Flew round trip from Detroit to Tokyo recently on this type. A real pleasure, the cabin is amazingly quiet. It was as comfortable as a 13 hour flight can be.
You’re lucky that Detroit is a Delta base and already have their A350s. I fly out of SFO which is United territory and they won’t get their A350s till 2027. At least United is getting SOME A350s,,, unlike American who cancelled their order
Nice plane, a bit harder than A320 neo. But some things are easier like having buttons for numbers at the radious. I really hope that it will be available from the start in MSFS 2024, really wanna try it.
Wow, now I can get a job as a pilot after watching this vid. I'm applying to American Airlines and Delta tomorrow. If they don't take me, I know Spirit will. 😊👍
Excelent video. But idk I feel like I still prefer the a320 panel. Is good that technology bring to us a lots of practically, but the a320 is so pretty 💙
BOSpilot do you know anything about it? Like what’s being changed and when it’s releasing. I’m just fed up of having no SID/STARs and no weight/fuel initialise page
Thomas Mortimore Yeah, the devs said there will be SID/STAR support and there will also be ToD and ToC indications. In order to get the ToC and ToD indications, you need to fill the FUEL&LOAD page, so yes, that will be updated
I thought Boeing aircraft were complicated but nothing even close to the AB-350. By the time the video was over , I was brain dead from all of the functions that were necessary to configure the aircraft prior to departure and arrival. This video is totally AMAZING! Since , Airbus aircraft are operated by onboard computers, I can understand the complexity!!!!!!!
When you start to throw in other factors like engineering issues, weather, fatigue and human factors like attitudes and moods you can see how this can be a much tougher job than people appreciate, particularly for the left seat but for reasons that are not always perceptible in videos like this
ı am a old 737 guy and now training for a350 and ı already missed american mentality , keep it as simple as stupid :((( these days ı am like Clint Eastwood as in the scene Fire Fox. '' I must think in Russian.........
As you see by these two airmen, this routine and ability to provide the details without referring to cue cards, checklist, etc., means that it becomes rote. However, get away from it for a month and you'll have to retrain your brain to become accustom to the flow.
That's a great job Thanks a lot However at 32 20 shows ECAM CG to enter TO PERF THS BOX That is not correct, LS CG entry should be done Yes it looks weird , because at A 330, we used to rely on and enter ECAM CG rather than Load sheet CG But here A 350, the F/CTL PITCH TRIM/FMS/CG DISAGREE check logic is a little bit different than A 330 So we should enter LS CG
But the CG they used off the ECAM should be the same as the LS anyway shouldn’t it? You enter the initial figures in the FUEL and LOAD page for ZFW, ZFWCG and Block fuel and that will give you the CG of the aircraft which should match the loadsheet? The result they got off the ECAM is just what they entered in the FUEL page as the aircraft can’t calculate its own weight and CG until at least in the air
@JSL SAA if possible do another video on takeoff, cruise and landing in details as in this one. Great video and insight, not your everyday thing to see . Thanks
Honestly the UI in the A350 needs to be more organized. The buttons on the screen seems to be scattered in random locations, and some color coding would be nice too. The chip should be updated in the future cuz its a bit laggy when zooming in and out of the nav screen.
I agree, the UI needs a huge overhaul. Everything needs to be big and bold and every screen should be a touch screen. The menus seem clunky and the hardware slow.
@@CyberSystemOverload Why should they be touchscreen? You're just asking for dirty fingerprints all over it. And then how do you manage during turbulence?
@@tomstravels520 Those issues have long since been addressed. Look at Symmetry flight deck that Gulfstream is using. 10 touchscreens :-) Even the overhead is all touchscreen: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-PnLe4Rm7QzY.html
@@CyberSystemOverload that video doesn’t explain how they’ve been addressed. I’d like to know what happens if the screen freezes or power is lost to that screen of controls or if a severe electrical failure occurs. Then how do you activate those systems controlled by touchscreen. Also private jets are massively different from commercial passenger jets. The UI of the A350 is probably the best around. PFD is for flying the plane, ND is for navigating, central displays are for managing aircraft systems, lower central displays are managing the flight and the OIS is for extra assistance for displaying maps and showing aircraft maintenance data etc. The newer A350 do actually have touchscreen lower displays and OIS but they’re for pilot preference who can still use the mouse and keyboard or trackball if they want. If you’re not a commercial pilot you can’t really say “oh it looks bad and needs sorting out” because you don’t use it anyway. Also this plane was designed in late 2000’s and likely using chips from that era as they can’t keep adding new ones all the time as they have to be throughly tested. The chip powering the EFB on the 787 is supposedly from late 90’s
Can you imagine if you took this plane and cockpit and landed at KJFK In July 1960 then give all the pilots a tour of this thing? I mean they would think you were some super advanced being with alien technology. Compared to the 1960 707 cockpit.
