Article: The Pros & Cons of Different Aircraft Types

[AFF Editor]

Inspired by AFF forum posts from @FlyingFiona and @aikman and in this thread...

Post in thread 'Would you fly at a less convenient time to get a nicer plane?'

Jun 22, 2025

I'm a points flyer, so I fly whatever is available. However, I'd like to know, and appreciate, the aircraft more, especially becasue I see so much chat about them in the forums. Is there an article (or thread with a pinned top post) summarising the different types of craft and their high and low points? If not, that'd be really useful if someone has the inclination....

• FlyingFiona

• 

I've written an article summarising the differences between different plane types, and the pros & cons of each one:

The Pros & Cons of Different Aircraft Types

Find out how frequent flyers spot the difference between types of planes, and which aircraft types are the best to fly on.

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

For those of you who aren't familiar with the subtle differences between different aircraft types, I hope this helps you to make a more informed decision next time you book a flight!

And for the frequent flyers on the forum who know all the ins & outs of different plane types: Do you agree with my comments? You can share your thoughts here!

 

[elanshin]

I would say that beyond these 4 categories: small regional jet, standard single aisle (737/a320), standard wide body and the 2 floor planes (a380, 747) most passengers wouldn't be able to tell the subtle differences and only care about how the interior is laid out.

ANA 787 configured with 34" of leg room vs most other 787s? I doubt the average passenger would even realise that its the same air frame.

As for going out of the way to fly better aircraft, I suspect there would be a preference for widebody over narrow, but at the same time context is very important for people to understand. There are times when going for the widebody and the slight comforts are potentially worse off.

 

[aspro2]

I guess this will be across all modern Airbuses: in a complete accessibility fail, the signs for whether toilets are free or occupied break the rule of informational redundancy (only a colour change, no cross-through or text) AND the warm green and red difference is a total cough for red-green colourblind users. I breathe a sigh of relief when I board a Boeing cos then I'm not squinting desperately to see if I can work out the colour, or queuing needlessly for ages. (There's a chance my sample size is not large enough, but I believe this is a clear Airbus/Boeing difference.)

 

[moa999]

It's really the combination of airline and aircraft type that matters (and even then numerous airlines have multiple subfleets and can be known for last minute substitutions.



While Y on most 332/333/338/339s is good, like say the 2x4x2 on QF, that's until you hit the LCCs that pack 3x3x3 into the frame (AirAsiaXs and Cebu Pacific)

Whereas (almost) everyone is 3x3x3 in a 787.

 

[Berlin]

For most absolute beginners, it’s actually most important to explain to them that aircraft type is completely independent from seat type. It always strikes me how many of the “public” do not understand this. And an old 777 on Emirates with their 2-3-2 config can indeed become rather uncomfortable.

Just experienced the A220 for the first time the other day on a short Air France hop from Paris to Berlin. Clearly not a “real” Airbus in the classic sense but a super nice little plane nevertheless. Glad that Qantas decided to purchase them.

One more point I’d make on the A330- the new A330 NEOs have a MUCH more modern interior than the old A330s Qantas still flies. From a passenger perspective, it feels like an all new aircraft and is becoming more and more popular with airlines for routes that don’t quite require an A350.

 

[The Tasmanian Ambassador]

Inspired by AFF forum posts from @FlyingFiona and @aikman and in this thread...

Post in thread 'Would you fly at a less convenient time to get a nicer plane?'

Jun 22, 2025

I'm a points flyer, so I fly whatever is available. However, I'd like to know, and appreciate, the aircraft more, especially becasue I see so much chat about them in the forums. Is there an article (or thread with a pinned top post) summarising the different types of craft and their high and low points? If not, that'd be really useful if someone has the inclination....

• FlyingFiona

• 

I've written an article summarising the differences between different plane types, and the pros & cons of each one:

The Pros & Cons of Different Aircraft Types

Find out how frequent flyers spot the difference between types of planes, and which aircraft types are the best to fly on.

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

For those of you who aren't familiar with the subtle differences between different aircraft types, I hope this helps you to make a more informed decision next time you book a flight!

