AA777
Topic Author
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:31 am

When I recently flew on a BA A320, I was excited to fly on the A320, as I had never been on one, only the A319 which was really nice .... Yet I was quite Dissapointed on the A320 ... I am sure that the A320 is one of the LOUDEST planes in service today, since I was sitting in row 3 and I felt like I was sitting in the last row of seats next to the engines on an MD-80 (which I have done, and the Noise level is actually quite similar...) I didnt really like the Interior, it wasnt as nice as BA's 757's.... really, all I liked was the Food and serivce In Club Europe, and Its takeoff performance... which is OK for a little plane of its size. Does anyone share these feelings? Really I was surprised that the A320 wasnt as nice as I anticipated...
-AA777
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:34 am

You are about to get yelled at by Airbus fans because you stated your opinion about Airbus aircraft and it wasn't a good one. All I can say is that the 737NG's are much better and more quiet.

Udo and AB.400 are going to yell at you soon.

 

Best Regards,

B744
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:35 am

What was so much worse compared to your flight on the A319, just the noise-level ?
 
Skyteam
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:50 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:37 am

I have flown on a couple Airbus 320's, and I didnt like them very much. Their seats were hard on my back, and the aircraft shakes like hell on landing. The A-320 makes the DC-9 look like heaven!!!!!

SKYTEAM
 
Guest

RE: Skyteam

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:39 am

I agree, that plane does shake and vibrate a lot on landing.

It is LOUD.

 
B727-200
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 11:28 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:39 am


Aren't BA's A320's some of the original ones off the assembly line? If so, they would be old enough to go to high school now.

I have travelled on A320's with one airline that span in age from 12-years-old to 2-years-old. The 12-year-old aircraft looked quite tired and old, whilst the 2-year-old aircraft looked quite fresh and new. You would not believe they are from the same carrier.

B727-200.
 
slawko
Posts: 3742
Joined: Tue May 25, 1999 7:40 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:42 am

I agree with B747-400 get ready for a big argument from the Airbus fans...it;s funny the fans are much like the company, no one can ever critisize them.

I am going to get out early and say I agree with you AA777 I did not like the A320 when I flew on a few of them, I found it to be loud and very cramped (I know the airline chooses the seat layout) I also noticed that on the 320 and all the airbuses I have flow on even the 310 the cabin seems to make a lot of noise and shakes alot during taxi and take off, more so then the other compeating aircraft I have flow on, don;t know if anyone else has noticed that too.
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
 
varig md-11
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2000 7:17 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:58 am

hi
Just like Slawko I noticed the interior of Airbuses is shaking a lot;on take-off and landing it looks like the ceiling attached bins are going to fall on your head...
otherwise I flew on many A320 and never noticed it was that much noisy...yet I had the same feeling than 727-200:I flew recently on one of the 1st AF A320 and it was not a great flight:the interior looked tired and comfort was nothing special,while flying on a newer Star airlines A320 was a more pleasant experience....maybe AA777 experienced a flight onboard an A320 inherited from British Caledonian and rebranded BA ,instead of the new versions BA is getting now
AF TW AA NW DL UA CO BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ PC RG IW SE LI TN
 
User avatar
sammyk
Posts: 1560
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 1999 11:31 am

RE:My Experience & Boeing747-400

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:26 am

You know, me and a friend of mine took a trip from JFK-BUF on Jetblue, and she specifically said "Hey this plane is so loud" I'm like ok. She was comparing it to the Fokker 100 she had just gotten off of 2 days prior. Our seats on Jetblue were practically in the "First Class" area (row 4), and she said "no, its not the sound of the engines, its the other stuff, like flaps, and landing gear making noise" (I told her about the flaps and landing gear, since she said it wasn't the engine). When she left, she had a 737-500 on CO, and I asked her again about the noise, and she said the 737 was quieter than the Airbus. This is someone who don't know diddley about a plane, and doesn't care if its Boeing, or Airbus, or Fokker. Probably the most objective opinion I have heard in a long time.

Boeing747-400, you know what fella, its how you word something, look what you said:

"All I can say is that the 737NG's are much better and more quiet."

