Qantas in the ****ter

[Enema Bandit's Dad]

From today's Australian newspaper

Qantas flight 63 from Sydney to Johannesburg last Friday was beset with difficulties: six toilets on the 747 were blocked, and it was later discovered four blankets had been stuffed into the pipes. After a fair bit of argy-bargy concerning whether it was okay to fly, and whether the loos could actually be fixed in South Africa or not, the 747 returned to Sydney, where it was found the pipes had leaked sewerage all over the passengers' bags. The planes next trip, as Qantas flight 31 to London, had to be cancelled, and there is now an enquiry into whether the toilet damage was a case of industrial sabotage, or simply the final consequence of cost cutting. Qantas chief Geoff Dixon has been widely praised in business circles for a five year cost-cutting program, but there is now deep disgruntlement at many levels within the national carrier.

[blueloo]

Apparently it was one of Geoffs Tampons that blocked the dunny.

[assasin8]

Where's Kenny when you need him ???
:O

[Enema Bandit's Dad]

And with a name like blueloo, I guess you'd know!

[captain_cranky]

:hmm: I heard it was the Captains log!:E

[Apophis]

Probably just another maintenance error its all in the planning.:{

[Taildragger67]

How the blazes do you stuff a blanket into the loo pipes??!! Yes I know about the vacuuming etc. but a blanket would take up a decent volume and one would've thought there'd be something obvious still sticking out of the hole in the loo itself.

Cr@p all over the bags :eek: ... makes for a plane-load of very unhappy campers.

[rammel]

Of course the first thing they blame is disgruntled staff. It'll probably turn out to be some yob or a group of them who thought it'd be a bit of a laugh.

[Bazzamundi]

From what I have heard there are three a/c that have suffered the same fate (blocked crappers due to blankets). It may not be just a bunch of drunken yobs doing something they think is funny on board if this is in fact true.

[VTM]

Sounds like a load of CRAP to me:bored:

VTM

[jack red]

QF staff have been pissed off for a while, looks as though they are now shat off !:E

[AlphaMale]

Can't imagine why sombody would have eaten the blanket in the first place?!? :bored: ... Is the food really that bad?

Andy

[company_spy]

The cancelled flight was due to 12, yes one dozen blankets found inside the toilet tanks.These blankets were rolled up tightly, as you do at the beach to dry a towel, an carefully fed into the toilets. When the aircraft was finally put on bay and the toilets serviced another blockage happened and one more blanket was found.
For the aircraft toilets to have the required suction to pull through 13 blankets this must have happened in flight. Also if you saw pax in the aisle way tightly winding up blankets it would look suspicious, crew perhaps. I certainly hope not, because if it is I would personally like to see them in the **** tanks removing them as the engineers did the other night.

[Capt Claret]

Whilst on the topic of blocked ****ters, the F/O a couple of weeks ago performed above and beyond the call of duty!

Despatched with one of two WCs U/S. Almost half way into a 2+ hour sector with close to a full pax compliment the CC advised that the second WC had also gone U/S, both being blocked.

The No1 CC and F/O and I discussed the pros and cons of an enroute 'tech' diversion to prevent some poor soul soiling themselves, when the F/O offered to go and investigate.

So, rubber glove on, hand into the (full) bowl, other hand working the plumbing levers underneath the bowl, and hey presto both crappers now working. :ok:

As it transpires, the defect kept recurring for a week with gingerbeers unable to find a fault until a disposable nappy was eventually retrieved from whence it shouldn't have been.

Onya ET! Can't say I'd have been prepared to do it.

[Buster Hyman]

Ahhh...hence the term "Blanket Bombing"!

[jack red]

Despatched with one of two WCs U/S.

Tech. crew should not have left for a 2hour + flight and full pax compliment with one dunny U/S. When are they going to stand up and resist this crap.

Must have been a weak assed Skipper not to have insisted the toilet be repaired prior to flight. Hope the F/O makes him clean the dunny next time it happens! :*


If the F/O had to clean out the crapper, tough tittys. He might question the Captain next time and get the toilet serviceable before depature !!!!:mad:

[Capt Claret]

Jack,

Why shouldn't I have?

ps. F/O didn't have to clean the crapper, he just did it.

