Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2017, 07:06 AM
 
Location: Cannes
2,452 posts, read 2,382,164 times
Reputation: 1620

Advertisements

Alright planeophiles, here are my take on these two amazing birds
Looks, yeah seems silly but i love the design and i've got say that the airbus looks way more aggressive and futuristic.
Space. Business class- Boeing felt a bit more comfortable
electronics- i enjoyed the gadgets on the airbus better. the screen seemed to have better quality and it easier "cleaner" to operate
bathroom: i always end up having to poop on the plan both felt comfortable, good space.
aisle- Airbus felt roomier to walk around
noise: lot of people claim that the airbus is quieter, i didn't notice. Both were extremely quiet
Landing/take off: Boeing hands down. Airbus felt like it was riding on sport "suspension"
Overall- If i could choose i would fly the a350 from now on
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2017, 10:28 AM
 
Location: North York
281 posts, read 327,632 times
Reputation: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by survivingearth View Post
Overall- If i could choose i would fly the a350 from now on

Of course you would.....


Boeing/Airbus have nothing to do with the comfort of the seats, width of the aisle and the passenger use electronics are all down to the airline.


As for the landing, that's down to the pilots...


As for the looks. I prefer the graceful features of the Dreamliner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2017, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Cannes
2,452 posts, read 2,382,164 times
Reputation: 1620
Quote:
Originally Posted by plmbpmp View Post
Of course you would.....


Boeing/Airbus have nothing to do with the comfort of the seats, width of the aisle and the passenger use electronics are all down to the airline.

To some extent

As for the landing, that's down to the pilots...
To some extent

As for the looks. I prefer the graceful features of the Dreamliner.
Personal opinion
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2017, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Beautiful Pennsylvania / Dull Germany
2,205 posts, read 3,333,676 times
Reputation: 2148
As it has been said, comfort and seats are usually defined by the Airline. The problem is that the 787 was designed for 8 abreast seats and most airlines cramp 9 abreast seats inside, that is why in economy class it is almost always very uncomfortable. Same for the 777 in 10-abreast.

In business class I think there are few differences between the 787 and the 350. The seats and the service again is made by the airline and the average customer does not note that many differences between the airframes. From the outside appearance, I prefer the A350 or at least the 787-9, while the 787-8 is a bit ugly imho. Colorschemes yet again make the biggest difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2017, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,421 posts, read 1,637,077 times
Reputation: 1751
Quote:
Originally Posted by survivingearth View Post
Personal opinion
Not a personal opinion. It's a fact.

Airbus/Boeing don't control the layout, choose what seats, or what entertainment is installed. That is 100% done by the purchasing airline. There are numerous cabin configurations, seat manufacturers and options that airlines can choose from. None of these seats are provided by Airbus/Boeing.

The airline determines how dense they want their cabin to be, what seat, what materials, whether there are overhead bins in Business/First or not etc.

It's the same as engines. Airbus/Boeing doesn't manufacturer or design jet engines. Rolls Royce, GE, Pratt&Whitney etc all do that. For some aircraft like the 787 or A380, the airline ordering makes the decision as to which engine and what thrust rating they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2017, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Cannes
2,452 posts, read 2,382,164 times
Reputation: 1620
Quote:
Originally Posted by caverunner17 View Post
Not a personal opinion. It's a fact.

Airbus/Boeing don't control the layout, choose what seats, or what entertainment is installed. That is 100% done by the purchasing airline. There are numerous cabin configurations, seat manufacturers and options that airlines can choose from. None of these seats are provided by Airbus/Boeing.

The airline determines how dense they want their cabin to be, what seat, what materials, whether there are overhead bins in Business/First or not etc.

It's the same as engines. Airbus/Boeing doesn't manufacturer or design jet engines. Rolls Royce, GE, Pratt&Whitney etc all do that. For some aircraft like the 787 or A380, the airline ordering makes the decision as to which engine and what thrust rating they want.
I meant this "As for the looks. I prefer the graceful features of the Dreamliner." was a personal opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2017, 07:06 PM
 
557 posts, read 607,029 times
Reputation: 689
Don't ever poop on an airplane
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2017, 11:49 PM
 
1,849 posts, read 1,809,687 times
Reputation: 1282
I'm pretty pumped for the A350. The 787 seems like narrow torture in coach and the whole program won't break even.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Cannes
2,452 posts, read 2,382,164 times
Reputation: 1620
Quote:
Originally Posted by N610DL View Post
I'm pretty pumped for the A350. The 787 seems like narrow torture in coach and the whole program won't break even.
Despite my experience in business class, i walked all over the plane and yes the 787 is a tad narrower, but i wouldn't call it torture. More space than the 767.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2017, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Cannes
2,452 posts, read 2,382,164 times
Reputation: 1620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundpounder View Post
Don't ever poop on an airplane
Why is that? i can understand if you poop 5lbs of solid fezes( probably pretty hard to such all that crap) but a minor diarrhea is ok
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:22 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top