See, now if you had put in the words "i think" after "All I can say is that", then maybe no one would pounce on you. But the way you are saying it is like a factual statement, with nothing to back it up with but your own experience, which doesn't count when it comes to facts, because someone can easily have a conflicting opinion.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5567
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

This Offered To Simplify Posts For Many Of You...

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:43 am

As a man of words and letters (I'll modestly proclaim), I offer the following for use by all "A v. B" combatants, as well as those who might choose to go way out on the proverbial limb, and champion an airplane built by the snowmobile guys, or the jungle guys, or the missile guys, or even the guys-who-have-never-built-a-plane-in-their-lives-but-they're-taking-orders-from-an-airline-that-doesn't-exist-yet.

This modest offering is tendered gratis, no compensation or attribution of any kind required, and I ask only that you use it in good health.

The deal is this: simply fill in the blanks with the name of your favorite (or favourite, as the case may be) airplane manufacturer (or fabrik, or whatever) and airplane and (of course), your least favorite (favourite), in the appropriate spaces, then cut and paste the finished product (and well finished it shall be, be assured) into a suitably-inflamatorily-named thread. Then, sit back, watch the fireworks fly, as all of the usual suspects rise up in righteous indignation, incensed that any cretin would dare compare their chosen aerial conveyance with the crude, dangerous and all-around-icky airplanes of the opposition.

You can even (with a little modification, the particulars of which are left to your individual taste) use this to fight about airlines; or politicians; or Ska bands, or word processing software.

It goes like this:

"I would like to settle the debate about ________ aircraft once and for all; they are clearly superior to the ____________s in all respects, having a markedly-better cabin arrangement, stronger and more durable engines, prettier wings (because they [have/don't have] winglets), and are especially safer because they are [equipped/not equipped] with fly-by-wire, and thus, [the idiot, pea-brained glorified bus drivers who claim to be skilled aircraft pilots won't be able to break the wings off at their discretion with impertinent control inputs / the titans of the sky, our invincible airplane gods, the Captains, are not compelled by the whim of egomaniacal software engineers to ride as mere passengers as their craft plane inexorably into the unyielding earth]."

"Buying, flying, looking at or riding in _________'s planes is sure the cause impotence, world hunger, famine, plague, gingivitis and the heartbreak of psoriasis. On the other hand, if you instead choose the cleverly-conceived and skillfully-manufactured aircraft of __________, you'll be younger, look better, think more clearly, have considerably better prowess with the [ladies/men/sheep] and (as an added and entirely unexpected bonus), you'll be contacted by a mysterious but earnest investigator who, after first confirming your identity through genetic mapping, will reveal that you are the long-undisclosed last beneficiary of the Last Will and Testament of Howard Hughes; that you are now richer than... well... stink; and that you now have all the resources that you might ever want or need with which to start an airline flying [777s, 74Xs, 767s and 757-LRs / A3XXs, A340s, A330s and A320s] from a hub in Branson Missouri to Bozeman, Montana, Victorville, California and Galion, Ohio, all markets just crying out for high-density service and thus far unrecognized by those short-sighted nimrods who currently run their respective airlines with no clue of what they're doing."

"Plus, [chicks/guys/ducks] are really attracted to people who prefer the planes made by _________; but are repelled by the mere mention of the laughable, unrefined ore-clods that _________ passes off as advanced transportation."

"When I grow up and graduate from school, I'm going to be a pilot and I'll only fly for an airline that buys the _________ planes, and whatever happens, I'll only fly __________s, no matter what they do in the way of fleet planning or aircraft purchases."


===============

There. Give it a shot. If there is enough demand, we could generate a series of these articulate and well-reasoned diatribes, and simply refer to them by number to start the flame wars (e.g., Airbus #42 would mean, canned post No. 42 with Airbus dominant, etc.). We could save typing time and more of the low-bandwidth members could participate in all-out wars, without incurring excessive connect-time fees, carpal tunnel syndrome, or tardy slips in the morning for showing up to homeroom late.

Comments?
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
Guest

RE: RE:My Experience & Boeing747-400

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:44 am

Acually, it doesn't sound like a factual statement, it's my opinion.

My opinion is that the new 737's are much more quiet and spacious than A320, facual evidence? I've been on both the planes and that's my opinion.
 