[Icarus2001]

Tech. crew should not have left for a 2hour + flight and full pax compliment with one dunny U/S. When are they going to stand up and resist this crap Resist what crap? Have you heard of an MEL or CDL or DDL?

So you would not depart unless EVERTHING on your aircraft was working?

Welcome to the real world.

[jack red]

Have you heard of an MEL or CDL or DDL?


Yep. Have you heard of common sense ? The Captain is not required to accept anything in the MEL he is not happy with OR common sense would suggest it would be unwise to accept.
I suppose you would tow the Company line and despatch with one wx radar u/s into known area of forecast TS? MEL says you can do it !:ugh:

F/O didn't have to clean the crapper, he just did it.

Yeah, well next time the F/O may just tell you to go and clean it ! :rolleyes:

[Capt Claret]

Jack,


Yeah, well next time the F/O may just tell you to go and clean it !

No he won't. I didn't tell him to do anything. Nor did I suggest anything. He volunteered to go take a look and then decide to fix it.

I suppose you would tow the Company line and despatch with one wx radar u/s into known area of forecast TS? MEL says you can do it !

I don't quite see how you can equate a MELd crapper with a MELd Wx Radar and T/S. Nor have I ever seen a MEL that will allow non Wx radar ops in areas of TS.

Now to my question, why shouldn't I have despatched?

[Icarus2001]

Equating a broken toilet at dispatch with a U/S weather radar is a l o n g stretch.

Our MEL does not permit flight into areas of known or forecast CB or even turbulence associated with large Cu if the radar is U/S.

Now back to the point, a two hour flight and only one toilet?

So why should CC have refused to depart?

[jack red]

Icarus I didn't realise you only flew lighties. Jet transport aircraft have two wx radars, if one goes u/s the MEL allows flight into areas of TS and turbulence provided the other one is seviceable. Only an idiot would despatch with one serviceable because if the other one goes cactus you're in the smuck !

Claret think about it Mate! You already stated The No1 CC and F/O and I discussed the pros and cons of an enroute 'tech' diversion to prevent some poor soul soiling themselves, ..............if you had despatched with two toilets serviceable this would never had been a problem!
You didn't come up through the cadet scheme per chance? Don't let the MEL & bully QF management rule your life. Use common sense and think about the crew and passengers for a change.

[Martin VanNostrum]

Jack Red.........It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

[Capt Claret]

Well jack, aren't you just the font of all knowledge. And, you're able to resort to that old PPRuNe staple, name calling. :=

I've only been flying jet transport aircraft for 7 years, commands on two types, but yet to experience the luxury of two Wx radar.

I guess, based on your comment, Only an idiot would despatch with one serviceable because if the other one goes cactus you're in the smuck !
there must be a lot of idiots out there, as I'd hazzard a guess that if the MEL allowed it and there were no other contrary indications more would fly with only one, than wouldn't. Afterall, my colleagues and I have been flying with only 1 radar for, for, well since Wx radar came on the sceene.

..............if you had despatched with two toilets serviceable this would never had been a problem!

Maybe. Maybe not. I'd suggest the mere fact that the F/O was able to render both dunnies serviceable means that both could easily be rendered unserviceable as they all share common plumbing.

Now, in the past I've flown that route with aircraft fitted with only one dunny. Should I refuse to operate the service and plunge the pax' plans into disarray because there's no toilet redundancy?

I now operate the service with either two or 3 dunnies, depending on the airframe. If one of three goes u/s should I throw pax plans into disarray?

If the dunnies were of the old pot under the seat variety, then with only one serviceable, and of very fixed holding capacity, then I'd have no problem insisting on a repair, as I have done in the past.

But with the current type, with all two/three dunnies feeding into a common holding tank, the question was; inconvenience close to 100pax whilst bits and bobs are sought to rectify the problem (which eluded gingerbeers for almost 2 weeks) or cause them some minor inconvenience in having to wait a bit to 'go'. I hold with my decision to opt for a little enroute inconvenience.

