Boeing or Airbus? Airbus or Boeing?
The competition that exists between Boeing and Airbus has to be one of the fiercest fights ever seen in commercial aviation. Among aviation enthusiasts, most are dedicated only to one or the other and just visit an aviation enthusiasts discussion website and you’ll discover debate that is even more heated than what exists between Airbus and Boeing.
Family and friends have, from time to time, asked me whose airplanes I like the most. I probably lean towards Boeing more than anyone but for different reasons than many have. Before going further, I should say that I think Airbus builds a modern, competitive airliner and is in no way materially inferior.
I like Boeing’s approach to an aircraft. I think they value customer experience just a bit more whereas I think Airbus tends to value an airline just a bit more. One example is the difference between the 737 and the A320 aircraft. Both are made for the identitical market and both are modern, fuel efficient jets. Both have had rough spots over the years and both companies work incredibly hard to sell these jets to all kinds of airlines.
I should say that I admire how well Airbus has done at making their aircraft families cross-compatible when it comes to flight crews. A pilot for an A320 can upgrade to an A330/A340 with a lot less training than a similar upgrade from a B737 to B767/B777. Airbus makes owning their entire aircraft family highly beneficial *if* their aircraft family can fill all of your missions.
However, I do find the 737 just a hair more comfortable. I’m a rather tall and big person with longish legs. Having flown numerous examples of both aircraft, I find the aisle seat experience roughly similar and the window seat experience very different. The A320’s fuselage is more “circular” and therefore curves inward more at the shoulder to head height of most people. At the window, my perception is that my head must lean away from the fuselage and that feels uncomfortable. The 737’s fuselage is more ovoid and that same curve is more gradual and starts more above the passenger than next to him.
The seats should be roughly the same but my perception is, again, different. This simply may be a function of what US airlnes are using for a seat on the Airbus vs the Boeing. My perception is that the A320 class of aircraft typically have a seat that is a touch thinner, a touch harder and therefore a touch less comfortable on flight durations of 2+ hours. I have felt it on America West aircraft, US Air aircraft, United Airlines aircraft and Northwest Airlines aircraft.
I once had a chance to fly from PDX (Portland) to DFW (Dallas / Fort Worth) via DEN(Denver). My flight from PDX to DEN was on a United Airlines A320 that appeared to be older but not “old”. Within 1 hour, I found myself fidgeting and since I was in Economy Plus next to a window, I expected to feel more comfortable. I didn’t. The next segment was on a United Airlines 757 (not a 737 but it does have the same fuselage dimensions and uses the same seats) in plain old Economy rather than Economy Plus. I was simply more comfortable. The window seat felt more accomodating and I was finally able to relax enough to nap despite less legroom.
Each aircraft manufacturer tries hard to find the right niche for aircraft and I would argue that as a result of this competition, they actually are more complimentary these days than directly competitive. An airline could be well served by both Airbus and Boeing without sacrificing efficiency.
If I were to pick a fleet for the upcoming Delta / Northwest merger, I would center on using the 737 family for domestic service (using a combination of 737-700 and 737-800 aircraft, the 767 (or 787-3) for domestic transcontinental and Hawaii service, the A330 for trans-atlantic (Europe and Africa) and South American service, the 787 for South American / Southeast Asia and trans-pacific service and the 777-200LR and 777-300ER for long haul, high density international traffic from hubs like ATL (Atlanta), MSP (Minneapolis / St. Paul), DTW (Detroit), JFK (New York City) and LAX (Los Angeles).
It’s hard to say where the new Airbus A350-XWB will fit in “mission-wise” when it comes to such an airline. While it’s passenger economies may be a tad better than the 777, it won’t haul nearly as much cargo. At present, it cannot quite adequately fill the 777 mission role and it might just be a tad too big to compete directly with a 787-9/10 either.
One thing I admire about Boeing is that they tend to “right size” their aircraft for various markets. Often people directly compare Boeing and Airbus aircraft on the criteria that one aircraft can carry more people on the same mission than another. Occasionally, that’s valid. More often, not.
An airline needs aircraft that “fit” the passenger and cargo demand of various routes. Boeing has 40 years of experience helping airlines plan their fleet on these needs and does it well. The 787 was never intended to be a 767 or 777 replacement. It was developed to fit an emerging demand that really fell in between those two aircraft.