Delta777-XXX
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2000 3:50 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:44 am

well... on the A320...

at least you know the engines are still there and running!  
 
aspen1
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 7:43 am

RE: AA777

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:47 am

When I recently flew on a BA A320, I was excited to fly on the A320, as I had never been on one, only the A319 which was really nice ....


you contridicted yourselft. The A320 is the exact same aircraft as the A319 except the 319 is a bit shorter at 111ft. The interiors are the exact same on both aircraft. how can you like one and not the other? please explain?
 
Delta777-XXX
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2000 3:50 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:57 am

"I would like to settle the debate about **Boeing and Airbus** aircraft once and for all; they are clearly superior to the **Cessna**s in all respects, having a markedly-better cabin arrangement, stronger and more durable engines, prettier wings (because they [have/don't have] winglets), and are especially safer because they are [equipped/not equipped] with fly-by-wire, and thus, [the idiot, pea-brained glorified bus drivers who claim to be skilled aircraft pilots won't be able to break the wings off at their discretion with impertinent control inputs / the titans of the sky, our invincible airplane gods, the Captains, are not compelled by the whim of egomaniacal software engineers to ride as mere passengers as their craft plane inexorably into the unyielding earth]."

"Buying, flying, looking at or riding in **Cessna**'s planes is sure the cause impotence, world hunger, famine, plague, gingivitis and the heartbreak of psoriasis. On the other hand, if you instead choose the cleverly-conceived and skillfully-manufactured aircraft of ** Airbus and Boeing**, you'll be younger, look better, think more clearly, have considerably better prowess with the [ladies/men/sheep] and (as an added and entirely unexpected bonus), you'll be contacted by a mysterious but earnest investigator who, after first confirming your identity through genetic mapping, will reveal that you are the long-undisclosed last beneficiary of the Last Will and Testament of Howard Hughes; that you are now richer than... well... stink; and that you now have all the resources that you might ever want or need with which to start an airline flying [777s, 74Xs, 767s and 757-LRs / A3XXs, A340s, A330s and A320s] from a hub in Branson Missouri to Bozeman, Montana, Victorville, California and Galion, Ohio, all markets just crying out for high-density service and thus far unrecognized by those short-sighted nimrods who currently run their respective airlines with no clue of what they're doing."

"Plus, [chicks/guys/ducks] are really attracted to people who prefer the planes made by **Airbus and Boeing**; but are repelled by the mere mention of the laughable, unrefined ore-clods that **Cessna**passes off as advanced transportation."

"When I grow up and graduate from school, I'm going to be a pilot and I'll only fly for an airline that buys the **Airbus and Boeing**planes, and whatever happens, I'll only fly **Airbus and Boeing**s, no matter what they do in the way of fleet planning or aircraft purchases."


















_______________________________________


LOL!!! like that?? Man.. I hate small prop planes! They are noisey and pumpy! ol' well... I guess you have to start somewhere!

 

 
aspen1
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 7:43 am

RE: A320 And 737

Tue Sep 19, 2000 8:59 am

i have been on 737 classics on united, delta, america west, southwest, and aloha. I have only been on uniteds a320's and a319's. Comparing the two i happen to like the a320 series better for the following reason. They interior is alot cleaner and more modern than the 737 classic. The overhead bins are larger, the bathrooms are cleaner and more modern and the aircraft is fitted with overhead video that retracts from below the over head bin.

You cannot judge a plane on the seating configuration nore on the seats. Aircraft manufacturers have no say in what seats are used and how they are spaced out on the aircraft.

I have been on uniteds 737-200 737-300 737-500 and 737-300 shuttle and 737-500 shuttle along with the A320 and A319. I prefer the a320 and a319 in both economy class and first class. One side note. I loved united's a320's when they first came out. I loved the fact that they had footrests in coach
 
aa737
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:49 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:00 am

The BA A320s are some of the original A320s (some are the -100 series). I have flown on them a quite a few times. I have also flown on a bunch of BA 737s. I found the noise level from the engines about the same. I have yet to go on the 737ng, so I don't know if its much quieter. In june I flew on a new GB airways A320 and it was slightly quieter engines then the 737 (-400?) that I took home. I did notivce the A320 was loud wuth flaps and stuff like that.