My final words, reflect on your own; Use common sense and think about the crew and passengers for a change.

If you can't just resort to name calling.... :D

[4SPOOLED]

If CC pulled the A/C from service due to 1 WC being U/S there would be some other moron on here saying what a stupid move to make.

Back in the real world of aviation we are payed to take punters from point A to point B, a glorified Bus driver so to speak, and we do it as quickly and cost effectivly as possible.

I doubt many Crews would ground an a/c due to a ****ter being blocked! In my level of aviation your happy to have all the instruments servicable and your even more excited when the ADF works :) (capt garmin is our copilot sitting on the right.....knee :))

[Hugh Jarse]

Clarrie,

He called you a cadet. :}

I nearly wet my pants, I did :ok:

[Spitty42]

Jack Red you are not understanding the whole premise of the MEL. These are devised with the "next failure mode" already considered. The risk of losing the second WXR has been calculated during the formulation of the MMEL. No further extrapolation is required....

[numbskull]

What's a weather radar MEL got to do with 12 blankets stuffed down a toilet. Get a grip on your ego's they're getting out of control.

I want to know who stuffed 12 blankets down the ****ter!!(and what in God's name was that FO thinking!!!- I hope he got a free coffee!!)

[company_spy]

there seems to be a campaign at the moment by certain CC members called "Screw the Roo" or words to that effect. The fact of the matter is that flushing blankets down the toilet only has the end effect of pi$$ing off the bloke who's job it is to clear the blankets out of a half full crapper tank. It would not seem a very smart thing to do, and on that basis one must question the recruiting process.

[RedTBar]

Company_spy,

I agree with you that the behaviour involved with sabotaging the aircraft with a blanket(s) is not smart at all and in fact an act of mindless stupidity.However to suggest as someone other than yourself did that this was part of an active campaign called screw the roo is speculative at best .The person that initially posted the suggestion that cabin crew would do something like this as a campaign against the company obviously wants to harm the reputation of cabin crew .

There are a number of cabin crew who are not impressed with the company just as there are engineers,pilots and just about any other area of staff as well who are unhappy with the company.It may well turn out that it is an individual in cabin crew who is responsible but I do not believe that it is a group who are doing this.The majority of cabin crew would never do anything like this as our argument is with the management and not with the engineers who have to fix this or the pax who is delayed .

There can be individuals in any group that display aberrant behaviour that the rest of their colleagues would never consider or condone.In just over 30 years of flying as cabin crew I have never seen or heard of anyone wanting to deliberately damage property belonging to anyone.

I ,like other cabin crew as well as engineers would like nothing more than to see the person (I hope that it is not persons) responsible caught and dealt with. Personally I do not believe that QF or any company has any position for a person that acts in this way.

[sydney s/h]

All this talk about the CC not going with regards to the dunnies being U/S.

As a CSM i have no authority whatsoever to make the call on an aircraft going U/S.

I speak to the Capt about cabin issues, he/she look in their books, call an engineer etc and then advise me to go ahead to board the pax or not.

We - CC- dont decide if the aircraft is airworthy or not.

[AnQrKa]

"The person that initially posted the suggestion that cabin crew would do something like this as a campaign against the company obviously wants to harm the reputation of cabin crew"

QF CC do a great job of harming thier own reputation. Crap service, militant unionist cranks wandering around the cabin treating the customers as a total inconvenience to party planning and aisle gossiping.

[sydney s/h]

Hey AnQrKa,

What do you do for a crust?

Apart from slagging Qantas Cabin Crew on here?

If you dont like us remember.... you have a choice.

[iceblock]

Sydney s/h,

In initial posts CC = Captain Claret, then in the last couple CC = Cabin Crew.

Hope this clears up the confusion.:confused:

[roamingwolf]

Hey AnQrka,

You know the old saying that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...well here's one you might recognise..

