Aviation Discussion

[fowler9]

Nice! A340 is very nice to fly on. Need to try the 787 and A350, but they don't look so cool.

Agree with that again. Love the wing on he 787 and the A350. Whichever engine used on the 777 they are beasts. Also like 757's, rocket ships, ha ha. The 747 is, as you said, iconic, made up to have flown on 2, one of which was VH-OEB from Hong Kong to Melbourne, at the time the one in the Melbourne Grand Prix colour scheme.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I guess I would have to say I don't have a favourite between Airbus and Boeing in general, I do love the A340 though. I was very very excited to see we were flying on an LAN one as part of our itinerary.

 

[Bald Rick]

Bit surprised by the above. I've flown both A330 and A340, transatlantic, didn't rate them. Whereas I think the Dreamliner and A350 both look fantastic.

There was another visit of an A350 to Heathrow in service in Monday.

 

[NathanPrior]

Going on two 767-300 in a few weeks. In my experience Airbus is a lot less noisy than Boeing, but they just feel slightly less stable.

Also get the enjoy two A320's, an A319, two A330's and a 737-800 later in the year.

I'd never get on a Dash, they just look odd.

 

[pompeyfan]

It also massively depends on the operator and pilot though, within 2 weeks I flew BOH-PMI return, 1 was on a FR 737 and the other was a TOM 737. I believe both are 738s and yet the difference internally is light years. Ryanair was comfortable enough (although I'm only short) but the attitude was get it up as quick as possible and down as quick as possible.

The Thomson interior is very posh, very clean looking too. I should add that they were both of the same age (built 2014). Registration of Thomson was G-TAWS. Didn't get the FR one.

 

[me123]

I somehow feel more comfortable on an Airbus, but that's probably because I'm more used to flying Airbuses (58% on my flights since 2011 have been on Airbuses vs just 16% on Boeings). Of course, it's not really anything to do with the construction or safety of the aircraft, it's just familiarity on my part. I wouldn't hesitate to fly on a plane made by either manufacturer.

Perceptions can of course be altered by quite a lot of things. BA passengers who travel primarily from Glasgow to London may see Airbuses (a modern A320 fleet) as quiet and modern aircraft, whereas Boeings (an ageing 767 fleet) could be perceived as older and noisier. Of course, that only relates to those particular aircraft.

I do very much like the A330 though - the 2-4-2 configuration of seats is much more comfortable in economy than having 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 (as many larger Boeing and Airbus aircraft do).

 

[WestCoast]

Most flyers really don't care what manufacturer they fly on, it's all about price, timings and service.

Embraer E-jets are the nicest short-haul aircraft I find, preferable to any 737 or A320. Why? Quicker boarding/alighting as fewer passengers (70-120 seats vs 150-189), no middle seats, larger windows, low noise level and stable ride.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd never get on a Dash, they just look odd.

Great economics for routes with less passengers and a very sporty ride. Flown the Q400 about 20 times now. The approach to London City over the Shard and Canary Wharf was a great experience, recommended.

 

[me123]

Embraer E-jets are the nicest short-haul aircraft I find, preferable to any 737 or A320. Why? Quicker boarding/alighting as fewer passengers (70-120 seats vs 150+), no middle seats, larger windows, low noise level and stable ride.

I love E-Jets. I've only been on them twice (flyBe), but I was extremely impressed with them. Quiet and comfortable flights. Such a shame they don't seem to be overly profitable for the airlines - I think flyBe are struggling with theirs?

 

[WestCoast]

I love E-Jets. I've only been on them twice (flyBe), but I was extremely impressed with them. Quiet and comfortable flights. Such a shame they don't seem to be overly profitable for the airlines - I think flyBe are struggling with theirs?

They're very popular around the world, especially in North America. Flybe seems to have a poor financing deal for them and can't get out of it. In any case, the E195 seems a bit too large for most of their routes and a Dash is more appropriate since they can make money with less passengers.

BA Cityflyer is the other big operator of E-jets in the UK.

 

[Techniquest]

I love the Embraer craft Flybe have (yet to use one with another airline) and the Dash 8s they have too. I've way more flights with Ryanair and therefore their 737-800s more than anything else mind, which suits me as I like Ryanair!

 

[Butts]

They're very popular around the world, especially in North America. Flybe seems to have a poor financing deal for them and can't get out of it. In any case, the E195 seems a bit too large for most of their routes and a Dash is more appropriate since they can make money with less passengers.

BA Cityflyer is the other big operator of E-jets in the UK.

E195's are definitely better than the 175 - more legroom.