I have also been on a bunch of BA 757s and they seemed to be the same interior more or less.
 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:07 am

......not starting a war, but factually, aren't A320's more spacious than 737's?? I.e, more space, i.e. greater dimensions in all respects, equals more spaciousness? And to back up Aspen1, the A319 is exactly the same as the A320 except for the frames.....their AMM's and IPC's are identical......
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:12 am

A320's are not more spacious than the new 737's. They do not have greater dimensions than the new 737's either. I can't wait to fly on a CO 737-800 and -900 soon.

I'm sure th 738 and 739 are more superior to the A320 than the A320 is to them.

Just my 2 cents.
 
wingman
Posts: 2794
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:34 am

I've flown nice 320s and nice 737s. I've flown lousy 320s and lousy 737s. In my judgement, the two factors which make a plane nice or lousy are 1) carrier and 2) age of aircraft. For example, I flew an IB 320 that was spanking new and the ride was excellent. I've also flown AWA 320s that were on the verge of structural breakup (or so I thought). Age and carrier make the difference.

Likewise, UA 733s and 735s are very well maintained and comfortable. COs NGs are a pleasure (brand new aircraft helps every time). Now, AWA's 737s are are crappy as their 320s and also twice as old.

My point is, if you don't like a plane consider the two factors above and make sure you have broad carrier experience with a specific type before you just say it's no good. Trust me, get on a new US 320 transcon and then an AWA 737 and you'll say just the opposite.
 
DeltaAir
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 4:41 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:38 am

The Airbus Narrowbodies are wider than the new 737NGs, but only by a few inches. Most of your complaints center around comfort, thats not the planes fault, its the airlines. You will find that the aging A-320s are becoming what the A-310s are and have been for a few years, maintance hazards. One very poor characteristic of the A-320 Series is the tendency of the aircraft to shake violently upon landing and occasionally manual breaking gets very touchy. I have flown both the United A-320s and Delta 737-800s several times each. The A-320 was supurior to the older 737s, but I prefer the 737. This may have to due with the airline configuartion, but to me it also seems quieter. I don't in anyway mean to cut down Boeing or Airbus, just simply stating some well known ideals as well as my personal opinion.

 
User avatar
sammyk
Posts: 1560
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 1999 11:31 am

RE: A320...not So Great! - Boeing747-400

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:38 am

Well duh, say it like that then! "My opinion....etc etc."

The way you said it SOUNDED like a factual statement, because you forgot to include "in my opinion" or "I think" in it. I never said it wasn't your opinion.

But I do see where you are coming from, its just harder to figure that out when its typed out since we can't "hear" you say it. Also, its not always easy to understand for people whose native tongue is not english, which there are many of here.

Sammy
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6418
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:43 am

Oh my dear. I have been on many shaky A320s and B737s / B757s, but I never blamed it on A or B. AA777, who maintains your runways? NY Street Service?
Yesterday I flew on a Swissair A320 from Zurich to Copenhagen. Both airports have well maintained runways and taxiways and the trip was smooth as silk. And it wasn't only because of the very comfortable Swissair leather seats, of which four rows were missing compared to most airlines to the benefit of generous economy class legroom for my 6 feet and 3 inches. All of which has nothing with Airbus to do, but a lot with Swissair to do. Maybe the smooth ride was due to the female captain?
Of course it was cramped at 3+3, but then one inch less cramped than a 737/757 since the fuselage is those 6 inch wider and they didn't leave that as a gap between the seats.
Last month on a 737 it was equally smooth at CPH, but certainly bumpy at my destination, but since it was daylight I could see the reason - a surface which not even NY Street Service would be proud of.
Any seat in an A320 is noisier than the first 5 rows of a MD-80 - the quietest seats of any narrow body plane. The back of an A320, which isn't falling apart due to lack of maintenance, is beaten only by a BAe 146/Avro RJ. But much like the good old Caravelle you are never left in any doubt that the gear has come up or down and has been locked. I feel good when I hear - and feel - that clonk. In a 757 or MD-80 on the other hand I sometimes wonder if I should run to the flight deck and ask if they remembered to lower the landing gear. An Airbus never leaves you in any doubt. Some people get scared when the whole plane is shaking from a gear lock up or down. I feel it as the same comfort as having three green lights right in front of me.

