Fly Airbus, see the world
Fly Boeing, see the next one
In my opinion, Boeing make the better looking aircraft - but from personal experience Airbus planes are quieter & more comfortable to fly on.
Here's another one that encapsulates the underlying issue with the 737 Max: Boeing engineers thought they could outsmart physics by increasing the engine size & hence location on the same 737 airframe. It doesn't work that way with just a "simple software tweak" as 346 people cruely found out with their lives. I sincerely doubt Airbus would have been so blase with that design decision.
Airbus has oversize freight airline. It mainly works for Airbus, but recently number of airplanes and crew has increased,
Now they can be hired for any general cargo that fits in their Belugas.
When opening an Airbus sliding window I always flick back the ratchet pawl so it doesn't make a racket. You can open a 777 sliding window without making any noise but the hand crank will give your arm a workout.
Boeing of course. Yoke reason.
Lockheed 1011 was the first to develop fly by wire but only partially. It was the first to fly entirely by computer control. The Airbus sidestick was copied from the F-16.
I thought it was copied from my first computer game....😂😂
Damn I really like to see the L-1011 to be resurrected for the years of absense, I bet it will probably mops the floor with Boeing on quality build planes.
If Lockheed Martin where to bring back the TriStar then Boeing will shit on their pants.
To see the return of the L-1011 from Lockheed Martin will be the biggest butthurt for Boeing.
4:30 Sounds more like a saw cutting wood to me.
I just look on the side of the plane most of the time the name of the company and the model number airbus is 3** while boeing is 7**
im pretty damn sure that 787 doors open parallel to the aircraft body.
The major difference between them is that one is designed by engineers, with safety and performance in mind, the other is “designed” by paperpushers with the only objective of generating profits to steakholders.
The second major difference is that the first works while the other falls from the skies or loses doors while flying.
Rudders on a Boeing (or any aircraft other than a ercoupe) is not activated using the yoke.
Airbus tightens all bolts, Boeing does not
boeing has removable doors
The Strobes on the Wingtips....Boeing Planes flash 1x Time, Airbus flashes 2x times! So at Night, look at the Wingtips....single Flash= Boeing, double Flash = Airbus
I’m happy they both exist. A monopoly would be bad for consumers and innovation. 😮
Airbus doesn’t make a convertible dive bomber
Lmao,,🤣🤣
AIRBUS is the favourite aircraft for pilots because they have trays in front of them for meals and coffee cups.☕️🍩
Airbus family
forgot to add that boeing and airbus have different cockpit window shape
I'm team "i wanna make it home safe and alive"
Airbus has had it's own issues too. Anything made by humans will.
I gave uo after 8 minutes because the background music was too annoying. Cut it down next time.
Ima give credit for Boeing inventing long range travel with the 747
The main difference is, I won't fly on a Boeing, at least until they sort out their priorities. It will be Airbus for me and my family from now on.
We all know Boeing's quality control issues. The reason for those may well be political in nature.
Compared to Europe, the USA have a more, not to put too fine a point on it, hands-off approach to government. So the FAA, instead of doing quality checks themselves, outsourced this, probably because of budgetary reasons. This is problematic in and of itself, because the whole point of a government is to serve as an independent party. But what's worse is that they outsourced quality checks to Boeing itself.
I'd love to do my own performance review at work. "Exceeded expectations" and a 30% wage increase year on year. "I swear, guv, I marked myself faithfully."
There could well be a scandal at Airbus in the making,like collusion or corruption. But I can guarantee you that the problems at Boeing have led to increased scrutiny at the European side, as to not repeat the American mistake.
MCAS not Boeing.