"Vikena, Yeah. All the ex an pilots are idiots. Nothing wrong with wildly generalised statements like that. Please, please please vikena, shed some light on your past - where did you come from cos EVERY pilots can be lumped into a generalised category if required. Its a slippery slope. Please tell me where you came from."

If you don't like wildly generalised statements about pilots then you should practice what you preach and shouldn't make them about cabin crew either or is that too complicated for you.

You sound like just another ex An pilot who is a tad bitter or is that too generalised for you..

[AnQrKa]

hey roaming wolf, most crew I know living in Asia have commented on the poor demeanour and generally crap service offered by QF - especially when compared to local carriers such as thai, cathay etc. QF legroom is far better though and the 330IFE is great. But dont expect too much from the 30 years plus seniorority of the longhaulers from LHR on 744. Been dishing out coffee for a tad too long. I am occasionally a full fare customer on QF LH when forced to be and have provided this same feedback to QF via the official channels. My piloting past has little to do with my dissatisfaction as a customer.

[sydney s/h]

AnQrKa,

like i said - why fly on QF if you dont like us????

You have a choice. We arent the cheapest fare in town, always other airlines you can fly on - SO WHY DONT YOU!!

You mention you flew on QF from LHR. Why? Every bloody airline around flies out of the UK.Why would you fly on an airline who has "Crap service, militant unionist cranks wandering around the cabin treating the customers as a total inconvenience to party planning and aisle gossiping".

No way i'd spend my hard earned $$ if i thought that way about an airline on one of the worlds longest sectors.

You sound like a whinger who is sitting down the back and is used to being in the premium cabin and want that service from when you used to fly for Ansett.

[roamingwolf]

AnQrKa,

I knew that my post would be beyond your comprehension although I had hoped that my example of your dislike for generalization would be understood.However with all your vast experience you can tell that all cabin crew are the same just as all pilots are the same.

Just as I thought though an Ex An pilot who has to live os to get a job and no you’re not bitter at QF at all….

Anyone who has the slightest understanding of cultural differences between Asia and western countries would know that comparing cabin crew of Asian airlines and those of western airlines is like comparing apples and oranges. I suppose you are loving the attention from all those Asian hosties and are terribly disappointed when you fly with a western airline.

I am curious as to how long you have been piloting as you put it?

As s/h said if you don’t like QF why then did you pay full fare to fly with us and not SIA or Thai.? As far as your understanding what we do as cabin crew I would have more idea of what it is like on the surface of Mars.

I suggest next time you are forced to fly home full fare that you fly an Asian carrier so that you can be pampered like the little boy you are. Don’t try to engage a hostie on one of those airlines in a conversation because you won’t get one but then it is not a conversation you want it...is it?

[AnQrKa]

Mate, wolfy, you really are barking up the wrong tree.

My interest or ability to obtain work in boring old oz has NOTHING to do with my comments wrt the crap that passes as customer service on QF. The amount of time spent as a pilot has no relevance either but I have spent A LOT OF TIME in the back, middle and front of an international airliner as full fare, staff and FFlyer.

If you actually read my post, I said I only travel QF when forced to. I would rather get home to oz on hols in the back of a QF “you should have asked me for wine when I was serving the meal” 330/744 when CX/SQ are full than not get home to oz at all. Understand.

No, I am not disappointed when I fly with western airlines – I fully expect to receive poor service compared to Asian or new Middle Eastern airlines. I am not surprised when I ask for water and get told to get it myself from a tap in the galley when traveling on QF.

I am not trying to offend you personally or query your motives or experience or history (like you have about me). I am just passing along an OPINION wrt to the service levels I have experienced at QF compared to airlines such as the ones I mentioned. It is an opinion shared by a lot of customers – you know the ones. That pay full fare.

What amazes me is the attitude of Syd s/h namely – don’t fly with us then.

Are you for real?

[roamingwolf]

There's the rub AnQrka,

You have offended me personally by generalizing about all QF cabin crew as well as other non Asian and middle eastern airlines cabin crew especially when I pointed out that in a previous post of yours you did not like a generalization about ex An pilots being made.

