Who are the world's safest airlines for 2016?
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
Who are the world's safest airlines for 2016?
Many folk ask in here about the 'safest' carriers. This may be some of them:
Major Airline News - AirlineRatings.com
They do 'show their working' and the criteria Airline Ratings
Major Airline News - AirlineRatings.com
They do 'show their working' and the criteria Airline Ratings
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will always be Qantas. AirlineRatings is edited by Geoffrey Thomas - a Qantas fanboy and 'aviation expert. By naming them the safest he's guaranteed top tier FF membership and no doubt is showered with numerous goodies from QF. There's no doubt that they're a very safe airline, but in the modern era there's no evidence to say they're any safer than a whole host of airlines. They are a relatively small airline operating predominantly in a very benign environment. Many airlines have had a fatality free jet era but somehow QF always come out tops with Geoffrey.
It's a nonsense system anyway. It's odd how you loose two points for not being IOSA certified but only loose on point if you've killed someone in the last decade.
You loose a point for not being FAA endorsed which would not apply to euro carriers anyway. And you loose a point for 'only' flying Russian aircraft. So you have a fleet of 100 jets, 99 of them are Russian but you still actually score a point because not all are Russian. By having one none Russian jet you're still scoring a point.
They even admit they don't rank them based on numerical scores but pick one airline that 'stands out'. Watch what happens when the 'list' is published for 2016 - the result will be that Geoffrey Thomas will likely be at a Charman's Club lounge near you or you might be sharing the QF premium cabin with him.
It's a nonsense system anyway. It's odd how you loose two points for not being IOSA certified but only loose on point if you've killed someone in the last decade.
You loose a point for not being FAA endorsed which would not apply to euro carriers anyway. And you loose a point for 'only' flying Russian aircraft. So you have a fleet of 100 jets, 99 of them are Russian but you still actually score a point because not all are Russian. By having one none Russian jet you're still scoring a point.
They even admit they don't rank them based on numerical scores but pick one airline that 'stands out'. Watch what happens when the 'list' is published for 2016 - the result will be that Geoffrey Thomas will likely be at a Charman's Club lounge near you or you might be sharing the QF premium cabin with him.
Last edited by HeartyMeatballs; 27th May 2016 at 08:12.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, so you didn't know about Geoffrey Thomas and AirlineRatings eh, PAXboy?
There have been a few threads on here to do with GT's (lack of) qualifications and objectivity.
HeartyMeatballs is right on the money.
There have been a few threads on here to do with GT's (lack of) qualifications and objectivity.
HeartyMeatballs is right on the money.
I have yet to meet anyone in the industry who takes airlineratings.com seriously.
Apart from anything else, no airline would ever claim on its own behalf to be one of "the world's safest airlines for 2016" when we're not even halfway through the year - that would be tempting fate ...
Apart from anything else, no airline would ever claim on its own behalf to be one of "the world's safest airlines for 2016" when we're not even halfway through the year - that would be tempting fate ...
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and God forbid QF did have a fatality, Geoffrey Thomas will merely change the assessment matrix to ensure that they're still tops. Perhaps it will be a matter of going 6 months fatality free instead of the usual 10 years. Anything to keep QF in pole position.
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
I DO know about Airline Ratings. Hence use of >'safest' carries< the use of the word 'may' and 'show their working' with inverted commas. Perhaps I should have thrown in a few 
for good measure!
I just thought that you might like a little 'click bait' for the long weekend.
You can always ask the mods to delete the thread.
for good measure!I just thought that you might like a little 'click bait' for the long weekend.
You can always ask the mods to delete the thread.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All IATA members are IOSA certified, it is a condition of membership. Neither Easyjet nor Ryanair are IATA members, nor have they sought IOSA. That doesn't make them less safe. Compare, for example, Easyjet's unscheduled hull retirements to Air France's. Nuff said.
The article doesn't say what is meant by 'safe'. Is it engineering? Airlines in the past have been banned from European airspace for poor engineering? Is it aircraft type? Again some have been banned for that. Is it Crew performance and training? The list goes on.
I've got 4 sectors with Egypt Air coming up, but I consider them safe! (Not sure where they are in the top 100)
I've got 4 sectors with Egypt Air coming up, but I consider them safe! (Not sure where they are in the top 100)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airline safety should come with an investment style warning "Past performance is no guarantee of future performance". What really matters is that the airline's culture is "safe" and by that I don't mean walls full of safety posters, constant emails to staff imploring then to be safe and small minded, too often quoted cliches like "Safety is our first priority... etc." in every press release.
A safety culture is a rather nebulous thing and very hard to quantify. But the safest companies will have proper management. One that wants to hear bad news, one that is prepared to spend money training and one that trusts and supports its crews in its day to day operations. When any of these things are absent its employees soon realise that they are not a valued part of the system but a mere tiny cog. They then start thinking only of themselves and not as a player in larger game. It will work for a time, you may well end up with a perfect record for a period of time but then you get caught by something you didn't expect.
So what makes an airline safe is not what you can see, it is what you can't - if that makes sense?
PM
A safety culture is a rather nebulous thing and very hard to quantify. But the safest companies will have proper management. One that wants to hear bad news, one that is prepared to spend money training and one that trusts and supports its crews in its day to day operations. When any of these things are absent its employees soon realise that they are not a valued part of the system but a mere tiny cog. They then start thinking only of themselves and not as a player in larger game. It will work for a time, you may well end up with a perfect record for a period of time but then you get caught by something you didn't expect.
So what makes an airline safe is not what you can see, it is what you can't - if that makes sense?
PM
Last edited by Piltdown Man; 30th May 2016 at 13:03. Reason: R's about face and missing worms.