Going back to the Dash which is more cramped is certainly a retrograde step.

 

[fowler9]

Bit surprised by the above. I've flown both A330 and A340, transatlantic, didn't rate them. Whereas I think the Dreamliner and A350 both look fantastic.

There was another visit of an A350 to Heathrow in service in Monday.

I think what it is is the nose to be honest. Think it looks a bit odd. I think the rest of the plane looks beautifull. I am probably being old fashioned. Either way the A340 is the best looking plane. no arguments. Ha ha. I jest. Just my opinion.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I somehow feel more comfortable on an Airbus, but that's probably because I'm more used to flying Airbuses (58% on my flights since 2011 have been on Airbuses vs just 16% on Boeings). Of course, it's not really anything to do with the construction or safety of the aircraft, it's just familiarity on my part. I wouldn't hesitate to fly on a plane made by either manufacturer.

Perceptions can of course be altered by quite a lot of things. BA passengers who travel primarily from Glasgow to London may see Airbuses (a modern A320 fleet) as quiet and modern aircraft, whereas Boeings (an ageing 767 fleet) could be perceived as older and noisier. Of course, that only relates to those particular aircraft.

I do very much like the A330 though - the 2-4-2 configuration of seats is much more comfortable in economy than having 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 (as many larger Boeing and Airbus aircraft do).

That is why I loved the LAN A340. The 2-4-2 seats. Me and the ex had the 2 outer seats nearest the back from Auckland to Santiago. It was amazing.Much as I loved the BA 777 from Buenos Aires to Heathrow it could not compare, especially since yet again the headrest was falling off like on the 744 Heathrow to Hong Kong.

 

[Harbornite]

787's have nice wings and are very stylish for airliners. A380's are less stylish but I do like the wings on them. I can see why some people prefer the 747 for aesthetics as it is slightly less bulbous from the front, although I do like the looks of both those aircraft. A340's look good as well, very nicely proportioned, as do the newer 737 models.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I love E-Jets. I've only been on them twice (flyBe), but I was extremely impressed with them. Quiet and comfortable flights. Such a shame they don't seem to be overly profitable for the airlines - I think flyBe are struggling with theirs?

I've only flown 4 times (two return journeys) one of which was on an E175. Not bad at all.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The joys of opinions! While the Boeing 747 is undoubtedly iconic my preferred models from a purely visual point of view would be the Lockheed Constellation, the Convair Coronado, the MD11 and the A330.

I'm not familiar with the Coronado, and I dislike the Constellation's looks, they just seem a bit odd- looking. I much prefer the Boeing 707 and the De Havilland Comet, which is one of the finest looking aircraft ever made in my opinion.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

My favourite plane that I have flown on is the Airbus A340 (Not been on an A330 but am guessing it is pretty damn similar). The 747 and 777 are up there though. Not too keen on the 787 to look at, not flown on one though. Don't really think the A380 is that pretty either.

I think the main difference is the number of engines, and the cockpit layouts as a result of this.

 

[ld0595]

I recently flew on an AA A330 and a BA 787 between Philadelphia. The AA service wasn't quite as polished as BA and the IFE screens were hopeless to use, the actual plane itself was pretty good. I love the 2-4-2 seat layout which I find to be roomier when seated by the window and legroom was fine for an economy seat.

The 787, while it was incredibly quiet, it was probably one of the most uncomfortable flights I've been on - so much so that I'm avoiding it on my next flight. The 3-3-3 layout is cramped, the legroom is minimal - especially when the person in front reclines their seat. The entertainment box for the IFE intrudes a lot into the foot space too which made for a very uncomfortable 7 hour flight. I also find the dimming windows to be somewhat gimmicky - they take a while to dim and then don't even block out 100% of the light unlike a regular blind.

I'm tempted to take a Lufthansa A340 or a 747-800 next time I go but sadly there is no early Lufthansa flight out of Edinburgh to make this happen!

 

[jopsuk]

I think the main difference is the number of engines, and the cockpit layouts as a result of this.

The A330 and A340 share the same fuselage cross section- in fact, they share it with the A300 and A310. The original models of the 330 and 340 even shared the same wings.
The major differences is length. The A330-200 is a little shorter than A340-200, both -300 variations are the same, and the A340 has the stretched -500 and -600 models (the classic long, slender version that most people probably picture when they imagine the A340). Only 747-8Is are longer

 

[WestCoast]

Does Gatwick have staffing problems? Had the strangest experience today flying with Ryanair from Gatwick South to Belfast Int. We were called to the gate and the plane duly arrived but there were no staff to process the boarding! Thankfully it was a domestic flight so the security staff that check photos were able to raise the alarm. After lots of phone calls and half an hour a very flustered looking manager turned up to board the flight. The captain didn't seem very impressed in his announcement

On the other hand, Ryanair's newest 737s have the very pleasant Sky Interior. Although the seats seemed a bit more towards the park bench level of comfort.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

E195's are definitely better than the 175 - more legroom.

