captain420

737,747,777 which is the easiest to fly?

Recommended Posts

Out of these 3, which one would you say is the easiest to fly (more automated), mostly handled by the computer and less interaction and hand flying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

777

That's what I'd say. 2 engines is easier than 4 (747). 

737 is much less automated than the 777.

So, 777 < 747 < 737.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Automation does not equal ease.

2. More automation does not mean that you will hand fly less.

Always remember that automation is a tool to be used to assist the pilot in his duties, not replace him :D

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, captain420 said:

Out of these 3, which one would you say is the easiest to fly (more automated), mostly handled by the computer and less interaction and hand flying?

I'm not a real world 737,777,747 pilot so I will only say my experience as far as PMDG aircrafts. Been logging lots of hours into these 3 and I hand fly a lot both take off to climb, approach to landing. The 777 is more automated than the other 2 and also not as joy to hand fly as the others. Eventhough 777 has more automation, I find it quite hard to hand fly actually. The 737 gives me the most joy and still one of my favorite aircraft.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, captain420 said:

Out of these 3, which one would you say is the easiest to fly (more automated), mostly handled by the computer and less interaction and hand flying?

 

That definitely goes to the triple 7 (777) - it is very easy to fly compared to the 737, however, the 747 isn't too far behind, it is a bit older, lacks FBW and a little bit of the 777's automation.  However, if you are looking for super automated, look at the Airbii (I am unsure of their plural.) series from the a320 and up or the MD 11 or a 717...  

However, I want you to remember that the 747 is very easy to fly and after a few flights (and using the tutorial from PMDG) the 737 becomes very easy and it is my preferred aircraft to fly out of the three Boeing's that PMDG currently sells.  Essentially, while automation is nice and it can be enjoyable, going back and flying the less automated aircraft gives [me at least] more satisfaction than flying a 777 continuously. :biggrin: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, achutchison said:

1. Automation does not equal ease.

2. More automation does not mean that you will hand fly less.

Always remember that automation is a tool to be used to assist the pilot in his duties, not replace him :D

 

I believe that a few other aerospace manufacturers are trying to reduce the pilot's workload to minimal amounts and eventually remove them from the pointy end of the plane. :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the 737 and 777 only. Prefer flying the NGX as there is some work involved. If I feel lazy then it's the 777 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one you're most familiar with will be the easiest to fly, automation or otherwise...

Ian Webber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bt the way it goes without saying that you need fs2crew if you want an easier experience. And besides none of those aircraft are meant to be solo pilot. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I do not understand the point of the question... I am not sure what the threadstarter's aims are...

I think Ian Webber's reply hits the nail on the head...

A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aentwis said:

I have to admit that I do not understand the point of the question... I am not sure what the threadstarter's aims are...

I think Ian Webber's reply hits the nail on the head...

A

It's pretty clear if you read the title ☺

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Venturi said:

It's pretty clear if you read the title ☺

In defence of aentwis, if you read some of the OP's other earlier posts, he has had issues with these aircraft, IIRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, it would be the 737. I dont fly the 747 that often and i fly the 777 even less. There is no general answer to your question in this case i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all of those airliners, you can simply go to the mode control panel for the autopilot, hit level change, key in an altitude to stop it at that desired altitude, pop in a heading, engage the autopilot and you're in business, so they're all about as easy as one another to operate automatically in that sense, moreover, pretty much every Boeing FMC is similar in functionality, so there is little to choose on which is easiest for VNAV and LNAV flying either, providing you've keyed in the necessary data. But, I'd say the 737 is the easiest in terms of getting to grips with, since it has a much simpler cockpit with less stuff going on, it being the first airliner having been designed to be flown by two, rather than three crew, and having been designed to be flown from very basic airports too. The less 'star wars' a cockpit is, the easier it will be to figure out.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, Alan, spot-on. Could not have been stated better. Must be all that training teaching you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as the pf or pnf ?

.... help from mce etc can change your perspective of what is "plausible" to fly in a "simulator". as  does a lot of help from hardware & fsuipc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 747 is easier to hand fly compared to the 777...

For example: If you are going to land by hand with the 777-300ER (follow ILS glidescope)... I can't exactly describe why but for me it's easier to follow the ILS glidescope with the 747-400 compared to the 777-300ER...

Do you know the Asiana Flight 214 crash at SFO?  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214)

I had similar situations with the 777-300ER as flight Asiana 214.  The aircraft is really hard to hand fly.  But I never had a situation like this with the 747-400... For me it's much easier to land the 747 by hand.

For example: If you need to increase the altitude (because your altitude is too low) just a few seconds before landing the 777 can crash... This doesn't happen with the 747-400...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Venturi said:

It's pretty clear if you read the title ☺

Unfortunately not. Three totally different aircraft with different concepts, each with its own challenges. The poster equates ease of control with the degree of automation. The easiest is going to be the one you know the best, completely regardless of any automation, as Ian so wisely put it. But I still don't understand what the point of the question is in the context here. Is the original poster looking for an aircraft to purchase that requires the least input from his/her point of view? Otherwise there is little to offer as a useful answer.

A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Chris97 said:

I think the 747 is easier to hand fly compared to the 777...

For example: If you are going to land by hand with the 777-300ER (follow ILS glidescope)... I can't exactly describe why but for me it's easier to follow the ILS glidescope with the 747-400 compared to the 777-300ER...