No airliner rolls on bad road as a Cadilac, mostly because a Cadilac is not designed to survive to be slammed down onto the road in sidewing. But on the same airliner you will always feel a great difference on bad road if it is lightweight or it is loaded down with dozens of tonnes of fuel for a max range sector.

Read this carefully and let's try avoid this anoying "A or B not so great" stuff. Let us see if we can manage 24 hours without that oh so boring stuff. Then we can try 48 hours next week...  
Best regards, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
LH423
Posts: 5868
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 6:27 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:46 am

I recently got off a Lufthansa A320, and I did notice it to be slightly louder than the United 737-300 I was on the week prior. I slept through most of the A320 flight, but one thing that disturbed me was Lufthansa's grey, sterile look to the A320. The walls were grey, the seats were grey leather, and Vienna in late August can be warm during the day, but chilly at night, so the clear, cool morning light, and the grey interior makes for a slightly uncomfortable, un-aesthetic feeling. It also makes the interior very plastic, and fragile looking. I can't comment on any other airlines, my only A320 experience was the one I just described.

LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:49 am

Boeing747-400.......according to BOTH manufacturers websites and technical data sheets, the A320 cabin is approx. 7in wider, depending on which width dimension you wish to compare......

Slawko.......the reason Airbus supporters like to argue so much is because we can argue with facts.......all I ever seem to see is opinions on your side.......the lack of knowledge regarding Airbus is incredible, it makes me wonder......its funny how Airbus supporters have never launched a Boeing attack, simply because we have the open mindedness to accept the quality of both products......all I hear day in day out is people like you literally throwing shite at a mirror......either way it ends up in your face.......

Take Boeing747-400 above......"A320's are not more spacious than the new 737's. They do not have greater dimensions than the new 737's either. I can't wait to fly on a CO 737-800 and -900 soon. I'm sure th 738 and 739 are more superior to the A320 than the A320 is to them......"

Both manufacturers websites show the A320 has greater dimensions......full stop.....what the hell is 'I'm sure th 738 and 739 are more superior to the A320' supposed to mean??

Maybe Airbus supporters will start respecting the Boeing supporters when they grow up........hell, look at NWA, USA, UAL, ACA, CMM, AAL, JBU........at least they have some open-minded people working for them.....
 
AC_A340
Posts: 2196
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 1999 12:01 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:53 am

After reading all the posts in this thread, I have to say the most intelligent thing I read was the post above by Wingman. Carrier and age of aircraft make the difference. I've flown NW 757's and UA 757's. The landing in the UA seemed to be much more harder.

In my opinion I prefer the A320 family to the 737/757 for the following reasons.
I like the lawnmower sound
I like to be able to hear the plane
You don't hit your head on the TV monitors
I believe they look better

Although I would gladly fly either because both are safe and will get you to where you are going. 
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:10 am

Grow up? HA!

My reasons are clear, look at the sales so far this year, compare the A32X to the B73X, airlines do prefer the 737's over the A320's, sure, some do buy A320's, but Boeing has delivered over 4000 737's and the A320 is no match to that. If you talk about Jetblue, look at Southwest.

Wingman, when Airbus supporters grow up, the they'll be respected as well. You can't tell us to grow up.

So, people have to be opened-minded to order Airbus, eh? Looks like most airlines are pretty dumb for ordering more Boeing's than Airbus. HA!

Just my 2 cents.

(Whuch means that this is my opinion, so don't attack me for it)
 
ben88
Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 4:49 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:13 am

Here we go again. I would have thought that after the last argument, people would no longer make unsubstantiated claims. Boeing 747-400, you have to learn that if something is your opinion, you have to denote that in your post. Let's take a coupe of examples:

"All I can say is that the 737NG's are much better and more quiet"

This is not an opinionated statement. It is a non-factual claim.

"I'm sure th 738 and 739 are more superior to the A320 than the A320 is to them."

Not only does this make absolutely no sense, it is also a non-factual claim.
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:16 am

Yes it does make sense Ben88, it's what I think!! If you don't except my opinion, then don;t reply!! I don't want to fight with you again, but you seem to be looking for one.