Excellent. I found out that at 12:12 engine out is 7058ft, but would like to know what typical values are entered in the INIT page, under T.O tab for 'THR RED' and 'ACCEL'. Thanks so much.
Hi Ron. It depends on the runway noise abatement instructions. 7058' is 1500' agl in Johannesburg. The Airbus engines are so quiet that we normally use 1500' agl for THR RED and for ACCEL.
@@henrysakul625 I do. Some companies have the pilots having temp control. In this case, the aircraft was clearly ex engineering which would mean the engineers had put the controls where they needed them.
The meters are connected directly to the battery. All you’re pressing when you push the battery buttons is the switch to connect them to the power supply
Thanks, always align the ADIRS 1 then 2 then 3, this helps with muscle memory of the odd switch positions if you ever have to find the correct switch during an emergency.
@@hodb3906 Having flown both Airbus and Boeing, I think I'm a bit more qualified to comment on this snowflake ;) And no, none of us are flying right now in real life cause there's this thing called a pandemic going on, that's why we're here watching this crap 🤣
@@hodb3906 back to your mother's basement and stop getting so offended over everything 🤣 I'm sorry that my professional opinion has hurt you, but I don't even understand what part of it offends you. Literally all I said was how incredibly simple this thing is to fly, because it is!
0:02 Shouldn't that be either "all liability is" or "all liabilities are?" 25:38 I'm surprised you don't look into why the plane made the switch back to TOGA.
Rey Han my guess is that they’ve been senior if they are on an airlines RU-vid especially such a big airlines RU-vid so they’ve probably memorized all abbreviations, then they just do everything that they must fill in, order probably doesn’t matter
I feel like Airbus went two steps back with all that modern stuff. Way too much workload for the pilots. And what's with all that repetitive steps? Why can't the EFB synchronise with the MCDU or vice versa?
Very suboptimal clumsy interface still. It should be one big display, virtually no buttons. The legacy autopilot bar at the top should never have been there. The screen should be much closer to the pilot and there should be no center console. It could be so vastly much cleaner and nicer. That is painful to look at for a thinking person.
No. This is superior. A single interface would be too cluttered. There’s also no redundancy with a single display. You really don’t know what you’re talking about
@@peteconrad2077 hehe ye of little faith. Go to 11:45 and look at the dash. In a zero visibility situation, would you rather fly by this dash or by a 40inch microsoft flightsim display? try to realize that MSFS is synthetic vision avionics. Which is clearer, which is more enabling. And which is absolute garbage. As for redundancy, one big display per pilot and a little 3rd unit stowed away out of sight but realistically if you have lost both units you have probably lost the electronics that control the plane anyway. It's a good general lesson to never mindlessly defend status quo. Don't be so devoted to the current situation that you praise it without insight. I assure you, airline cockpit design is absolute garbage.
@@DanFrederiksen I’m not mindlessly defending anything. I have a masters in aeronautical engineering, fly the A350 and can tell you that you are taking utter bilge.
@@peteconrad2077 hehe, you are a bus driver. I am a polymath genius, father of deep learning, smartest man in the world with wisdom to match. When you are done being offended, think about the comparison I offered you. Which is the more informative clear display, the A350 dash or the MS flight sim view. One is pleasant to fly by, the other is a runway show for emperor's new robes. You just never questioned it. Next time you sit down in the cockpit, look at it and realize that it belongs in a russian plane from the 1960s. The first car with an engine looked like a horse drawn carriage, just without the horses. That's a failure of intelligent design. Airliner cockpits are similarly thoughtless design by past convention.
@@DanFrederiksen you are neither a polymath nor that bright and certainly ignorant of the priorities for operating an aircraft. Having used both displays extensively and having considerable expertise in this matter I can tell you that the Airbus design is superior every way. Better redundancy Better segregation Better ergonomics More information with intelligent display showing what’s needed for the phase of flight. In fact, only a know nothing could imagine the MS display superior. Thank you for self identifying.
so unnecessary complex and long. 787 is so much easier and pilot friendly. although it might be just this video. you start daylight it's night now and still somewhere with preflight preparations...
