Any Airbus fans here?

[GeorgeLKMT]

I'm excited that MRTT will be featured in DCS. I can't wait to try the FBW system in DCS environment. Alpha floor, GPWS.. exciting times ahead!

 

Don't hold your breath though. If VEAO decide to make that Airbus flyable, it will take a couple of years just to develop that monster. There's a reason why there are no PMDG level Airbuses in FSX. It's just so goddamn hard to make a proper Airbus with all its systems functioning properly. It's a flying computer. FSLabs are doing one, but I think they were developing it for like 3+ years already and still not done :(

[aaron886]

Yeah. Teams more experienced than VEAO hesitate to take on Airbus flight control augmentation. That's a long term project.

[WildBillKelsoe]

be that as it may, any Airbus is an instant purchase for me in DCS. I'll check out FS+ team's progress now. Thanks

[IvanK]

Have flown 2 Boeing products (B767 and B744) and two Airbus products (A330 and currently on the A380). I have absolutely no hesitation in saying I am in the Airbus camp. The no moving throttle and non linked sticks being an issue is all hype ... yes its different but not the end of the world :)

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

whoa that is ALOT of ECAMS

[sobek]

[...]

 

If everybody would extrapolate like that, i for example would have to assume that every car produced by a certain top of the line german company was utterly flawed for all the software bugs it contains (i used to be employed as a subcontractor unit tester for a project). The project i was employed for had consistently moving goal posts up to the SOP, that is, we had to implement huge software functionality changes even after the car was in customer hands, consistently blasted deadlines, extremely poor contractor communication (a fellow employee (a pretty resolute project manager, german btw.) almost quit because she got weekly f-bombed by the software lead(!) of said company up to the point where she almost broke into tears), you name it, it went wrong. Now do i think that german engineers are all incapable of being decent human beings or doing their job well and that all cars produced by said company are of sub par quality because they have a habit of mis-managing their projects? I sure don't.

 

Shall we get back on topic now? :)

Edited September 8, 2014 by sobek

[Druid_]

There's a reason why there are no PMDG level Airbuses in FSX. It's just so goddamn hard to make a proper Airbus with all its systems functioning properly.

Even Airbus can't do it. Far too complex for its own good.

 

If I were Veao I wouldn't even attempt to do a full simulation of the RAF a330 because after all it's a combat sim not FSX. Basic functionality to allow it to operate as a tanker should suffice, full systems modelling would sap their resources and quite possibly not be worth their time given the market demand for such a product in DCS.

[WildBillKelsoe]

druid.. GRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr........... :(

[Godzila]

I work with cars and I have to tell you that you shouldn't mix cars with airplanes. Cars are made with flaws intentionally. I am not talking about software bugs, but mayor design weaknesses in sometimes critical components. At least I hope it is not the same. Cars are designed to fail after warranty expires, which is few years, airplanes should fly for decade or decades. And when components manufacturers almost control the whole industry there can be no national or racial comments because parts are made worldwide regardless of location or nationality of the brand that the parts are made for. That is not the same for aircaft manufacturers I hope.

[bongodriver]

Aircraft manufacturers don't have to build the flaws in, all they do is say a component has 'x' lifespan and the law backs it up, once a manufacturers limit is reached then it's the end of the road for the aircraft/component even if it has no actual failure, things like pressurisation cycles and fatigue index are all arbitrary limits set by the manufacturers and usually end the life of the entire aircraft (rebuild is not often cost effective)

Component manufacture for aircraft is highly regulated and the quality has to be ensured, nothing like cars at all.

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

"In one glass-cockpit aircraft, the A320, fifty incidents of glass-cockpit blackout have occurred.

On 25 January 2008, United Airlines Flight 731 experienced a serious glass-cockpit blackout, losing half of the ECAM displays as well as all radios, transponders, TCAS and attitude indicators."

 

http://airnation.net/2012/08/22/airbus-a320-cockpit-power-failures/

Edited September 9, 2014 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[PFunk1606688187]

I find the Airbus flightdeck to be depressing, uninspiring, and dull dull dull. My god is it dull. I like Boeings better, though I like de Havilland Dash 8s even more.