And for the frequent flyers on the forum who know all the ins & outs of different plane types: Do you agree with my comments? You can share your thoughts here!

A350 new Business Class unbeatable
787 ageing like milk..

 

[BigCatHunter]

As a poor (read: economy) passenger I really love the A380 - it has more space for tall people like me, and I even discovered that on the upper deck there are a few seats where the seat in front is absent because there seems to be some kind of trap door there. Sorry, I know it is a bit vague but I still remember how wonderful it was to stretch out on along haul from Europe; and even the normal seats have more space.

 

[offshore171]

Not enough emphasis is given to the benefits of the lower Cabin Altitude of more recent designs from the A380 onward, including the A350 and 787. These aircraft run a cabin altitude of 6000ft equivalent, as opposed to 8000ft of older designs like the 777 and A330.

The better air pressure and higher air quality is a game changer for long haul.

 

[Palyadoc]

I like the E190 in business with its 1-2 layout. But the overhead bins on the left hand side in the business cabin are very small.

 

[FlyingFiona]

This is a really great comparative article, @Matt Graham, thank you so much for taking the time to do this. I will be paying much more attention to the aircraft types when weighing up my travel options from now. It's also very helpful to know which craft are nosier than others.

 

[Warragul]

Not enough emphasis is given to the benefits of the lower Cabin Altitude of more recent designs from the A380 onward, including the A350 and 787. These aircraft run a cabin altitude of 6000ft equivalent, as opposed to 8000ft of older designs like the 777 and A330.

The better air pressure and higher air quality is a game changer for long haul.

I think that can be overrated compared to other variables. Worse jetlag I've had in recent times was after 12 hours on a 787 (in J), but with an uncomfortable seat equating to minimal comfort and shuteye.

 

[offshore171]

Worse jetlag I've had in recent times was after 12 hours on a 787 (in J), but with an uncomfortable seat equating to minimal comfort and shuteye.

Ok so there was other factors in play there.

What I would say is that all else being equal the cabin altitude makes a big difference on long haul.

These higher pressure cabins also have slightly higher humidity. The air quality is significantly better. Your eyes, nose and mouth don't get as dry, your ankles dont swell as much, and your eyes get less puffy.

Bloody hell sounds like I'm describing a hangover

 

[jb747]

Not enough emphasis is given to the benefits of the lower Cabin Altitude of more recent designs from the A380 onward, including the A350 and 787. These aircraft run a cabin altitude of 6000ft equivalent, as opposed to 8000ft of older designs like the 777 and A330.

The better air pressure and higher air quality is a game changer for long haul.

You need to be careful of the marketing here. Yes these aircraft can operate to a greater maximum differential pressure (I think the 380 is actually the winner in these stakes), but that does not mean they operate at 6,000’ vs 8.000’. The cabin altitude varies with the real altitude, and it will achieve that maximum differential at some point. From there, the cabin maintains that differential, and climbs with any actual change. So, depending upon the actual flight profile, you’re probably looking at an average improvement more in the order of 500 to 1,000’, assuming the same flight profile. These new aircraft also have a tendency to be operated higher, for longer periods of the flight, so any benefit disappears, as the flight profile will not be the same.

Moisture….the air cycle machines remove all of it, not that there’s a great deal present at altitude anyway. Whilst you could use some form of humidifier, the easiest way to increase the moisture level in the cabin is to reduce the cabin air replacement rate.

Many pilots have a preference for either Boeing or Airbus because the two plane makers have fundamentally different approaches to designing aircraft. Boeing gives more control directly to the pilots, while Airbus planes use “fly by wire” technology that takes pilots’ inputs and runs them through a computer. In some cases, the Airbus computer might even override the pilot’s yoke inputs – for better, or worse.

Boeing also uses fly by wire, and whilst many will claim that it’s more transparent to what the pilot wants, the reality is that the Airbus system does not stop you from getting any response that you need, whilst it simultaneously allows taking the aircraft to the aerodynamic maximum. One aircraft that lets you pull it into the stall, vs one that will hold you exactly on the cusp of the stall. I know which I would prefer. Remember that most pilots have not flown types from both makers.