Hello to all, This past weekend I flew from San Jose, Costa Rica(SJO) to Tegucigalpa, Honduras (TGU). I was really bummed out because I had to fly Taca, this meaning two things, I had to fly airbus and I had a layover in San Salvador. From SJO to San Salvador I flew on a A321. Now let me say I was truly impressed, comfortable cabin, seats somewhat seem bigger, and the cabin itself seemed wider than the 737. But there was one thing that I did dislike I was in seat 9F in front of the #2 engine. At takeoff there was that unmistakable whine/cat/grind that that the Taca Airbus's had. I was impressed no doubt. Then from San Salvador to TGU it was an A320(comfortable but not as comfortable as the A321, I'm pretty sure because their A321's are new). But this time I was sitting behind the engine. So my question is that if you sit behind the engine, do you generally avoid the grinding sound or not. Well I must say I cannot criticize airbus anymore, I really enjoyed it. BUT don't get me wrong I'm still a Boeing man THROUGH and THROUGH.

Thanks for reading,
David

I flew from Orlando - Detroit with a Spirit A321 in August. Great plane it is! Great airline, too.

If you are in front of any jet engine, you will hear that type of sound. Its the compressor blades doing their job. I was going to ask you if you disliked sitting in 9F but you were impressed with the sound, how does that even make sense? Did you want to be behind the engine?


You are correct, you wont get it as much, you may hear it a little but it will be significantly less than sitting right by the front of the wing or 9F in your case. If you sit from the trailing edge and back, you will just hear air from the jet wash of the engines and the passing air. Hope this helps!

I love the A320 - And I flew on it in July/ August. It was FCA flights 2750 and 2751. The aircraft is extremey impressive. I had never before flew on an A320 but I felt that it was great, more so than a 737. And yes the cabin is wide. On the way home I was sat on row 8E and that noise can be a little annoying on TO to some, but to me it was great. My mum kept asking questions about if the engine is rubbing and are we slowing down too much (thrust reduction on TO). I really do think of the A320 as an efficient little aircraft. And the flight deck - oh my god it looks amazing (especially in the evening)

Regards,
Chris

The Airbus aircraft are generally very quiet both inside and outside of the cabin, when compared to a Boeing. Thats my opinion anyway. The interior of all narrow body aircraft look the same to me. The changes are to the exterior and the flight deck - An amazing sight in the Airbus A320, very clean, spacious and "modern".

Morris

That's because it is.

I still prefer Boeing's when in-flight. I rarely miss the few centimetres of width. Can't beat being inside a 737 classic.

thanks for the information, but a small correction. I was not impressed with the sound, I was impressed in general of the aicraft itself.

Same here! I don't know why but I have just have this thing for the older 737's.

Yes, the 737 and 747 are very loud aircraft compared to the whisper quite Airbus. In all my travels I fly Boeing because, here in Australia, Airbus aren't very common compared to Boeing. I have flown on three Airbus, the A320, with Ansett (Go Ansett!) and Jetstar (yuck) I remember the Ansett A320 I flew on was very quite and had wonderful seats! Very quite and smooth compared to the Saab 340 I had just flown on but that was years and years ago when I was younger.

Last year I flew on a Jetstar A320 and as I have said before, NEVER AGAIN. Yuck yuck yuck it's the crappiest airline in Australia so I was really disappointed that I wasn't able to savour the A320's quietness, smoothness and wideness because Jetstar ruined that with it's soiled, cramped seats and nasty service. Oh god and the FA uniforms, how embarrassing!

Dash,

You have not been impressed till you've ridden in the 717. The ambient sound is soothing, very low pitched humming sound, and the br-715s sound absolutely wicked, 'spool up' just sounds wicked. Chairs are dramatically wider than any competing RJ, an inch wider than that of the 737, but still lacking in width compared to the A320. One thing I did notice though, when sitting on a window seet, the wall wasn't almost curving into my head, unlike other aircraft.

