The Differences Between Flying Widebodies & Narrowbodies: A Pilot's Perspective

Рет қаралды 36,232

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер

@andyyiu3987 Ай бұрын

As a pilot who have flown both, I prefer the narrowbodies. The widebodies gave better pay and more days off, but with narrow bodies, I dont get as jet lagged, home on more days, and the flying generally feels more fun and rewarding.

@misterrabell Ай бұрын

I dont know how you guys decide on the topics of your videos.. but every one for the past couple of years has been something I am into. As a AMT/AME I look forward to your posts. Keep It up!

@tomcatpilot1 25 күн бұрын

See, a common misconception among "avgeeks" is that the airplane type is what matters most to a pilot. But the real question is all about what lifestyle do you prefer to suit your family the best. I've flown a good mix of wide and narrow, including ERJ-170, B757, B767, and C-17. After 6 months or so of flying any airplane, you will have learned how to grease your landings and how to taxi properly. That's not the mystery. That's just "pilot stuff." The biggest difference between types of airplanes is the lifestyle that comes with each, including the schedules they give you, the places you'll go, and what they pay you. On the E170/175, I would typically fly 50-60 legs per month with short layovers in small-medium US cities like Cedar Rapids, Raleigh, Hartford, and Savannah, and get about 12-14 days off per month. Now that I'm on the 757/767, I typically fly just 8-10 legs per month and get full-day layovers in exotic international cities like Zurich, Malaga, Nice, and Naples, and get about 17-19 days off per month. And, I make about 5x as much as an FO on the 757/767 than I did as FO on the ERJ. I love being on the 757/767 fleet and truly do love both airplanes, but it's no secret that constant international flying comes with a lot of jetlag, something that pilots on the A320 or 737 fleets don't have to worry about, and it's a major reason of why I don't want to just do long haul flying forever. Thankfully, the 757/767 fleet at my airline gives us a nice variety of domestic and international flying, so I am able to bid for totally different kinds of flying month by month. So, being on the 757/767 totally works for me right now, because of the lifestyle it gives me.. and it's an added bonus that I happen to love the airplanes too. But, if my airline only used the 757/767 on 1hr flights where I just wound up right back home every night for example, I wouldn't be choosing it. Even though the airplane would be the same, the lifestyle wouldn't be worth it.

@nightowldickson Ай бұрын

Generally speaking pilots who fly narrowbodies tend to fly more sectors than widebody crew. For example they could operate multiple 1-3 hour flights per day in their roster pattern up to the airline's maximum flight duty period. Widebody crew tend to operate longer sectors with longer flight times, and are used less often on shorter sectors (some airlines do operate widebodies on shorter sectors). If widebody crew are deployed predominantly on 10+ hour flights, the number of flights and landings they perform per month will be significantly lower than narrowbody flight crew. Another thing is workload - the workload is likely to be higher for narrowbody crew flying shorter sectors.

@GarfieldRex Ай бұрын

Never thought about that, of course, I'm a passenger, but this video was great. Keep it up with this series.

@floridah7016 Ай бұрын

As a pilot who just transferred from the embraer to the Boeing 777, I completely agree with your video 😊

@sohumpatel3364 Ай бұрын

Wait your getting to fly a wide body straight from the regionals?

@floridah7016 Ай бұрын

@@sohumpatel3364 F/O 737, Captain E190/175, F/O 777. Flying 737/Embraer is more fun, but 777 is more relaxed and pay is better

@sohumpatel3364 29 күн бұрын

@@floridah7016 Oh I got you now, congrats man! Do you think its reasonable to assume that if one were to start flying for endeavor at 22 with an r-atp through deltas cadet program they could eventually be an a350 captain before the age of 35? Im hoping that I would be able to atleast hop in the right seat of a wide body after 2 years of flying a narrow body once I get to mainline delta

@Tina-d8f Ай бұрын

As a passenger, I prefer a widebody. But enjoy watching both taking to the sky.

@Aviatopolis Ай бұрын

Yeah narrowbody airliners feel very cramped compared to widebodies. This is why I'm against with the idea of long range narrowbody airliners replacing wide body in the future and prefer to fly larger planes in flight simulators like FS2020 and XP11.

@gottfriedheumesser1994 Ай бұрын

It may also be that some pilots don't like the jetlag. If they fly narrow bodies this is mostly not an issue, often you may again sleep at home. On long-range flights, you will always have to wait for the next plane due to work time restrictions and have to spend one or several nights in a hotel with a totally different time zone. Many crew members prefer flights to the west, as this gives a later sleeping time.

@andyyiu3987 Ай бұрын

This is the case for me. I hate jet lag. I struggle to sleep in a bunk. Thus, narrowbody works for me. It's more work, and I get exposed to more hazards like weather... but getting to sleep in my own bed makes life so much better for me.

@gottfriedheumesser1994 Ай бұрын

@@andyyiu3987 You have for sure more practice in landing than a senior FO whose main duty is to check the AP working and perform a level change per day.