Going back to the Dash which is more cramped is certainly a retrograde step.

Depends on the airline, Flybe seems to have a tighter configuration. BA Cityflyer's E190s have loads of legroom as they seat less than 100, something to do with their suitability for operating at London City Airport. Funnily enough Flybe's E-jets can't operate out of London City at all, the E175s and E195s are unable to land there. Not great considering they've moved their London hub to there!

 

[pompeyfan]

It's something to do with their E-jets not being configured or having the modification for the steep landing needed at LCY

 

[Harbornite]

The A330 and A340 share the same fuselage cross section- in fact, they share it with the A300 and A310. The original models of the 330 and 340 even shared the same wings.
The major differences is length. The A330-200 is a little shorter than A340-200, both -300 variations are the same, and the A340 has the stretched -500 and -600 models (the classic long, slender version that most people probably picture when they imagine the A340). Only 747-8Is are longer

Yes that's right, the interchangeability of the models helps with economies of scale.

 

[AndyW33]

Does Gatwick have staffing problems? Had the strangest experience today flying with Ryanair from Gatwick South to Belfast Int. We were called to the gate and the plane duly arrived but there were no staff to process the boarding! Thankfully it was a domestic flight so the security staff that check photos were able to raise the alarm. After lots of phone calls and half an hour a very flustered looking manager turned up to board the flight.

That's not Gatwick itself, that's whichever of the several ground handling contractors operating there Ryanair is currently tied up with. I'm sure Ryanair Accounts Department in Dublin will be making a deduction from the next invoice they receive from the handling agent, as the captain will certainly report the incident, if only to ensure they don't blame him for the late flight.

Depends on the airline, Flybe seems to have a tighter configuration. BA Cityflyer's E190s have loads of legroom as they seat less than 100, something to do with their suitability for operating at London City Airport. Funnily enough Flybe's E-jets can't operate out of London City at all, the E175s and E195s are unable to land there. Not great considering they've moved their London hub to there!

BA's sub-100 seat E190s are down to two factors. Firstly UK CAA regulations (and the rest of the EU, and the USA) would require an extra cabin crew member if the number of seats fitted exceeded 100 (one person up to 50 seats, two people up to 100 seats, three up to 150 seats and so on). Airlines have to calculate whether the extra revenue from the extra seats exceeds the extra costs.
Secondly their agreement with the pilots union is that aircraft with 100 seats or less can be operated by pilots on a lower pay and benefit scale working for the BA Cityflyer subsidiary. Planes with more seats have to be flown by "mainline" pilots on the standard payscales, so another extra cost. The big US airlines have even more restrictive union agreements.

Flybe are continuing to reduce the number of E-jets in their fleet in favour of second-hand Q400s on the grounds of reduced leasing costs, reduced operating costs, and matching plane size more closely to demand.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Meanwhile, word reaches me that the fallout from Shoreham continues:

Apparently the Red Arrows have been ordered not to perform at Farnborough next month; they may only carry out flypasts instead.

Not really worth going there now is it?

 

[Harbornite]

Meanwhile, word reaches me that the fallout from Shoreham continues:

Apparently the Red Arrows have been ordered not to perform at Farnborough next month; they may only carry out flypasts instead.

Not really worth going there now is it?

That's a shame. On another note, the gardening centre at Albrighton will be closed during this weekend's airshow at Cosford over safety-related concerns also linked to the Shoreham incident.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Meanwhile, word reaches me that the fallout from Shoreham continues:

Apparently the Red Arrows have been ordered not to perform at Farnborough next month; they may only carry out flypasts instead.

Not really worth going there now is it?

According to reports, the CAA banned them.

The real story is that the RAF have noticed that houses have encroached on what they would think of as safe areas. Besides, as Military aircraft, the CAA have no jurisdiction on the RAF

 

[Bald Rick]

That's a shame. On another note, the gardening centre at Albrighton will be closed during this weekend's airshow at Cosford over safety-related concerns also linked to the Shoreham incident.

What? Where am I going to get my roses that weekend??!!!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That's a shame. On another note, the gardening centre at Albrighton will be closed during this weekend's airshow at Cosford over safety-related concerns also linked to the Shoreham incident.

