Blackbird615 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 46 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 10198 times:
Starting with the 737/DC9 era who builds the best planes based on longevity, structural integrity, efficiency, flyability and longevity etc. For example, a personal belief is Lockheed's L1011 was a great airplane both from a technical standpoint and a passenger friendly aircraft yet failed to survive. I personally enjoy flying Airbus products but have some question on longevity and engineering. This is not intended to be A vs. B but a request for input on all jet products from various manufacturers including Russian AN24's and specifics on why readers would personally purchase one manufacturer over another without regard to politics or cost. Simply put, who builds the very best commercial product and why?
Apologies in advance if this is a previous subject I may have missed, your reponses and opinions will be appreciated.
Sovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2684 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 10051 times:
DC-3 also used in Russia under designation Li-2. Boeing is probably the best currently but Airbus is catching up and Douglas's DC-8 is also in service just like 707. Dont forget all those NWA DC-9s, MD-80s, and all the DC-10s and if it wasnt for Boeing, Douglas(Mcdonnel Douglas) more of their planes would be flying. But I also think Tupolev have done alot when it comes to civil aviation although many people don't recognize what the Russian manufacturers have done. Still a lot of tu-134s and -154s out there also the -144 SST, but I dont think any Tu-104, Tu-124 are still flying.
Blackbird615 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9999 times:
To clarify the question is who builds the best commercial aircraft today and why? Certainly the question is subjective but from a purchasing standpoint regardless of politics or nationality my goal was to identify a product that excels above the competition and most importantly support your reasoning with fact. Thanks.
Aviaar From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 9713 times:
Every individual has their loyalties and reservations about their favorite company. Most Americans will say Boeing, Europeans Airbus. Determining which company is the best depends on how many people post.
I'm American, I'll say Boeing, not knowing/considering any specific technical differences between Boeing and other companies. It's all loyalty.
LVZXV From Gabon, joined Mar 2004, 2041 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 9578 times:
Let me be even-handed: Airbus builds comfortable (esp. the A320 family, A340), while the US builds durable (all Boeings, DC-9 family, DC-10, TriStar), and the UK built solid (BAC 1-11, VC-10, BAe 146 family). Regional aircraft are a separate category, but I am impressed by the longevity of the Fokker classics; the F27 and F28, many of the former of which are flying well past their 40th birthdays, and both of which are pretty roomy. I'm not quite convinced by the build-quality of Bombardiers, ATRs and EMBRAERS, however, in addition to looking fairly cramped.
CWUPilot From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 9571 times:
Yakolev. No, wait, Tupolev!
Ok, just kidding, Boeing all the way. Yes I'll make a few people angry by saying this but I cannot tell a lie. There's a feeling of safety and security you get when boarding a boeing that I never feel when I climb aboard a bus. Just my opinion.
"The worst day of flying still beats the best day of real work."
Skymileman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 9544 times:
Just to be honary, I think I'll say Martin did. I do have some reasons, though. Martin built the 202's and the 404's that did wonders for Northwest, and I like Northwest. Really, I think they're all comparable quality.
BA747400 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 428 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 9499 times:
Airbus has its ups and downs; as does Boeing....But there's just something about Boeing that is just.......Better. They have a longer history, better reliability (IMHO), that and they have the 747...Nough' said!
Both these companies make good products and offer their own unique style; so I don't think any answer is wrong to be honest.
ReguPilot From Puerto Rico, joined Jan 2004, 495 posts, RR: 23
Reply 23, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 9480 times:
Just to comment on Pirate's post.. I know lots of people that would rather fly on and old model plane, with a history of safety, than ina newer model, because they are not sure of how safe it will be. Funny, ain't?
To my thinkings, both Airbus and Boeing! They both deliver what the customer expects! And, what if we had an all Boeing or an All Airbus world? Woudn't that be boring?