If you read further into my posts, I did say that these are my opinions. Back off.
 
ben88
Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 4:49 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:18 am

You also forgot to mention that Boeing has been selling 737's for 33 years while Airbus has been selling A320's for 12 years.

btw, it's accept, not except
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:19 am

Bravo Sccutler! But one thing bothers me, why didn't you think of a cut and paste message for the message I'm posting right now? Oh well, I enjoyed your post very much. hehehe

  Tzvika
NO URLS in signature
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:20 am

Oh, excuse me. I'm sorry for your inconvienence that I made a typo. Like no one else has. Give me a break!

Selling 737's for 33 years is no excuse, look at the orders for this year.
 
cwapilot
Posts: 1085
Joined: Mon May 01, 2000 7:10 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:28 am

I flew on 2 or 3 year old UA A319 and A320 a few months back...my first experience on Airbus birds, so I was excited to have a couple more aircraft types and another manufacturer under my belt. Well, upon departing our home airport, the A319 we were to depart on was delayed for mechanical reasons for the fourth time that week. Meanwhile, the old, horrible, nasty 737-300 and 737-500 a at the next couple gates left right on time, like clockwork. The noises inside the cabin drowned out most of the flight attendants instructions, as we pushed back from the gate...strange noises attributed by the crew to a "hydraulic pump", making most passengers uneasy given the 2 hour maintenance delay. Taxi was fine, until the tested the flaps. The brakes made a noise akin to when the brake pads are worn out on an 84 Chevy. Upon takeoff, the interior shook like an old DC10, and as the weight transfered from the gear to the wings, there was a sound like "pop....pop....pop....pop" followed by the extremely loud gear retraction. The plane cracked and popped the whole ascent and cruise. Every turn made my stomach drop. The landing, however, was extremely smooth, with a nice, even descent and feather-like landing. Taxi lead to those horrible "hydraulic pump" sounds. The pilots stood at the door, adressing many of the passenger's questions about those noises. I asked if all the questions are normal, and they said yes, but people here will eventually get used to our new technology (chuckle chuckle).
The A320 was no different, except for more cracking and popping during cruise.

The aircraft we connected to in each case was an older 757-200....WOW what a difference! Solid, quiet and powerful.

In my experience, the A32X sounds very rickety and rough...very LOUD compared to the competition. In regards to space, only the aisle is wider, the seats are the same, so who cares about the slightly wider fuselage. As has been discussed in previous threads, the 737 fuselage is not a perfect circle, so its width is wider in some areas and narrower in others. Either way, you can't tell the difference. It's still 3 x 3, only with smaller, lower-set windows than the 737.

I guess I prefer the 737, classic and NG, to the A32X family. I am looking to try an Airbus widebody, hopefully an A330...I hope they are better than their smaller cousins.
Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!
 
Dazed767
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:41 am

I've flown on NWA, AWA, and jetBlues A320's. I did notice when we hit a big air pocket in the AWA flight that the plane sounded like it was going to fall apart (but it was fun   ). I like them, they are classy, kinda like a Volvo. jetBlue's are unbelievably comfortable. More leg room, leather seats, all the goodies of first class (without the price). I've never flown on a 737NG, but I like the A320 over the 737-300/500s.
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:50 am

Yes, thats true.
THe Airbus A320 is an aircraft I hate.
I travelled with Ansett on one, and I hated it

Q A N T A S 7 4 7
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 10:59 am

I have an idea; why don't we stop talking about A vs. B and start talking about C vs. E (CRJ, ERJ). It'll be a lot more calmer, and, no offense, but not as many people here from Brazil/Canada as US/Europe, so not much patriotism.
 
DeltaRNOmd-80
Posts: 1979
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 7:42 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:02 am

I like the A320 better than the Classic 737. A320 is cleaner, obviously because they are newer. A320's seem more spacious to me. Also, I like the retractable LCD TV screens that come down from the overhead bin, they are better than the 757's in the center of the aisle, I think. I have yet to ride on a 737NG so I cant compare A320 series to them, but I like A320 better than the older 737's.
 
cwapilot
Posts: 1085
Joined: Mon May 01, 2000 7:10 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:04 am

There has been no A v B except for those warning against it. We always get to hear about how horrible DC9s and 737s are, but as soon as someone says that they don't like an A320, we all of a sudden get the Aviation Forum PC Police! So what...someone describes negative A320 experiences...except for one person, the whole conversation has been quite civil. I don't HATE the A32X family, but my experiences so far have been less than stellar, given my expectations built up by the A fans on this forum. I would not avoid these aircraft...but it would be okay if I said I was avoiding 737s because of the rudder! Just grow up and accept some differing opinions.
Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!
 