This is getting a bit knee-jerky isn't it? Are they next going to police the entire areas that are in line with the ends of the runways at air shows and make them exclusion zones?

What next? A forced evacuation of residents under the flight paths near an air show?

 

[Harbornite]

This is getting a bit knee-jerky isn't it? Are they next going to police the entire areas that are in line with the ends of the runways at air shows and make them exclusion zones?

What next? A forced evacuation of residents under the flight paths near an air show?

Rather, but better safe than sorry I guess.

 

[Butts]

Flew from Edinburgh to Cardiff today on an Embraer 195 so they still have a few knocking about.

Two Hours late leaving (was hoping for three for a nice payout ) and it had to have an Aircraft equivalent of a "jump start" hence the delay getting up from Cardiff.

Plenty of room compared to the 175's or dreaded "dash".

Always amazes me how quiet Cardiff Airport is.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Rather, but better safe than sorry I guess.

There is more chance of something pranging onto me where I live in Epsom under the London flightpaths than there is of something pranging onto me at an airshow. The issue is... where do we draw the line?

 

[WestCoast]

That's not Gatwick itself, that's whichever of the several ground handling contractors operating there Ryanair is currently tied up with. I'm sure Ryanair Accounts Department in Dublin will be making a deduction from the next invoice they receive from the handling agent, as the captain will certainly report the incident, if only to ensure they don't blame him for the late flight.

Yes, Gatwick itself supplied the security staff on time to do the photo matching for the domestic flights. It was the handling agent, Aviator in this case. I now believe they were stretched following problems with Gatwick's runway surface and subsequent disruptions which lasted for several days.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

BA's sub-100 seat E190s are down to two factors. Firstly UK CAA regulations (and the rest of the EU, and the USA) would require an extra cabin crew member if the number of seats fitted exceeded 100 (one person up to 50 seats, two people up to 100 seats, three up to 150 seats and so on). Airlines have to calculate whether the extra revenue from the extra seats exceeds the extra costs.

It is a while since I last looked at the regulations, but is it still the case that 19 seats and under means it is not mandatory to carry one in the back?

 

[me123]

Flew from Edinburgh to Cardiff today on an Embraer 195 so they still have a few knocking about.

Two Hours late leaving (was hoping for three for a nice payout ) and it had to have an Aircraft equivalent of a "jump start" hence the delay getting up from Cardiff.

Plenty of room compared to the 175's or dreaded "dash".

Always amazes me how quiet Cardiff Airport is.

Did that exact trip back in January. Cardiff is, quite bizarrely, a flyBe base with exclusively E-195 operation (they use Dash aircraft on the Belfast route though I think). I don't see why the E-jets aren't better utilised on routes like Scotland to Birmingham, which I would imagine are busier and would have a higher yield.

Cardiff Airport is really quiet, and the check-in and security staff just looked pleased to see someone! It really stood out how friendly everyone was - something you most certainly do not see at Edinburgh! In spite of it being dead, the flights that left when I was there (a KLM to Amsterdam and of course my own return flight to Edinburgh) appeared to have good loadings.

 

[Butts]

Did that exact trip back in January. Cardiff is, quite bizarrely, a flyBe base with exclusively E-195 operation (they use Dash aircraft on the Belfast route though I think). I don't see why the E-jets aren't better utilised on routes like Scotland to Birmingham, which I would imagine are busier and would have a higher yield.

Cardiff Airport is really quiet, and the check-in and security staff just looked pleased to see someone! It really stood out how friendly everyone was - something you most certainly do not see at Edinburgh! In spite of it being dead, the flights that left when I was there (a KLM to Amsterdam and of course my own return flight to Edinburgh) appeared to have good loadings.

I agree that Cardiff Airport is a pleasure to travel through, although if there ever were a lot of departures the space post-security could be a bit tight.

One feature you overlooked was the "Ardal Ysmygu" by the Bar in Departures which is a welcome additional feature for me

Travelling back this morning I had to check in at the desk as the machines were u/s. The kind lady gave me seat 15D on the 195 which is an exit row and I had the "two" to myself. The 175 does not have an exit row in the middle (being smaller) and I don't care what anyone says there seems to be more room in the ordinary 195 seats than 175's. As for the turboprops forget it

She hammered up to Edinburgh in 50mins, seriously is there any other way to travel between the two Capitals? £60 return a bargain !!

I noticed a couple of BA planes by the hangars a 747 and what looked like a 767 not sure what they were doing there. BA don't fly out of Cardiff as far as I am aware.