The next replacement for the 737/757 series will fall somewhere new as well and probably will not fill a need below the 737-700 and probably will not fill a role that exceeds the 757-300. That’s a 2 class aircraft that will probably have a family range accomodating from 150 passengers to 220 passengers. Real aircraft range will probably include transcontinental capability for all variants at about 3500 to 4000 nm (nautical mile) max range. Airbus will likely target a similar set of criteria with the next generation aircraft.
The discriminators in the next battle between Airbus and Boeing will be things like the best operating efficiency, dispatch rates and passenger comfort. I would give the edge to Boeing when it comes to efficiency and dispatch rates and it is anyone’s guess on passenger comfort. I’m certain that both companies will sell an amazing amount of the next generation single aisle aircraft and I’m equally certain that airlines will praise both.
And with one bound we have a market for a 100- to 130-seater…?
And, bad for Boeing or Airbus, there are several companies who are rapidly going to market with an answer for that need. I suspect that “need” is an aircraft that falls more between 95 to 135 passengers in a 2 class layout. A newer, more efficient engine than the CF34 is needed, however.
I don’t agree with the statement ” I think they value customer experience just a bit more whereas I think Airbus tends to value an airline just a bit more.”
If you look at the simple aisle width between the Boeing 757 and the Airbus A320 family, you will see that the Airbus’ fuselage and aisle is quite a bit wider, which makes for easier moving around on board. That means getting past a flight attendant with a cart in the aisle, it means being able to roll your rollerbag down the aisle instead of carrying it sideways.
I think the head against the wall issue is mostly perception. Now, if you’re talking about an CRJ, then I’m with ya, but I’ve spent plenty of time in an A320 window seat and find no such issue as having to lean my head inboard.
With the 787, Boeing is obsessed with making the 777 to 787 crew transition as short as possible and is leaving behind quite a few good ideas or improvements (on the flight deck) that could be incorporated , but won’t be.
If you look at the Airbus flight decks from the A320 through the A380 thre is a great deal of similarity between them all and they fly virtually identically. Boeing has a harder time with that, since many of their airplanes go back to steam-gauge instrumentation -and it’s been a mish-mash of cockpit designs since then.
Boeing also took a completely different tack on the fly-by-wire philosphy than Airbus. Both could get great ideas from the other, but I prefer Airbus’ “keep you out of trouble” vs. Boeings “Flip it over if you need to” approach. [my words, and there’s lots more to it than that]
The 787 mission, should be viewes as looooong haul without having to have 400 folks to do it with. It will be as comfortable an airplane as you can have on such trips (lower cabin altitude, higher humidity, time controlled lightting, quiet ).
I think the A-350 is aimed at a similar purpose, though Airbus got way behind on it. NWA was deciding between the 787 and A350s for its newest aircraft. The 4 year difference between delivery dates (at the time) was a big factor in the final decision.
The 777 is an awfully big airplane for the number of seats on board.
I think the differences are subtle but they are there. You interpret aisle width differently than I do. The people who are truly confounded most by aisle width are the airlines and airline personnel. The typical passenger doesn’t really use the aisle that much.
The internal widths of the A320 and B737 are within inches and the “who has more space” arguement is simply one of preference from passenger to passenger.
Boeing had an opportunity to set a commonality standard with the 737NG and deferred it to keep greater commonality with older product for existing customers. In their case, I suspect that was the right decision. Airbus, on the other hand, started with a fresh sheet of paper and that’s OK too. I do think we’re discovering that the Airbus commonality isn’t quite the selling point it once was given that both manufacturers aren’t hurting for orders.
I firmly believe there is a place for each manufacturer in the market. What’s more, I think there is a place for both inside a large network carriers’ fleet plan. The products compliment each other more than contrast and that’s a good thing.
Yes, I’m unsure of what mission, exactly, the A350 is going to fill. No doubt it will fill a mission but I think they tried a bit too hard to build a “me too” plane in that effort as opposed to defining their customer needs and building to it. (Also a symptom of Not Invented Here syndrom which Boeing has been guilty of in the past as well.) As it stands now, the A350 doesn’t quite compete with the 787 and nor does it quite compete with the 777. I simply can’t divine exactly what set of requirements the A350 fills at this time.
The A350 feels more like a B757 to me. A good airplane with lots of performance but not necessarily one that fits a large number of needs as a family. Time will tell.
I have yet to be comfortable on an Airbus product. And you could safely say I fly a bit.
737-700s rock, even in Coach.
-R
Your blog is interesting!
Keep up the good work!
Good blog. 😀
I tend to prefer Boeing 737NG over Airbus A320s. Just a personal preference I guess. I’ve flown B737-8 cross country and A320s halfway across.