Sorry to state the obvious but all maintenance is headed offshore other than line. Flight and cabin crews, already well on the way. Look at the youngsters on the 380, no seasoned crew in sight. How do you stop the business from heading O/S? The argument proposing Asian maintenance/cabin staff/flight crew are inferior to OZ falls short when looking at Cathay Pacific, Singapore or Lufthansa.
The old days are gone, not sure what the future holds or how to embrace it.
Redwine, your argument will fail when an A380 overruns an airport and bursts into flames.
The first people out the door will be those delightfully complaisant Asian cabin crew.
They are not paid to risk their lives getting the pax out, in fact their compatriots would regard them as being stupid for even trying. They are not paid enough. The company has no loyalty to them, let alone their dependents.
As for maintenance, they will do what they are paid to do, not what Airbus requires them to do. They will simply rely on diffusion of responsibility to protect them.
Meanwhile, we will continue to prosecute people for honest mistakes.
The unfortunate reality is that the entire aviation regulatory and quality control system is based on Judeo Christian principles especially the golden rule. Japan has a similar principle based upon the concept of "Face". Apart from that - nothing.
We are about to learn that again. Cirrus and Continental have been sold to China. Good luck with that.
CASA will not change until there are Three smoking holes in the ground.
Look at the youngsters on the 380, no seasoned crew in sight.
Actually untrue. A high percentage of CC on the A380 are experienced and older domestic crew on secondment for two years, having a break from 4 sector domestic ops.
There are not too many Longhaul there though.........
Sunfish.----- this is not the first time I have to correct you. Not all Asian cabin crew are "first out the door" as you say. On more than one occasion Cathay cabin crew have excelled themselves during pax evacuations. So please take your biased attitude elsewhere. In fact in around 5 evacs in the past 15 years not once did any of our cabin crew abandon ship before the pax, they did their jobs to a very high standard.
The argument proposing Asian maintenance/cabin staff/flight crew are inferior to OZ falls short when looking at Cathay Pacific, Singapore or Lufthansa.
A very ignorant and misinformed statement if ever I saw one. Fixing wiring with staples, pencil whipping check sheets on inspections that were not carried out, taking off on closed runways etc, etc.
A manager within QF Eng made a very similar statement in front of a group of around 80 LAMES approx 1 week before the OQA engine incident. We subsequently grounded our 380 fleet immediately. Some others didn't (and guess who). What a short memory some people have. Cost cutting is usually the main reason behind people making statements such as these.
By the way, you left a few big name airlines out of your cleverly compiled list.
Yawn, another willy waving competition.....so here goes!
We here at CX have flight crew standards the equal of QF. We too haven't ever lost a Jet Aircraft due to flight crew error. In fact the last Jet hull loss was from a Thai bloke blowing himself and the Aircraft up over Vietnam a long long time ago. Our record, like Qf, speaks for itself day in day out all over the world with 130+ widebody Aircraft flying into places QF crews only dream about!!
So take your "QF is the best" crap and shove it!!
Rant over....
By the way, I have a lot of mates in Skippy and as an Aussie am proud of their high standards.
A year or so ago QF started an ad campaign in UK emphasing "worlds most experienced airline" or similar. Made pilots cringe. Qf has been around a while but much "experience" gained doing "ground hog day" - SYD SIN LHR SIN SYD etc etc. Most QF pilots are aware, envious and appreciative of the multiple destinations that other crew encounter on a daily basis. The familiarity with all destinations can produce its own problems. There are no doubt some w@@#%$# that believe Qantas is the best - the rest of us try to be but are under no illusions....
My son recently flew CX and was appalled at the cabin crew standards and behaviour. They made virtually no attempt to enforce seatbelt restrictions or anything else. The service was crap as well.
God help the passengers when there is an incident on any Asian crewed airline because the cabin crew won't.