LH423
Posts: 5868
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 6:27 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:04 am

MY last trip I flew on the A330, and the A320. While awaiting pushback on both planes, I felt and heard a "thumping" noise every few minutes. This plane I've never noticed on any Boeing aeroplane, any info on what this "thump" is? Thank You!

LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
 
TWA902fly
Posts: 2869
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 5:47 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:11 am

same happened to me. i flew ORD-BOS and EWR-ORD on United A319s. and they are my second favourite small jet. The A320 which i flew on LAX-ORD i hated, it was very loud. i dont know why... i am flying A319s ORD-SJC and SJC-ORD in November,

-TWA902fly
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
 
flyboy_se
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 5:31 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:12 am

i have flown on both B737 and A320 family.
My personal opinion is that Airbus is better.
i ve flown on both A320 and A321 with Swissair.
And i had my best flights ever.The seats were comfortable,The food was grea nd FA were friendly.
now that depends of the airline , of course.
But the cabin of Airbus looks more spacy and more lighty.
i agrre that it shakes a bit on the takeoff and landing.
But it is not more worse than on any other aircraft.
i peronally like when it shakes a bit..lol

I think that the reason of shaking is that Airbus A320 familly are much higher than Boeing 737.Boeing 737 is made to stand hard landings , and its almost on the ground.Airbus A320 on other hand, you can almost walk under it not having to duck.

Peronally i think A is better.
But i had some great flights also on 737.
So stop arguing what ac is better.
I mean , we all have different taste whan it comes to planes.If you like a prticular plane and you think that it is best in the world it doesnt have to mean that everybody has to think so.
it is your opinion and everybody is allowed to think what they want.

Airbus and Boeing and anu other ac manufacturer are equally good.
It s just people that say This is better , that is better and so on.

I mean , they can all fly , dont they  

thats all from me

Fkyboy_se
Sweden
I prefer to be crazy and happy rather than normal and bitter
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 11:25 am

I flew on a Delta 737-200 that creaked and groaned as it taxied to the runway. Being only about seven, it scared me. But AA's 727s had that solid as a rock feeling, while their MD-82s were much quieter; my comparison since that was all else I had flown on at the time.

How about we end this mindless debate about 737 vs A320 and simply acknowledge the best family of aircraft flying today, the MD-80/MD-90/717.  
 
fjnovak1
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2000 2:23 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 12:08 pm

I have flown countless segments with Airbus aircraft. As proof, here are the ten flights I have taken in the past year (since last summer)

Northwest DTW-SFO A320
Northwest SFO-DTW B757
Northwest DTW-PBI DC9-40
Northwest PBI-DTW A319
US Airways DTW-PHL B737-200
US Airways PHL-BOS B737-300
US Airways BOS-PIT A320
US Airways PIT-DTW B737-200
Northwest DTW-BWI DC9-30
Northwest BWI-DTW A320

40% on Airbus aircraft, 40% on Boeing aircraft. Though I enjoy the 757, I prefer the A320/A319 for all of those flight segments I listed. It makes for a great short flight, and the planes are always so nice inside. I know seven inches isn't much difference between the 737s and the A320s, but lets say they split it up this way; 1 inch extra for each seat and an extra inch for the aisle, although its probably closer to 3/4 inch per seat and 3 inches extra for the aisle. Either wqay, its more space in your seat and better manueverability in the aisle..for example, trying to get around the drink cart to go to the lavatory...maybe it is easier on a 319 than a 737. Out of all the planes listed above, the only one I don't like is the 737-200...

But I do enjoy the lawnmower sounds of the A320....however, the flight to PBI, first class in a DC9-40 was the quietest ride I'd ever been on...I love the new interior on NWAs 9s....its almost identical to Airtran's 717 style.
Go Blue!!
 
