"You have a point. If you think it's important to agonize over a routine airline event like it's really something; then that's up to you."
I don't know about agonising, but at least it comes up and gets discussed - like so many other threads in R&N that really are about "dealing with the sh*t that happens when you fly" - things break, deal with it. Report it, discuss it, learn from it, move on.
"Yes crew are pressured. "
I don't doubt it it may be happening - was it an influencer in this case? Unknown. If it is happening, it's yet another hole in the cheese, so what is the aviation community doing to expose it and have the hole filled?
"At the very least, the original poster should re-name this thread as "Hydro failure at Sidney" not something that is untrue: another "EMERGENCY!" at Qantas."
Yeah, thread topic could be toned down, but one thing to consider, did the crew declare an emergency and get priority landing? If so, it is the 3rd one in a month for QANTAS.
"I am not a corporate toady as you can verify by my posts at the "Qantas 744 depressurization" thread.... but this report is below the belt imho."
*IF* the Adelaide crew declared an emergency and *IF* this crew did as well (sorry, I can't state 100% that they did) then that's 3 close together. While only the first was a full blown, "holy crap" situation and the others comparatively "easy," it certainly does raise some eyebrows.
Are declared emergencies a frequent thing?
NOTE: I'm not trying to have a go at you and can respect the position of "don't kick 'em when they're down" - I also agree that the Oz press are blowing things all out of proportion at the moment (typical sensationalism

). I don't agree with pulling the thread (change the title if an emergency was NOT declared) and I was wondering how the "pressuring" applied to this incident.