Sunfish:---- you are a biased racist idiot. I'm not sorry to say it. As a Professional working in the industry for nearly 30 years I have a better idea of standards and safety than your son ( was he travelling in the Baby bassinet? ) My cabin crew have many times in the recent past excelled themselves in emergency situations and I have absolutely no hesitation in saying that they are as professional a bunch as any QF crew. Their runs are already on the board mate.
I've been the Captain on several diversions in the last 10 years and my crew continued to give service above and beyond to their passengers long after the wheels had stopped. Assisting them in the terminal, helping with bags and taking them personally to the airport hotel. This is what my crew do, it's their job and they do it well.
Running down other Airlines and their crews does nothing to help your cause so pull your stupid head in and stick to flying in GA with OzRunways strapped to your knee.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 15th Feb 2012 at 22:27.
Thats a bit average mate. You do post a lot of intelligent thought provoking material, which generally are supported by facts or are well thought out.
I think you may have missed the mark here with such a sweeping generalisation. I don't think it is (i hope not) racially motivated but very uninformed.
Generally i am a fan but can't go with you on this one. there are a lot of Aussie CX pilots here and I would be surprised if they held the same views of the CC they work with everyday.
HKG Airlines bought the A380's that QF didn't want but they might be unwanted again
Hong Kong Airlines may cancel A380 order: report
Hong Kong Airlines may cancel an order for 10 Airbus superjumbo A380 jets, a report said Thursday, as Chinese opposition to the European Union's airlines carbon emissions fee intensifies.
Beijing has banned its airlines from complying with the EU scheme, which was imposed from January 1 although no airline will face a bill until 2013.
Hong Kong Airlines, a subsidiary of Chinese carrier Hainan Airlines, said it was under pressure to cancel the acquisition -- reportedly worth about $3.8 billion at list prices -- following China's decision.
"We cannot do something which is against our country's interest," Hong Kong Airlines president Yang Jianhong told the South China Morning Post newspaper in Hong Kong.
The airline might review its fleet expansion plan if the order is dropped, the newspaper quoted a source from the firm as saying. The 10 jets were intended to serve its European and North American markets.
Hong Kong Airlines could not be immediately reached for comment. A Singapore-based spokesman for Airbus told AFP "there is no change to the status of the order" at the moment.
The European aircraft manufacturer has reportedly said it plans to deliver the first A380 to Hong Kong Airlines in 2015.
China was among more than two dozen countries including India, Russia and the United States that opposed the EU scheme, which is imposed on airlines taking off or landing in Europe.
The EU has said the carbon tax will help the 27-nation EU bloc achieve its goal of cutting emissions by 20 percent by 2020 and that it will not back down, despite claims the charge violates international law.
China has said it fears its aviation sector will have to pay an additional 800 million yuan ($125 million) a year on flights originating from or landing in Europe, and that the cost could be almost four times higher by 2020.
Hong Kong Airlines may cancel an order for 10 Airbus superjumbo A380 jets, a report said Thursday, as Chinese opposition to the European Union's airlines carbon emissions fee intensifies.
They've dropped the order because the economics are crap and the aeroplane doesnt make money. It's that simple.
Nancy's sitting down near the southern end of 20C in Singapore. Looks complete from the outside but apparently there is a further delay due to a wait for hangar space to complete the job.
Looks complete from the outside but apparently there is a further delay due to a wait for hangar space to complete the job.
Yeah....That worries me too.
"Oh I'm so sorry Mr Qantas, That airplane you had booked in for a "D-Check", that you've just sent here with no more hours to run as you've used up all your extensions.....So sorry, cannot do check for another 8 weeks as the check for another airline is running late / they paid us more then you pay us / we have our own aircraft to service / our contractors just left for someone who pays 2-bowls-of-rice a day"
The penalty clauses built in to these maintenance contracts are very, very severe if delays are caused by or attributed to the contracting engineering company. Heads are likely to roll in SIA if penalty clauses are invoked, the alternative is to negotiate a cheaper contract without these clauses, could that be QANTAS?