I fly in whatever they hook up to the jetway, and like it, because to drive to my destinations would typically take days. 3 Hours of a loud noise is well worth the savings if you ask me.

Call me old fashioned, but there ya go.

Oh yes, and then theres the 717, which beats all other jet aircraft in every way.

Dash,

I personally favoured the boeing twins (except they are not identical) the 757 and 767. I love the 767 but the A320 was great to fly on, fuiet, really good acceleration (but not like the 767, But it was still great) and sitting behind the wing is great. The flaps look amazing on take off and landing, but it was just after sunset when I landed so didn't see much, Just an Emirates 773 at Larnaca ready to go on 22. The A320s engines are just great. Wonderful CFM engines. A fantastic aircraft.

Regards,
Chris

I have been on most airbus and boeing types and the quietest I found was an AA 777, the airbuses are as quiet in flight but I found them noisy on the ground, they seem to have very noisy suspension on the a340 lots of banging during taxiing. I also prefer the takeoff power of the boeings, the 757 is renowned for being powerful and I thought the 777 was far better than the airbuses, especially over an a340. I don't know how they compare to a 330 as I haven't been in one yet but will be doing so soon.

Yes I have noticed the same with the 757. Although I mentioned the TO power of the A320 was good, it was not so like the 757. It is awesome, it feels like you're flying to space. Those Rollers on the 757 are really powerful for the aircraft and are only flat out rated at about 40,200lbs. The Boeings are great. But the airbuses are great too

Regards,
Chris

Twins will always have more that twice the power required to fly! It's just how much extra that counts. On a long runway with no deficiencies etc. is common practice to de-rate the engines. Just how much you'll never know but the effect is to takeoff with less than full power. But generally, a takeoff in a twin has a bit more "get up and go" about it if you compare it with four engined one. The 757 probably has one of the best power to weight ratios out there and the F100 one of the worst. As for furnishings and seats, these are all airline specified - so if you are uncomfortable, blame them. To a certain degree, so is the noise as there are various noise reduction mods on the market. And the quietest aircraft I've ever flown is an ASW22 (not many passengers though but very frugal on fuel).

PM

Oooh, nice plane indeed! Haha, and its acceleration is far better than that of an Airbus or Boeing, depending on the take off method that is. The closest I got to it was the ASK21. To my bad only the Ka8 was ment for student solo flights and I never completed my license. Do you still practise that hobby?

Sorry, for going of topic, but that plane is worth it. Even though it's almost an oldie it has a glide ratio of 54:1

Another thing that went threw my head while reading this post the last times was how often who flew with which of the above named planes? Are you sure to have done it often enough to compare their performance? As PM already stated it is hard to compare them as you never know the exact power settings for take off. A powerful engine doesn't necessarily make a powerful plane and high standard airlines always have the nicer looking ones.

I flew on the A319 Airbus from Glasgow to Bristol in August, and I do recall having a very enjoyable flight there and back. Having said that I have just flown back from Lanzarote on a Boeing 757-200 and there really was not much room for a long flight I felt that I had to keep doing my foot and leg exercises because it was so cramped. I kept on pressing my neice's control panel with my elbow. That got really annoying for us both. Also the televisions were in the aisle so I gave up on watching the films.

Isnt that more a reflection on the airline than on the aircraft BB? Presumably you were not on a regular commercial flight, if itwas a holiday charter it's surely all about packing them in like sardines and forget about the luxury.of space ;)

Indeed, that poor 757 sure has never chosen to be packed like this

To be honest Swagman, I was not really that impressed with Thomsonfly, apart from the pilots, who kept us informed about the wind speed, height, and direction we were heading. Also approximately the time we would land at. Also the weather at our destination. Shame about the plane, but yes it was a holiday charter flight after all.

I've also experienced something similar on a Britannia flight a few years ago (sat by the engine on a B762) when we were taxiing , the engine made like a humming/grinding noise every few seconds, like there was something up with the blades. But it stopped once we were in the air. Is this similar to what happens on the A32S or something else?

Dan