 |
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:37 PM
|
|
|
|
9,716 posts, read 2,639,787 times
Reputation: 3893
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
Regarding those technical issues, they really should be more thorough there. It's not a TV set we're talking about, there are hundreds of lives at stake on every flight.
|
Meh. Both Boeing and Airbus make very safe planes. Crew training and maintenance have a much bigger influence on the safety of any given flight, and those are of course dependent on the airline, not the aircraft manufacturer.
Anyway, Airbus and Boeing tend to leap-frog each other in orders - Boeing doesn't really have anything to match the A320neo. Next year, Airbus is likely to lose orders to the 787.
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:38 PM
|
|
|
|
5,511 posts, read 2,033,508 times
Reputation: 2662
|
|
|
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:48 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Portugal
13,308 posts, read 5,388,938 times
Reputation: 4756
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Meh. Both Boeing and Airbus make very safe planes. Crew training and maintenance have a much bigger influence on the safety of any given flight, and those are of course dependent on the airline, not the aircraft manufacturer.
|
How safe is VERY safe?  I think they have to be absolutely safe.
The problem is one can't really test planes like cars or other relatively small, cheap stuff (crash tests for jumbos  ). Many of the stress tests are done using simulations.
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:50 PM
|
|
Status:
"What Would Miles Do?"
(set 26 days ago)
|
|
28,193 posts, read 11,871,987 times
Reputation: 10810
|
|
|
Not to throw flames on the fire, but according to the linked story, the main difference was in the number of Airbus A320s vs Boeings much older 737 and the for the buyer the decision came down to fuel efficiency (sound vaguely familiar to problems with the sale of American autos). Also after a casual check of the safety records for both planes while the Airbus has had twice the number of accidents and incidents, I can only detect one accident that could be blamed on the aircraft and not the crew. If others have better information, I will certainly deferred to that.
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:52 PM
|
|
|
|
565 posts, read 170,353 times
Reputation: 162
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
How safe is VERY safe?  I think they have to be absolutely safe.
.
|
Neuling, on which planet do you live.
Ever been on a French "autoroute" anything is safe in comparison.
|
|

06-24-2011, 01:57 PM
|
|
|
|
18,006 posts, read 6,170,254 times
Reputation: 6188
|
|
|
The Boeing 787 is already beating Airbus. The A320neo is Airbus's response to the failed A350 that didn't pass wingload testing. The failed A350 nearly put the company in a flat spin of which it almost didn't recover. Without subsidies, Airbus would be a thing of the past. The Boeing 787 is the front runner by far. Airbus had a good order this year.....it won't be anywhere near Boeing's success after the launch of the 787 and they know it.
|
|

06-24-2011, 02:00 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Portugal
13,308 posts, read 5,388,938 times
Reputation: 4756
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrjam
Neuling, on which planet do you live.
Ever been on a French "autoroute" anything is safe in comparison.
|
Sure. Still, I think hardware or software failures or errors are absolutely unacceptable with planes.
I read that spare parts are a major source of problems, it is a lucrative business, which attracts the wrong kind of people.
|
|

06-24-2011, 02:03 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Portugal
13,308 posts, read 5,388,938 times
Reputation: 4756
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
The Boeing 787 is already beating Airbus. The A320neo is Airbus's response to the failed A350 that didn't pass wingload testing. The failed A350 nearly put the company in a flat spin of which it almost didn't recover. Without subsidies, Airbus would be a thing of the past. The Boeing 787 is the front runner by far. Airbus had a good order this year.....it won't be anywhere near Boeing's success after the launch of the 787 and they know it.
|
One of Airbus' problem is the company structure. It is a multinational company where German, French, and other interests collide. The atmosphere is said to be very bad.
In the military branch I assume Airbus simply lacks the experience Boeing has thanks to the MIC in the US.
|
|

06-24-2011, 02:21 PM
|
|
|
|
565 posts, read 170,353 times
Reputation: 162
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
Sure. Still, I think hardware or software failures or errors are absolutely unacceptable with planes.
I read that spare parts are a major source of problems, it is a lucrative business, which attracts the wrong kind of people.
|
I never felt safer than in one of those big airliners.
At that time there is nothing I can personally do wrong that might alter my destiny. Let me just say, that feels so good.
|
|

06-24-2011, 02:22 PM
|
|
Status:
"I'm too big to fail"
(set 25 days ago)
|
|
Location: Raleigh, NC
18,572 posts, read 5,993,461 times
Reputation: 3338
|
|
|
I want to personally thank the folks of Washington for helping to make this possible.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Similar Threads
-
Boeing suggests temporary 787 fix., Aviation, 34 replies
-
Boeing 777 - why so well liked?, Aviation, 40 replies
-
FAA Grounds the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, Aviation, 4 replies
-
Boeing 737 MAX, Aviation, 6 replies
-
Boeing vs. Airbus planes, a poll, Aviation, 15 replies
-
Boeing Reveals 787 Demonstration on 7/8/07, Aviation, 2 replies
|