From: (Jean-Francois Bosc)
Date:         01 Jun 95 05:00:51 
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1995.667@ohare.Chicago.COM>, (Thornton Shepherd) writes:

> Judging from your e-mail address, you are with the DGAC in France
> (like the US FAA) so I think you may be a bit more sensitive to
> what you perceive as Airbus-bashing.  Your company probably knows
> more about the Airbus design philosophy than anyone outside Airbus
> itself.  Please realize that the best way to get YOUR view across
> is to write about it just like everyone else does.  Don't sit there
> and whine about censorship etc.  Frankly, I wouldn't mind hearing
> some views in defense of Airbus' design philosophies.  A man from
> Boeing put some of that company's thoughts on the news group.
> Maybe you can do the same.  If you have some views, please let me
> and the other readers know.  Thanks.

As I said in my post, my reaction may have been slightly ( :) )
epidermic. I just found the assertion about the "awful number of
crashes" a bit shocking. I personally don't deal with aircraft, so I
don't have a particularly deep knowledge of Airbus systems (and I
don't speak for DGAC). I would have liked to see some figures in
support of such a statement, and not even just the fact that n
aircraft have been lost due to pilots getting confused.

A while ago I reacted (more softly) to a post from somebody who said
he didn't "fell as comfortable" in new generation Airbus, but my post
(maybe 2 posts) didn't pass. I believed this was a technical newsgroup
where such subjective comments didn't have a place.

Anyway, sorry for the wording, and I probably will go and read
somewhere else.