AirBus versus Boeing

[otispunkmeyer]

boeings dream liner thing FTW!

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
all the airbuses i've ever flown in have been crap.

that and their planes are ugly.

and i can't stand that the french give them huge cheap 'loans.' it sure is easier to come up with a new airframe when you don't have to worry about if you can sell it or not.

well french desgin philosophy has always been daft, even suicidal at times.....just look at renault and citroen. their desgins are pretty quirky and i like them, but alot of people dont, and see it as too radical

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=renault%20avantime&sa=N&tab=wi
renault avantime ---- totally insane to look at, and a wierd concept of 4 seater mini SUV coupe. they sold about 40 in the UK, then killed it

http://images.google.co.uk/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&q=renault+vel+satis
renault vel satis --- another crazy design, which i like, but again just not selling at all. i think ive seen about 2 on the road, thats it.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Yeah, this poll will be fair...

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
all the airbuses i've ever flown in have been crap.

that and their planes are ugly.

and i can't stand that the french give them huge cheap 'loans.' it sure is easier to come up with a new airframe when you don't have to worry about if you can sell it or not.

To say an A320 is any more or less beautiful than a 757 is just silly, and I'm a Boeing person. Now the A380 looks stupid with the cockpit in it's location, but in all reality, the 747 didn't impress people with looks with that growth on it's top, either.

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Well, before I get subjective, let's look at the maiden flight info for the following aircraft:

B737: April 9, 1967 (39 years old)
B747: February 9, 1969 (37 years old)
B767: September 26, 1981 (25 years old)
B757: February 19, 1982 (24 years old)
B777: June 12, 1994 (12 years old)

Average age: 27.4 years old


A300-100: June 28, 1973 (33 years old)
A310-200: April 3, 1982 (24 years old)
A320-100: February 22, 1987 (19 years old)
A340-300: October 25, 1991 (15 years old)
A330-300: November 2, 1992 (14 years old)
A321-100: March 11, 1993 (13 years old)
A319-100: August 25, 1995 (11 yers old)
A318-100: January, 2002 (4 years old)

Average age: 16.63 years old


So, looking at that, Airbus aircraft are roughly half as old as Boeing aircraft. Yes, both companies have updated their models (747-100, 200, 300, 400, etc.) but the original design concept/airframe is outdated on most Boeing aircraft. All Boeing currently in service, aside from the 777, were designed in an era without CAD!

So, what are these companies doing now? I think Airbus is smart. First, they attacked Boeing by building newer, smaller planes first, taking away 737 market share for example with the A320 series. Then they moved up the ladder, targeting the 767 with the A330 and A340. Next, they plan to target the 747 and 777 with the A380 and A350, respectively. Airbus is targeting each and every Boeing model, giving customers are newer, more up-to-date choice in each segment. What has Boeing done all this time? I would argue that they have largely sat back and done nothing. They have updated the old stuff instead of going back to the drawing board, largely augmenting the 737 series with the 500, 600, 800, X, etc. Same with the 747-400, 767-400ER, and 777-400ER. These old designs are simply outdated, using outdated materials, and not designed to handle the demands of the 21st Century. Newer Airbus models are designed to use composites like carbon fibre, for example.

Now, from a subjective standpoint, I still prefer Airbus aircraft. Every year, I fly a Lufthansa A340-300 back and forth from Atlanta to Frankfurt. I think it's much quieter, less prone to turbulence, and has much better climate control systems than say the 767-300ER that Delta flies on the same route (took one of those to Munich in December).

So, I prefer Airbus, but I think the companies will still be tied in 20 years.

The A321/320/319/318 are all structurally very similar, like Boeing rev levels. To say that the 739 versus the 731 is too similar yet an A320 and an A319 are different is just silly. The NG 737s have new wings, tails, flight deck, and a longer hull. I don't think that Airbus has even tweaked the A32x wing yet, because it costs too much.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
All Boeing currently in service, aside from the 777, were designed in an era without CAD!

Airbus is targeting each and every Boeing model, giving customers are newer, more up-to-date choice in each segment. What has Boeing done all this time? I would argue that they have largely sat back and done nothing. They have updated the old stuff instead of going back to the drawing board, largely augmenting the 737 series with the 500, 600, 800, X, etc. Same with the 747-400, 767-400ER, and 777-400ER. These old designs are simply outdated, using outdated materials, and not designed to handle the demands of the 21st Century. Newer Airbus models are designed to use composites like carbon fibre, for example.

Maybe so, but a lot of those older 747's, 737's, 727's, and probably a few 707's are still in active service. When I was flying 727's I was aboard an aircraft built in 1967. It had 61,000+ airframe hours and it was still being used for passenger service. Even those planes built in the 60's will continue flying for another 10-20 years (well into the 21st century) at least after they are converted to cargo operations. So I guess those guys designing these planes without CAD did know what they were doing.

EDIT: and did you know the 727 was the first commerical jet certified to take off from a gravel runway. I would like to see an airbus try that.

 

[alphatarget1]

Boeing, because it's American.

They have an Airbus plant in Hamburg somewhere though... I should go check it out one of these days.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

AirBus automatically loses because of their name.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
All Boeing currently in service, aside from the 777, were designed in an era without CAD!

Airbus is targeting each and every Boeing model, giving customers are newer, more up-to-date choice in each segment. What has Boeing done all this time? I would argue that they have largely sat back and done nothing. They have updated the old stuff instead of going back to the drawing board, largely augmenting the 737 series with the 500, 600, 800, X, etc. Same with the 747-400, 767-400ER, and 777-400ER. These old designs are simply outdated, using outdated materials, and not designed to handle the demands of the 21st Century. Newer Airbus models are designed to use composites like carbon fibre, for example.

Maybe so, but a lot of those older 747's, 737's, 727's, and probably a few 707's are still in active service. When I was flying 727's I was aboard an aircraft built in 1967. It had 61,000+ airframe hours and it was still being used for passenger service. Even those planes built in the 60's will continue flying for another 10-20 years (well into the 21st century) at least after they are converted to cargo operations. So I guess those guys designing these planes without CAD did know what they were doing.

EDIT: and did you know the 727 was the first commerical jet certified to take off from a gravel runway. I would like to see an airbus try that.

NWA is still flying lots of McD airframes from the 60s for passenger travel.