TWA902fly
Posts: 2869
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 1999 5:47 am

To FLyboy_se

Tue Sep 19, 2000 12:14 pm

i flew in a 737-800. That thing IS WAY spacier than any of the A320 series. it looked so wide! although i knew it was 3-3, it seemed as wide as a 767!

-TWA902fly

I do prefer the 738 over A320, but not the rest of the 737 series (old generation) (never tried -600, -700 or -900)
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
 
AerLingus
Posts: 2280
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2000 9:22 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 12:49 pm

For many, many months on this forum, perhaps longer than I have been here, members have started these glaring and distasteful threads.

It is good to see that we are starting to tone down the irate posts at each other.


Get your patchouli stink outta my store!
 
ILUV767
Posts: 3035
Joined: Mon May 29, 2000 2:21 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 2:14 pm

I have flown on both the A320, and the 737. I have only flown on UAL, so my comparisons do not include the 737NG.

The A320 is great for longer trips. The video screens, and the wider cabin helps a lot. I believe that the seats are a little wider, but i'm not sure.

I do personaly like teh 737 better. It seems to be balanced, while the A319, looks like its too high up off of the ground, for its size.

I have always been comfortable on both. I think that the pilot having more control over the plane (737) is better, than having the computer, judging your moves.

i don't mind either plane... They are equaly good.

My 2 cents
 
Guest

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 4:41 pm


There are an awful lot of childish and pointless arguments in this thread...

Cramped interior, hard seat, interior worn out....Complain about the airline you flew with, not who manufactured it...The manufacturer is not responsible of all the facts you mention...

I flew AC Airbuses and it was my best experience : small TV every 4-5 rows, lots of legrooms, very very clean aircraft....So my conclusion should be that Airbus produces the cleanest and most modern aircrafts ??? Rubbish...On the other hands, like many shuttles worldwide, AF shuttles can be less than perfect as far as clean and spacious interior is concerned..Now what shall I conclude about the aircraft ???

Try to elaborate a little bit better when you want a thread to be fruitful....

E.
 
IndianGuy
Posts: 3126
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 3:14 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 4:58 pm

The A320 is noisy? PUHLEEZE!



 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 7:59 pm

Most of the world's civil aviation has to do with either Boeing or Airbus, and both of these are constantly at war......there is nothing wrong with Boeing V Airbus wars, if the manufacturers are at it, then it's of interest to everybody else......the problem here is that opinions/arguments are never substantiated.....I showed this forum to an ex-Boeing employee who was with them for three and a half years, and is now working in Toulouse......he was laughing at how misguided some of the information posted here was......for both manufacturers..........Boeing V Airbus arguments are going to go on for ever, all I'm saying is make them some way credible by backing up the information........screaming opinions back and forth gets boring, especially when there is probably a single fact contained on one website or the other that will finish the argument.....

 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:26 pm

Heeh what were you expecting? I think you've been expecting too much.
 
mlsrar
Posts: 1384
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 7:41 am

RE: A320...not So Great!

Tue Sep 19, 2000 9:46 pm

Some tactless points read:

"The flip-down screens in AIrbus are better than aisle monitors in Boeing,"

The retractable LCDs are options on both the 757 and 737NG series.

"The 737 is designed to land softer since its lower to the ground, you can walk under an A320 so it lands harder,"

How could I forget, Airbus, an aviation consortium with engineers from across Europe designed their first narrow-body aircraft to land 'hard'. Though a 757 rides higher, it can land soft, no?

"The cabin width is what makes it better on an A320,"

Width and breadth (beam) are two entirely different measurements. First of all, both manufactureres are notorious for publishing exterior widths until recently, Boeing publishes interior width, AI still displays skin-to-skin measurements. Second, where an Airbus achieves maximum beam, it is at a point where it may not matter to people over 6' tall who can't afford to fly first--knees. It's not as if the extra inches are placed above your navel. Regardless of the carrier, AW, US, NW, UA, the A320s are narrower where I enjoy the window seats.

"It's just my opinion, don't attack me,"

It is the right of anyone in this forum to return fire--eve if it is just your opinion. He/she may choose to fraction your words to determine fact from fiction. The catharsis many reach after an argument has evolved of "don't attack," often pleas too late.

I mean, for the right price I’ll fight a lion. - Mike Tyson

Who is online