 

I'm a simmer, I like being busy, and flying an Airbus makes me feel like every time I switch something from automatic to manual I'm doing something wrong.

[WildBillKelsoe]

it's all subjective, my friends..

[Druid_]

A short story: many eons ago I got my first airline job and rocked up at the CBT course conversion building. There were 2 rooms, one for the B744 and the other for the a340. Fortunately for me I went through the Boeing door. The Boeing lot finished early every day and met in the Bar, went home Friday lunchtime and came back late morning on Monday. The Airbus lot did NOT. They occasionally rocked up to the Bar late in the evening but with a laptop under their arm to continue their studies later.

 

This ^ and a quick look over one studies shoulder at flight control laws and logic was enough to put me off Le Airboos for life. That and I really don't think I am clever enough!

 

One other thing I like about Boeings is when I tell the aircraft 'I have control' .. I do. With Le Airbus ... You never really know.

 

So sorry no fan here although I do think Airbus do a bunch of things better than Boeing.

 

[true story but said in jest! not intended to start a B v A flamewar]

[Zakatak]

*puts on hipster glasses*

 

Airbus and Boeing airliners are too mainstream.

 

*puts on toque with a red maple leaf on it*

 

I prefer the Bombardier C-Series. :P

 

 

I'd rather fly a Boeing, but I'd rather be a passenger in an Airbus. Airbus tends to make better look planes, A380 aside.

[Amuro]

I was on a China Air A321-200 from Beijing to Hong Kong last week. Don't like it that much. Lavatories are too small.

[Oesau]

I was on a China Air A321-200 from Beijing to Hong Kong last week. Don't like it that much. Lavatories are too small.

 

Well get used to that experience across all aircraft types - looking at the trends of aircraft fit-out developments, you can see that they are redesigning aircraft interior fittings to allow more passengers (whilst also keeping them within limits so that no additional air crew need to be on-board). So the toilets are getting smaller, and in some cases (such as Qantas), the number of toilets has been reduced.

[Ninja1959]

Aerosoft - Airbus A318/A319 - Official video

 

${1}

[outlawal2]

Only a fan as far as their helicopters go...

Not a 'liner fan at all...

[Weta43]

Something for some of you to maybe look forward to ..

 

Apparently (though Stuff is a bit of a Sh*t new site), Airbus have entered into a joint venture to develop a supersonic business jet..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/61436016/airbus-to-collaborate-with-aerion-on-supersonic-jet.html

[Ninja1959]

Relive the A320neo’s historic first flight

 

${1}

[Yurgon]

I recently had two flights in A320s as a passenger. I was promised glass-cockpit-failures, emergencies and all kinds of catastrophes. Imagine my surprise when I got from A to B and then back again without a scratch... :music_whistling:

 

That doesn't make me an Airbus fan. It's just that I got nothing bad to say about the aircraft, and compared to the B737s I'd flown in previously, I don't recall any major difference. :smartass:

 

(But I'm not a frequent flier, therefore reserving the right to alter or strengthen this statement at a later date as I gather more experience flying in either aircraft type :D)

[Weta43]

... and compared to the B737s I'd flown in previously, I don't recall any major difference.

 

Sit down the back during a rough landing, and in the 320 if you look along the length of the cabin, you can watch (& hear) the fuselage flex & twist in a way I've never seen with a 737.

 

Happy to fly in them at the moment, but I'm dubious about how well they'll survive that sort of flexing regularly over 15 or 20 years.

[aaron886]

Sit down the back during a rough landing, and in the 320 if you look along the length of the cabin, you can watch (& hear) the fuselage flex & twist in a way I've never seen with a 737.

 

Happy to fly in them at the moment, but I'm dubious about how well they'll survive that sort of flexing regularly over 15 or 20 years.

 

Psssst. A320 has been flying since 1988. :smartass:

[Yurgon]

Sit down the back during a rough landing, and in the 320 if you look along the length of the cabin, you can watch (& hear) the fuselage flex & twist in a way I've never seen with a 737.

 

I'm quite happy that the landings were too smooth for such observations, and I hope they will be on my next flights as well, regardless of aircraft type. :D