@USAFA00 Ай бұрын

Unless you’re carrying 10 extra knots, pulling the thrust to idle in a 737 at 30’ will most assuredly result in a hard landing. If you’re on your target approach speed, pulling the power back at 10’ results in a much more consistently smooth touchdown.

@daffiid Ай бұрын

Different recording setup? The voice sounds much bassier than usual

@Wheninflight Ай бұрын

Fuselage length and wing area can also affect the flying characteristics of an aircraft series. My cousin at United says how the 757-200 & 767-300ER are easier to fly than their larger counterparts. The longer fuselage and added weight can make them harder to handle in crosswinds, the larger wing area of the 763 making it easier on the control column to fly out of the family.

@GeeBoggs Ай бұрын

Fascinating!

@Olifantenstaart 26 күн бұрын

We all prefer a narrowbody but dessert looks so good

@zlm001 28 күн бұрын

Thanks.

@navajojohn9448 Ай бұрын

Going to pilot widebody long haul flights go for an Airbus since it has a stick on the side and a table giving more room.

@gerardmoran9560 Ай бұрын

The fuselage diameter isn't a large factor. If I want to understand how a jet flies, I'll study the wing- how thick is it, how sweptback is it, what kind of flaps/slats does it have? Another factor is fuselage length. The stretch DC-8 (narrow-body) is longer than a 767-200 (wide-body). Being far ahead of the main landing gear adds a bit of complexity to the landing. My best years were flying the 76/75. You could fly both in one day. Cheers

@Rodgerball 28 күн бұрын

If someone passes gas on the flight deck while having an augmented crew aboard, each pilot has plausible deniability. 😂. “Wasn’t me”😂😂😂.

@ProAvgeek6328 Ай бұрын

I went on a 737 max, a narrow body with 6 seats and 1 aisle. If the seating configuration was 1-3-1 the plane would have 2 aisles, wouldn't it become a widebody?

@qwerty112311 28 күн бұрын

The argument could be made

@fahadali5046 Ай бұрын

Any pilot if they could of course will take the Concord very narrow body airplane over any other (Go Speed-Bird).

@maxcfi7718 Ай бұрын

most people don’t know this but main difference is actually the width of the body

@TallerLeanerYoungerwithDrSimon Ай бұрын

❤

@UAL320 Ай бұрын

5:42 Look at the way the gear hangs on the A330….the 777 is the same way. Easier to kiss the ground on landing, it would seem, vice the 767, which hangs the other direction, and of course the narrowbodies with the single set per gear.

@jonathanlee400 Ай бұрын

I’ve flown the 767 and A330 and can roll it on pretty consistently on both aircraft. Stubbing the toe on the 767 is not really the case; it’s the ground spoiler deployment that makes the 767 sit fast. The 767 always has.A bump when deploying and stowing speedbrakes.

@Aj14_JustDoIt Ай бұрын

1 hour ago and less than a thousand views .. this channel is seriously underrated

@rajaampattravel Ай бұрын

keren

@navajojohn9448 Ай бұрын

Many airlines don't have widebodies so no choice and many airlines have only one model aircraft so no choice. Southwest Airline is having a problem because only one type narrowbody airplane and a thing called "resume washing" is happening. New pilots take job at SWA just to put on resume for a job at a bigger planes airline.

@ivangeo3319 Ай бұрын

I like widebody since my body also wide 😅😅

@AnotherPointOfView944 Ай бұрын

The seats are the same size, so ....

@harshmarwah4508 Ай бұрын

Wide body has double thrust narrow body and wide body can take 1-2 seconds of command fulfilling in ratio in comparison to a narrow body because wide body is not as flexible as narrow body. Though engine thrust to weight ratio and aerodynamics can fix it.

@TheRealEtaoinShrdlu Ай бұрын

It's "transition", not "trancision". 😂😂😂

@trevorkarran732 Ай бұрын

The Boeing 777 is a family of wide-body twin-engine commercial jet aircraft with variants for both passenger and cargo transportation. The 777 was first flown on June 12, 1994, and commercial service commenced on June 7, 1995. It is the world’s largest two-engine jet (twin jet), and more than 1,200 777s were in operation in the early 2020s.

@ABDULLAH-789-h2d Ай бұрын

we know.

@VinayakMaraj 27 күн бұрын

*Correction: NOTAM - notices to airmen, not air missions

@chandrachurniyogi8394 29 күн бұрын

speaking of wide body jets, AIRBUS could relaunch new A380-800 with well thought out enhancements . . . for e.g. a cutting edge hybrid propulsion system that'll make the A380-800 more fuel efficient, as much as 50% in fuel savings . . . and that in turn translates to 40% additional range . . . replace existing wing tips of the A380-800 with sharklets . . . AIRBUS could launch the A380-900neo which was to be a stretched variant of the A380-800 . . . the stretched A380-900neo was a concept thought up by AIRBUS back in 2011 when the A380-800 seemed more promising . . . even after 18 years of A380-800 flight operations, Emirates is still very much interested in the stretched A380-900neo . . .