It's easy when you can make as remark about another group in society but you don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.I don't know what part of Asia you are living in but I suggest you try to get the translation for the word 'hypocrite .

Perhaps you might like to look at your own attitude to cabin crew and wonder why they treat you with such disdain.You usually get back what you dish out.

But the crux of your own attitude is summed up in your own words

"My interest or ability to obtain work in boring old oz has NOTHING to do with my comments wrt the crap that passes as customer service on QF"

If you find Australia so boring as you put it might I suggest you stay in Asia ,I think you be much more tolerated there. Australians usually tell it like it is

[Capt Claret]

Well, seeing as the thread drift has moved to the quality of QF CC, as opposed to some of the CC identities on this BB, let me tell a story.


Some time ago Mrs C took a frequent flyer redemption flight to a northern port. Enroute, a CC (cabin crew) member asked Mrs C why she was travelling. Mrs C advised that she was joining me in said northern port and we were then driving home, with our newly acquired kamper trailer.

On hearing this, the CC said, well you'll need some supplies, and provided Mrs C with what turned out to be a very pleasant bottle of vino-blanc, some nuts, some coffee, and a couple of glasses.

What bloody stirling service!!!!

The CC, nor anyone on the flight knew who Mrs C was married too, they didn't know I was 'in the industry'; they just provided excellent service.

So, to put a different perspective to some on this BB, I can only commend the QF CC I've personally dealt with when paxing, and the treatment of Mrs C only reinforces that.

ONYA guys and gals.

[J430]

I think enough is enough.

I have had CR@P service in almost every facet of consumer life, regardless of the price.

I also find QF not that bad, and I think the L/H CC(Cabin Crew) are pretty friendly and very accommodating. Even the tech crew. had one senior 744 captain come seek me out for a chat after takeoff ex LAX, just coz I fly with one of his retired colleagues, and because he engaged conversation with his customer on the aerobridge.

Cant count the number of flights in 38 years, but I can count the number of flights (various carriers) that I did not enjoy.....BA 744 Sydney to Singapore once.

I know things at the Red Rat are not what they used to be, but try most US operators, and the best of them is a LCC Southwest and some others similar.

I would probably avoid any flown by CC......with a name like that on wonders what state the skipper is in:} ....Just kidding...:ouch: Cheers mate!

J:ok:

[HotDog]

I suggest next time you are forced to fly home full fare that you fly an Asian carrier so that you can be pampered like the little boy you are. Don’t try to engage a hostie on one of those airlines in a conversation because you won’t get one but then it is not a conversation you want it...is it?


Roamingwolf, your disagreement with AnQrKa notwithstanding, I find your comments about Asian cabin crew somewhat bigoted and patronising. In my 33 years of Asian posting, I flew with countless Asian cabin crew of all shapes and sizes from various Asian backgrounds and nationalities. Many of them with university degrees. I have fond recollections of many a pleasant and intelligent discourse with these lovely ladies, in spite of the fact that they lacked familiarity with the virtues of a 4X stubbie. Now in my retirement, I always obtain a QF standby ticket as there seem to always be space available when my choice of Asian carrier is over booked. I wonder why.:confused:

[Capt Claret]

J430

hic, waas thaat you shay? hic

Jarse

G'day mate. I didn't know whether to laugh or get upset at the attempted insult. Well I did really! :ok:

[roamingwolf]

I think there has been enough posts about generalisations so I won't continue with another in response.Let's get back on topic

[lowerlobe]

Personally I like the one about why would anyone eat a blanket.

Then as someone else said it is probably better than a crew meal.

Never a truer word was said.

