Can you or someone else explain to me what qualifies you to make such comments about an airplane's systems?

I'm also looking for more specificity as to why the original poster thinks so highly of the Airbus X in comparison to the PMDG B737. There was a little ambiguity across several threads I read regarding the NAV radios of the B737: Must one manually tune the NAV radios for each waypoint in the PMDG B737, unlike in the B747?

 

By the way, congratulations on your 700th post.

I have both the 737NGX and the Airbus Extended. I love them both. While I agree, systems wise, the Airbus can't compete with the NGX in terms of complexity. But in terms of enjoyment, both have a permanent place in my hangar. I love them both, it's hard to pick one over the other as they both have much to offer the user on many different levels.

I'm also looking for more specificity as to why the original poster thinks so highly of the Airbus X in comparison to the PMDG B737. There was a little ambiguity across several threads I read regarding the NAV radios of the B737: Must one manually tune the NAV radios for each waypoint in the PMDG B737, unlike in the B747?

I don't own the PMDG 747, however I do own both the MD-11 and 737NGX. While flying the NGX, the systems will automatically sequence to the next way-point or VOR, just like in the real thing.

 

Also, just to input my $0.02, I would rather fly a Boeing over an Airbus simply for the fact that if it comes down to it, I KNOW I can have sole control of the aircraft if need be. Honestly, I would fly just about anything though. A mentor of mine flew an F-16 for about 10 years, and it has a similar system where everything is ran through the computer. His pitot tubes froze upon cimbout and the computer wouldn't let him pitch over. He stalled out at 30,000ft. Still unable to maneuver the plane due to the computer, he was forced to eject.

 

I sure hope Aerosoft comes out with their CRJ-700 soon.....

Oh great the old "You fly Boeings, Airbuses fly you".

 

I was waiting for that to come up.

While flying the NGX, the systems will automatically sequence to the next way-point or VOR, just like in the real thing.

So there is no manual action required that is equivalent to the automatic tuning that is depicted in the NAV RAD page of the B747 FMC?

 

Also, just to input my $0.02, I would rather fly a Boeing over an Airbus simply for the fact that if it comes down to it, I KNOW I can have sole control of the aircraft if need be. Honestly, I would fly just about anything though. A mentor of mine flew an F-16 for about 10 years, and it has a similar system where everything is ran through the computer. His pitot tubes froze upon cimbout and the computer wouldn't let him pitch over. He stalled out at 30,000ft. Still unable to maneuver the plane due to the computer, he was forced to eject.

This is a highly debated topic in commercial aviation. I personally support flight envelope protection, as it has done more good than harm. Only in extremely rare cases does this protection result in otherwise-preventable incidents, at least with modern Airbus aircraft. Also, it seems easier to over-correct without fly-by-wire adjustments. Have you seen the amount of over-correction in some of the videos of people flying Boeings with joysticks? But let's not turn this thread into one of those debates. . . .

 

Welcome to AVSIM.

So there is no manual action required that is equivalent to the automatic tuning that is represented in the NAV RAD page of the B747 FMC?

 

This is a highly debated topic in aviation. I generally support fly-by-wire, as it has done more good than harm, and only in extremely rare cases results in otherwise preventable incidents, at least with modern Airbus aircraft. But let's not turn this thread into one of those debates. . . .

 

Welcome to AVSIM.

Exactly. It will auto-tune for you.

 

And I support fly-by-wire also, but Boeing's way more-so than Airbus. I can see both sides. Both companies create some amazing aircraft either way.

 

Oh great the old "You fly Boeings, Airbuses fly you".

 

I was waiting for that to come up.

 

That's not what I'm saying, every airliner is extremely automated. I just feel more comfortable if I can control the end result if I see a bad situation about to occur that the computer can't see. I am a fan of any company that can let me fly.

"and the flight system are Excellent!"

 

To this date, Airbus Extended is certainly the best a/c I've seen, not only due to it's textures, but also in systems

 

The way I read it he is comparing within the sim, what he thinks of each product, I haven't seen anything that says they are accurate to real life. (Although I can see there is a fine line!) While we are on the subject, I just read some of your posts over in the 737NGX forum, and it seems you are posting what a real world 737 should do. Of course if you are a 737 pilot, you would be completely qualified to do so, but if not, under your logic, what qualifies you to tell someone how a real aircraft will respond? Of the myriad of opinions on that forum I have read praising the accuracy of the NGX, most coming from average simmers, are you this critical on their opinions? Let's just make sure the "goose is as good as the gander".

And I support fly-by-wire also, but Boeing's way more-so than Airbus.

It's interesting how Boeing chooses only to implement partial fly-by-wire in the B747-8 and B787.

I purchased the Aerosoft Bus last night, and it is surprisingly very good!

Having said that,I will no doubt be picking up the FSL bird when it becomes available.

 

Regards.

It's interesting how Boeing chooses only to implement partial fly-by-wire in the B747-8 and B787.

 

It a philosophical difference. Boeing still believes the Pilot should have complete control over his aircraft, where Airbus believes the computer should have the final say if it calculates the pilot is putting the aircraft in a dangerous configuration.

Boeing still believes the Pilot should have complete control over his aircraft,

But the B777 possesses complete fly-by-wire controls, right?

But the B777 possesses complete fly-by-wire controls, right?

 

Not as far as the protection laws go. A 777 pilot can still fly the plane outside it's normal flight envelope, An Airbus can do the same, but they would have to disable the computer flight control system first.

Not as far as the protection laws go. A 777 pilot can still fly the plane outside it's normal flight envelope, An Airbus can do the same, but they would have to disable the computer flight control system first.

Actually, you have to disable the laws of the Boeing first to be able to maneuver the plane outside of the envelope. Same goes with the 787. I don't know that much about Airbus, but from what I understand you can't override the computer if it doesn't deem the maneuver safe. This reflects the philosophies of the companies.

Actually, you have to disable the laws of the Boeing first to be able to maneuver the plane outside of the envelope. Same goes with the 787. I don't know that much about Airbus, but from what I understand you can't override the computer if it doesn't deem the maneuver safe. This reflects the philosophies of the companies.

 

You do that though by applying extra force on the stick, where as the Airbus requires you to throw switches on the overhead, and does not completely override the system.

 

"The Airbus A320 was the first commercial aircraft to incorporate full flight-envelope protection into its flight-control software. This was instigated by former Airbus senior vice president for engineering Bernard Ziegler. In the Airbus, the flight envelope protection cannot be overridden completely, although the crew can fly beyond flight envelope limits by selecting an alternate "control law".Boeing in the Boeing 777 has taken a different approach by allowing the crew to override flight envelope limits using excessive force on the flight controls."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_control_modes_%28electronic%29#Alternate_law

You do that though by applying extra force on the stick, where as the Airbus requires you to throw switches on the overhead..

 

The Airbus A320 was the first commercial aircraft to incorporate full flight-envelope protection into its flight-control software. This was instigated by former Airbus senior vice president for engineering Bernard Ziegler. In the Airbus, the flight envelope protection cannot be overridden completely, although the crew can fly beyond flight envelope limits by selecting an alternate "control law".^[4][7][8][9] Boeing in the Boeing 777 has taken a different approach by allowing the crew to override flight envelope limits using excessive force on the flight controls.^[4][10]

 

Ah, I didn't know that. In the 787 I believe that you need to throw some switches, or at least that's what I took from the "Legends of Flight" movie.