Do you know the Asiana Flight 214 crash at SFO?  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214)

I had similar situations with the 777-300ER as flight Asiana 214.  The aircraft is really hard to hand fly.  But I never had a situation like this with the 747-400... For me it's much easier to land the 747 by hand.

For example: If you need to increase the altitude (because your altitude is too low) just a few seconds before landing the 777 can crash... This doesn't happen with the 747-400...

 

I agree that the 777 is harder to fly.  However, when you do it daily for a little while, it becomes easy to fly any FBW aircraft.  I'll explain what I mean:

I recently went into Qantas' B747-400 and A380 sims and it was an incredible experience, there are, however, a few major differences between flying direct control (non-FBW) and FBW aircraft.  One of the first differences (coming from a guy who spends 90% of his sim time in non-FBW aircraft) about flying FBW aircraft is that every control input and movement is dampened and artificially replicated in the flight controls in a uniquely un-human manner that I find (again, remembering that I am not used to FBW aircraft) horrible and unpleasant to fly due to my input on the sidestick not being directly proportional to deflection of control surfaces.  That is entirely due to my lack of experience flying FBW aircraft and the "over correcting for my over correcting" tendencies that all non-FBW pilots exhibit.  (Essentially, when we move our yokes, we are constantly making small adjustments to keep the aircraft in a lateral and horizontal position that we want to keep.). In the 747, I was stuck in a never ending cycle of manipulating the (surprisingly heavy) yoke and trim.  But I found this to be really fun and enjoyable, I had a lot to do. However, when I took the A380 for a spin, the instructor that was continuously telling me to relax and stop trying to correct for non-existent errors of the plane drifting from the desired position that is shown in a non-FBW aircraft.  This actually can become incredibly dangerous and is called pilot induced oscillation, and can lead to you getting the aircraft into a situation that you never intended to get into.  It was very hard to remove these tendencies that I had become so used to while flying non-FBW aircraft.  However, once you get used to it, it becomes very easy to fly and is quite nice but I found that it became boring quickly and I could not shake off that feeling of there being a wall between me and the aircraft but if I continued using FBW, I'm sure that would go away.  I know this will anger a lot of Airbus fans but flying an Airbus really gave me a feeling of being in a video game where  I do not have full control.  That applies to the 777 (and 787) to a large extent as well though.  

However, I am much more accustomed to non-FBW aircraft and I continue to make corrections for my corrections and continuously trimming to get the bird to just stay where it is for a few short seconds before I need to make another adjustment.  I personally prefer this hectic and never ending cycle of trimming and correcting myself and hope to make that into a career for myself in a very short amount of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zach, another rivetting post, with so much insight. Great read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, aentwis said:

Unfortunately not. Three totally different aircraft with different concepts, each with its own challenges. The poster equates ease of control with the degree of automation. The easiest is going to be the one you know the best, completely regardless of any automation, as Ian so wisely put it. But I still don't understand what the point of the question is in the context here. Is the original poster looking for an aircraft to purchase that requires the least input from his/her point of view? Otherwise there is little to offer as a useful answer.

A

Since it's a question then we can only assume he doesn't know the answer in which case at the very least it's not going to be the NGX. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, captain420 said:

Out of these 3, which one would you say is the easiest to fly (more automated), mostly handled by the computer and less interaction and hand flying?

captain420

I will speak from my experience from a PMDG prospective since I am not a real world pilot either. I have flow many of the NGX using FSX. Now that I have move to Xplane, I flowed the IXEG 737 quite often as well as being on an actual 737 when traveling.

What I find is that 737 are far more interesting to fly due to the smallness of the aircraft that gives you a sense for flight motion just like on the real thing. I like to the way it react to turbulent s more so than the larger aircraft, not that the larger one's don't, it just the sensation is more in the 737's. (you can include the airbus A318 and A319 but that is outside the scope of this topic)

I also think like some one else said that the automation is a tool for the pilot and not a replacement. For me it really gets you closer to the experience for flying the aircraft when you go thru the motion of setting up, following the procedure and using different types of approached for landing.  

Also I find that flying a 737 gives me more of a challenges due it being able to fly to smaller airports and runways under certain adverse weather condition both take off and landing.

The larger aircraft can be a challenge as well however, due to their size, it seem the movements is slower,and less spontaneous of motion, vibration than the smaller jets. I have larger jets was well but I usually take off and land from larger airports. Although you can fly them and challenge yourself by going to smaller runways but it gets away from your main topic that it would not be easy.

But for long flights the larger jets like the 777 would I would prefer. 

cheers

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boeing777300 said:

flying an Airbus really gave me a feeling of being in a video game

That is actually a very deliberate deliberate design choice made by EADS; they know that most new pilots coming through are from the video game generation, so it makes sense to go that way in terms of operation and haptics, in that young men and women used to computers are comfotable with the idea of 'point and click', so point and go that way makes sense in terms of flying. This is in much the same way as how the FMC's CDU was deliberately designed to look a lot like a pocket calculator, so it would be familiar to people when it first started showing up, since pocket calculators had also started to show up and that similar look helped to convey the importance of what the CDU does.

Naturally that is anathema to us old farts who are 'stick and rudder' types, but it is nevertheless the way things are going. Of course as we've seen, when things go wrong and the fancy systems pack up, the need to be able to go all stick and rudder arises, which is why, fortunately, airlines are now finally realising those skills should be maintained in addition to being able to press the buttons. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now