QF: Would it be asking too much to spruce up the 767s

[jb747]

Can I ask, how far away the toy was from the coughpit/instrumentation to be causing a problem?

At the rear of business class. So that would be about 40 to 50 feet.

It doesn't actually matter how far it is from the coughpit. Anything in the cabin is always only a few feet above the floor, and it's the wiring and boxes there that have always been the issue.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

At the rear of business class. So that would be about 40 to 50 feet.

It doesn't actually matter how far it is from the coughpit. Anything in the cabin is always only a few feet above the floor, and it's the wiring and boxes there that have always been the issue.

Thanks for the reply jb747.

 

[codash1099]

I agree with you. Love the 767 over the 737s.

I love almost ANYTHING over the 737's

 

[jb747]

All of the aircraft get harder to turn around as they get bigger. More to clean, more cargo (but the same number of doors), more engineering.

As Markis has said loading can be an issue, but as far as I know they only park at the dual gate bays in Melbourne and Sydney (and I haven't been anywhere else in Oz recently).

Airbus coughpit procedures are a nightmare...I could walk into the coughpit of a 767 with 10 minutes to go, and would be ready on time. The 380 is about 40 minutes minimum. I've never flown a 330, but I'd expect it has the same issues.

I think the upshot is that the 767 was designed for the US short haul wide body market, with the Atlantic as a bonus. The 330 is a medium haul aircraft that finds itself doing a job it wasn't designed for, and is only marginally suited for....

 

[MarkD]

Jb747. Thanks very much for your input to this forum, It is fantastic to get first hand information on procedures etc, something we all take for granted when we plonk our butts in the seats up the back, i never would have guessed that much of a difference, in fact i would have thought the a380 would have been quicker, due to advanced technology I for one really appreciate it very much

 

[jb747]

...... a380 would have been quicker, due to advanced technology

I'm sure it was advanced in 1985, which was about the last time Airbus seriously designed a coughpit.

Boeing change coughpits with every new aircraft, but the family relationships are all still there, and they all feel familiar. At each release though, they are the best that they can do....

Airbus designed a glass dash in 1985, and simply decided 'job done'. It was probably very advanced then, but coming from the 744, the coughpit is, at best, a step sideways. I'm sure there's advanced tech there somewhere, but it most certainly is not in the interface between man and beast.

 

[Sprucegoose]

This is not my area. But I have dealt with French engineers. Am I surprised at these preceding comments? not at all.

The concepts are laudable, there is some fine engineering, but someone needs to come in and Finnish the job. Relating that back to the concept design and end user, hell! We weren't the only ones involved in this!

These outcomes are largely cultural. An anthropologist can assist here to understand the relative approaches a Boeing engineer would approach an issue versus a European one.

 

[harvyk]

JB, if you don't mind me asking, what was the actual issue with the AP? Was it simply taking you off course, or was it switching off completely? I'm assuming there are multiple autopilots (3 per chance? Sorry, not familiar with the B767 coughpit) if so was it simply a case of one was affected which precluded an autoland? I also take it that an EICAS message was also displayed which indicated there was a problem?

 

[jb747]

JB, if you don't mind me asking, what was the actual issue with the AP? Was it simply taking you off course, or was it switching off completely? I'm assuming there are multiple autopilots (3 per chance? Sorry, not familiar with the B767 coughpit) if so was it simply a case of one was affected which precluded an autoland? I also take it that an EICAS message was also displayed which indicated there was a problem?

The aircraft was gently rocking it's wings a few degrees either side. If I recall correctly, it was happening with L and C, but R wasn't affected.

With two affected, the system would basically vote with the bad ones, so no triple auto land (but a dud dual one). If you only engaged two, they would disagree. I wasn't in a position to test exactly what would happen as we had the toy turned off, and you can only engage multiple autopilots on approach.

No messages...the system was quite happy...which is what makes the entire issue dangerous.

 

[JohnK]

I don't mind the 767s and I like them just the way they are. I would certainly choose a 767 over a 737 anyday.

Only problem now is that QF have taken the 767s off most SYD-BNE and vv routes and these have been replaced with 734s and 738s. Where 767s are scheduled there are hardly any discount airfares available and there is a good chance that it will also be replaced by a 734 or 738 anyway.