Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
I love competition and Boeing vs Airbus is competition at it's best!! I really don't think anyone can say that one is better than the other. They are both great products and both have their pros and cons, just like any other product on the market today. I have flown in both Boeing and Airbus products and as a passenger, i don't think you can really make any serious or informative conclusions about the aircrafts performance. I think all we as passengers can say is, "i got plenty of leg room". Of course, you won't be saying that when you fly in economy with JAL... trust me! My 6 foot 4 inch frame has been there and done that! I am sure that Airbus and Boeing look at each other's designs and try to be similar, while being different. This is the only way two products can compete head to head like this. Further, all pilots are different, for they are only human. I suppose it would depend on their style and personality and what they find important in regards to flight systems and cockpit layout, to where they would lean towards: Boeing or Airbus. My buddy is a first officer for Air Transat and flys the A330 out of Montreal and he prefers Boeing. As he puts it, "Boeing makes aircraft for pilots". I prefer Boeing myself just because of their long aviation history and i have also fallen in love with the 777. Anyhow, there is really no ultimate authority on this subject who can say that Boeing is the best or Airbus is the best. Each to their own
To Chalet-I'm sorry...I study English very hard! But,I like aircraft very much.
It is correct that Alfred Nobel made his money of of dynamite and the important ignition part just like Watt is remembered for the steam engine while the real invention/improvement was the condenser that cooled the steam and allowed the steam/lukewarm water to be recycled. Nobel family in Russia was also heavily involved in oil at Baku ans producing mines as a weapon for naval warfare. A.Nobel was however not in any sense a militarist and was worried about dynamite being used in harms way.
Arthur: I don't think you will get much argument going back to WW2 era because a lot of readers hear just flatly won't remember it.I'm not saying that AB is a crappy product or unsuccessful because of the subsidies but it is MORE sucessful because of them. If theirs was pulled down to the level of Boeing, it would be more difficult for them to compete as their production costs are higher. As time goes, those will probably come down.As far as the fighters, in the era in which you speak, there were no European manufacturers from which they could buy. As time went on, France&England started coming around but, quite honestly, the US did carry a big stick at that time and we had leaders that had the balls to use it. Too bad we don't today but that's another issue. I will not argue the radar issue as I really don't know anything about it. I did not know about the patent theft on the dynamite. I always thought Nobel invented/manufactured/got rich off the stuff; because that's where the money for the annual Nobel Peace Prize came from.
No mention of the Junkers airplane? The argument that Airbus is successful because it is subsidizes one way or another is rubbish. Anyhow the European manufacturer/states do not threaten to economically strangle any states that do not buy US airplanes. US has for decades forced overpriced unsuitable military airplanes down the throats of NATO members and Non-NATO members. The number one fighter pilot in the world with over 300 planes downed including 5 Mustangs advise the German Government against buying American fighter planes and was sacked, no doubt after American pressure. The Swedish inventor was cheated out of his invention for enhanced AIS which was blocked by USA FAA to protect the American Radar Industries, but was against US objection adopted by large majority in UN to be world standard for shipping. AIS is also used by Airlines despite all US efforts to stop H. Lanz invention. Lanz is treated just as shoddy as Alfred Nobel was when his patent for dynamite was stolen in the 19th century. The FAA even planted an American shyster in Stockholm which was introduced to Lanz and he offered to protect his case at a reasonable cost in US. This was bungled on purpose no doubt and the American Judge throw out Lanz case and concluded that he would have to pay the other parties legal cost around 300 million dollars.
faa
faa
with respect - i am glad in knowing, if (i hope not)you have a flight demize, that you can be in your comfort zone.