[Ultralights]

maybe they just ran out of toilet paper?? :}

[NIGELINOZ]

As someone who does not work in the industry I guess I am not really
supposed to post in this forum however the current situation re Qantas is very distressing to me.as Qantas is a great Aussie icon and I have never had a bad experience when flying with them.
I must ask though,why is it assumed that CC were responsible for the blanket isssue,surely there would be plenty of opportunities for others to do that sort of thing,like cleaners etc who have access to aircraft on bays prior to boarding etc.
Personally I have found all Qantas staff I have dealt with to be 100% professional and I doubt that any of them would want to do this sort of thing.
I really hope that all parties to this dispute about terms and conditions can be brought together before Qantas gets "merged" with Ansett,if you know what I mean.
To all Qantas staff:keep your chin up:)

[Kanga767]

I'm surprised the blanket culprits weren't caught on the security cameras hidden in all the lavatories. :O

K

[maui]

K767

They can't even keep the IFE operating (2 QF flights last month, 2 u/s IFE's). What makes you think they can keep the cameras servicable.

M

[HotDog]

Maui, you don't really believe they have surveilance cameras in the toilets.:rolleyes:

[Kanga767]

Of course they do! They're digital too!!

In a similar fashion to Captain Claret's experience, I've had to go in there a few times in the past weeks and clear a download.

K

[HotDog]

Yes I've seen your pictures on Utube. Not a pretty sight.:}

[Australia2]

Hotdog,

I'm with you, a rude, niave, gross generalisation. While a proud Australian and feeling for the staff on the coalface a great thing about QF travel is the sub-load availability.

Not all ex AN (and never assume not ex QF as well) drivers are rotting away in Asia dreaming of flying in Oz (Given the wonderful state of Australian aviation)

This thread pretty well sums it all up to me.

Oz2

[lowerlobe]

J* international have already fixed the problem of blankets down the toilet because they have very few on board and the ones that are there they know who bought them.

I have also heard that on J* international you have to buy a token for the brasco when you want to clear your own blockage.

If you stay in there for more than 3 minutes the toilet roll retracts ,the lights come on full with a pa telling you that your time is up and the door opens.If you do not vacate said brasco it takes a very nice digital pic of you and sends it to New Idea.

but as maui has said they can't keep the IFE working so this will probably break as well and the toilets will be unservicable..

ps people are not only bringing their sandwiches but blankets ,pillows and now toilet paper as well

remember the new J* motto..."You only pay for what you use"....I'm sorry sir you used 3 squares of toilet paper ,that will be another token please

[Bolty McBolt]

As someone who does not work in the industry I guess I am not really
supposed to post in this forum however the current situation re Qantas is very distressing to me.as Qantas is a great Aussie icon and I have never had a bad experience when flying with them.
I must ask though,why is it assumed that CC were responsible for the blanket isssue,surely there would be plenty of opportunities for others to do that sort of thing,like cleaners etc who have access to aircraft on bays prior to boarding etc.

To all Qantas staff:keep your chin up:)

To add a little light to why it is thought that cabin crew are to blame is that it has been found that the toilet vac system is not powerful enough to draw a blanket thru using the ground system. Therefore the aircraft had to be at altitude/cruise. And to add to weight of the accusation is that this happened 3 times in a week going to different destinations. It is not proof but if I had to investigate I know with whom I would start.

Then it could be pax resorting to eating blankets due to the lack of food served on QF flights or a football club end of year prank. All equally likely ! :ok:

[Torgoen]

Geoff Dixon might be widely praised in some business circles perhaps because he's learn't to smile as he kills ..

He was once famous for quietly intercepting flightcrew applications from Sunstate to prevent them from migrating to Qantas ..!!

could it be some people have longer memories than some care to think ...?











From today's Australian newspaper

Qantas flight 63 from Sydney to Johannesburg last Friday was beset with difficulties: six toilets on the 747 were blocked, and it was later discovered four blankets had been stuffed into the pipes. After a fair bit of argy-bargy concerning whether it was okay to fly, and whether the loos could actually be fixed in South Africa or not, the 747 returned to Sydney, where it was found the pipes had leaked sewerage all over the passengers' bags. The planes next trip, as Qantas flight 31 to London, had to be cancelled, and there is now an enquiry into whether the toilet damage was a case of industrial sabotage, or simply the final consequence of cost cutting. Qantas chief Geoff Dixon has been widely praised in business circles for a five year cost-cutting program, but there is now deep disgruntlement at many levels within the national carrier.