Having flown in both, honestly, I generally like Airbus planes better. Maybe that is because the subsidy lets them install more expensive, comfortable seats?
The A319 is a better plane than the 737
In regards to seats, those are to the specifications of the air carrier, not the manufacturer. An air carrier chooses the density of the seating, how many seats in first class, how many in coach, pitch of the seat, distance between seats, etc. Yes, the manufacturer builds them to the certification standards of the governing authority (FAA, EASA) but the comfort is not the sole result of the manufacturer.
Airlines order the internal packages they want. Its the airlines that pick the seating configs.
Speedy, the seats are on the airlines not the airframe manufacturer. Airbus has a different philosophy of control systems — a dead stick approach rather than the proprioceptive system that Boeing uses.
About anything Boeing makes is better than Airbusted.
The 737 has been around for 18 years longer than the 319. As a aircraft mech I personally know the 737 is 100% better than the 319/320 programs....everything airbus builds is fiber modified vs Boeing using metal there by making it repairable airbus aircraft are a flying junk yard ...
“The A319 is a better plane than the 737”
Man...how ignorant is the opinion from the passenger seat.
I’m FAA/FCC licensed. I worked at NWA from 1987-2006.
First in the avionics shop at MSP, then in the check hangars across the field.
Airbus tries very hard to sell aircraft with a contractual agreement to do the majority of maintenance out-of-house.
Not at NWA...now Delta.
The control heads in the cockpit, for the avionics suite in the aircraft, was poorly designed.
Instead of the gold-standard for the avionics electrical connections, Airbus had tin/lead connectors between the internal electronics and the face-plate readout. So what you say...we’re talking about a difference in engineering...the Boeing’s/MDC/Lockheed, etc...represented quality...the same quality that allows C-47/DC-3’s to be still flying around the world. Aerobus...on the other hand, is designed entropy to ensure a steady flow of repairs to vendors that are part of the avionics suite.
Now...let’s get to the nuts and bolts of the Airbus aircraft. It was designed to be an approximately 15 year airframe....then onto the next Airbus offering.
Airlines found out that the Airbus A318/319/320&321 family of aircraft were designed with standard bolts through wing spars for the engine mounts.
What say ye??? All American designed aircraft have interference fit bolts at these points. Why? Imagine...If you can...the amount of agitation at these critical points. Lets see, extreme temperatures from ground to flight altitude to ground again. Let us not forget the longitudinal and lateral forces during take-off, flight and landing.
Standard bolt to hole size doesn’t work. Neither does close tolerance work.
Only interference fit provides the safest and longest solution in aircraft design.
Interference fit IS the highest quality of design. What is it? The bolt is larger than the hole...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
How can that be?????
Interference fit works like this...the hole is slightly smaller than the bolt...put bolt into liquid nitrogen...it shrinks about 1-2 thousands of an inch...insert, by hammering with a brass-headed hammer...bolt warms up...and for a good long time...the mountings are secure.
Airbuses design of entropy cost them a lot, under warranty, subsidized by the EU, because most of this happened with 10 years of the aircraft entering service.
You can be driven by your own needy observation as a customer...but, I’ve told you only a small amount of the entropy in Airbuses design.
We called the Airbus...the “SCAREBUS” at NWA...the Freddy Krueger of airplanes.