Not going to call you a troll but I will call you a hypocrite as you tell NGX to sign their name and well yours is nowhere to be found! Also NGX you did feed him with your AC question witch was meant to be a smart ___ question witch any troll will take that bait. Just don't feed the trolls and we should all be fine.

LoL. I hadnt realised by sig was gone which contained my name. Yeah that would of came across as hypocrite. There really needs to be a name for people who feed trolls BTW. TROLL FEEDER!!! (not really effecftive is it)

Most likely fly-by-wire spoilers and stuff like that, but not entierly fly-by-wire. it will be slightly taller than previous 737s, because of the larger fan width on the CFM LEAP-X. But I still don't like those squished nacelles (they look cool, but its not the greatets thing). The 757 was a better design, Boeing got cheap. The A320's inherent design is better (like the 757's) because it sits higher, allowing for normal nacelles. Yet, teh A320 is a very rough ride, equal to the 737-200 (which was very rough). The 737NG is much smoother than the A320-series, and taxxis quiet, but nothing beats the 757.

But nothing beats the 757.

Unless of course your behind one, in which case it leaves the most ridiculous wake turbulance known to man in its wake...

I think it is quite simple. Airbus estimated to aquire roughly 200 orders for the A320 NEO after they presented it to the industry after one year and were astonished when they had about 1100 Neos sold in a comparably short period of time. Boeing favorized a complete redesign of their narrow bodies for a long time but had to react to the A320 Neos being so successful. It is obvious that todays technology does not justify a complete redesign like the 787 or A350 in the developers eyes considering the comparably low development costs of the reengined models.Although the A320 family sold faster than the 737s in the last 10 years Boeing was much more successful with the 777 (in comparison to the A330/340 family) that offers a significantly higher profit margin than a narrow body. But for the narrow bodies right now the A320 family is the measure of all things.

Yet another stupid and ignorant post from the "our toys are better" brigade, made worse by the fact it was repeated by a supposed flight sim enthusiast; "The xxx is one of the most useful aircraft in the world..."? You didn't say that about a Boeing. What are you going to wish for next? That all Embraer's crash and burn and that all CRJ's fall from the sky's? Don't you realise how stupid you sound when you wish ill on any aircraft type?

It's an Airplane mate... Relax.

I have no idea why, but I like Air New Zealand a lot, probably my favorite foreign airline, followed by Korean Air (don't ask why....). Its too bad they're buying Airbuses, and getting rid of their 747s. When they got their first Airbus, they suddenly lost their Skytrax 5-star rating. That should happen to all that get Airbus...hehehehe

Carlson (pj747) Why don't you go back to Captain Sim Forums and plague them for awhile with your Boeing bias. Michael Cubine

Move along, nothing to see here. Clearly not as special as the A320 NEO

Move along, nothing to see here. Clearly not as special as the A320 NEO

This is just awkward.Really awkward.

Unless of course your behind one, in which case it leaves the most ridiculous wake turbulance known to man in its wake...

Its kinda strage isn't it?? Except they don't give as good spacing behind big stuff like 777s in Europe as they do in the U.S, or maybe its Charles de Gualle airport, you know the french...

Its kinda strage isn't it?? Except they don't give as good spacing behind big stuff like 777s in Europe as they do in the U.S, or maybe its Charles de Gualle airport, you know the french...

Ha, oh God, how they can go on strike and complain that much I'll never know, and the giving preferance to their own Air France jets. Almost as bad as Spain for uncooperative ATC, and then there's JFK, [which I try to avoid like the plague], who act as if they get paid by the amount of words they can fit into the space of 5 seconds, Absolute nightmare they are, they do a good job but manage to give every pilot in their frequency a headache while they're at it... And back to the original post, AFAIK, the 777 needs less wake turbulance separation than the 757 does, but I'm not an ATCO, so don't hold me on that one....

Ha, oh God, how they can go on strike and complain that much I'll never know, and the giving preferance to their own Air France jets. Almost as bad as Spain for uncooperative ATC, and then there's JFK, [which I try to avoid like the plague], who act as if they get paid by the amount of words they can fit into the space of 5 seconds, Absolute nightmare they are, they do a good job but manage to give every pilot in their frequency a headache while they're at it... And back to the original post, AFAIK, the 777 needs less wake turbulance separation than the 757 does, but I'm not an ATCO, so don't hold me on that one....

The 757-300 is quite a plane too! Gosh, going international from JFk is horrible; since I fly on Delta, I have to put up with the world's worst terminal, the Pan Am Worldport...good thing Tom Hanks' character wasn't stuck there! nobody could design a more conviluded terminal than the Pan Am Worldport, even if they tried. Germany's teh best for Americans, they do all their ATC in English, regardless of the carrier's nationality. France is a bunch of inspector Clouseau's "You stu-pid American (nasal voice), you are in Fraance, you should be e-speaking (more nasal) french (even more nasal)!" [no offense to our French friends here]. I'm glad those there aren't many Scottish controllers!!

The 757-300 is quite a plane too! Gosh, going international from JFk is horrible; since I fly on Delta, I have to put up with the world's worst terminal, the Pan Am Worldport...good thing Tom Hanks' character wasn't stuck there! nobody could design a more conviluded terminal than the Pan Am Worldport, even if they tried. Germany's teh best for Americans, they do all their ATC in English, regardless of the carrier's nationality. France is a bunch of inspector Clouseau's "You stu-pid American (nasal voice), you are in Fraance, you should be e-speaking (more nasal) french (even more nasal)!" [no offense to our French friends here]. I'm glad those there aren't many Scottish controllers!!

Never heard of Shanwick, we have to get our oceanic from Scottish controllers before heading out over the ocean, no problem there though personally....

Go up to Aberdeen Scotland. My uncle flew choppers out to the rigs in the North Sea for bristow helicopters. Said ATC was a complete nightmare. Couldnt understand a single word they were saying.All okay for the UK & Irish nationals who understand each other. Being American...I'd be screwed big time

Well as an Irishman (since you fly for Aer Lingus, I'm guessing so) you'd have no problem, but as an American from California (we by the way speak teh purest form of English here, Californians on average have to dialect of english whatsoever, and we speak it as it is meant to be spoken. If it says so in the Merriam-Webster's dictionary, thats our pronuncation) I have soem trouble deciphering Scottish rants...

Ara sure here now, have yee never heard JFK atc??? Not only do they have a ridiculously strong accents, but they speak as fast as humanly possible...