JetStar code-sharing to Japan

[max autobrakes]

In todays paper a bit of fluff about How great JetStar is getting to code-share with JAL to Osaka.
Now if I'm not mistaken didn't Qantas have to go through hell to prove that Qantas was the equivalant to Japanese carriers before the Japanese Authorities would allow Qantas and JAL to code share.

Surely just because JetStar is a part of the Qantas Group you can't just automatically piggyback whatever Qantas has earned the hard way and just hand it on a platter to JetStar.

What about due diligence etc?

[Shagtastic]

In light of the safety issues experienced by JAL in recent years (and reported in the media) isn't it JAL that should be proving that it's up to PornStar standards??

Shags

[RAD_ALT_ALIVE]

I think you'll find that the Japanese authorities put Jetstar through its paces in the same way that other prospective code-share airlines are, ie Qantas.

It's the culmination of many months of hard work by teams within both camps.

Not that any Ppruner is likely to accept that.

Why is it that everything JQ do is belittled by all and sundry? EBAs aside, it's not unlike DJ when they were growing at an enormous pace - incidents occurred on the way, the degree of professionalism of some within their ranks were questioned. My guess is that once JQ have been around for about the same time that DJ have, the agro will die a natural death.

Or will it start afresh with Tiger...

[B A Lert]

I think you'll find that the Japanese authorities put Jetstar through its paces in the same way that other prospective code-share airlines are, ie Qantas.

It's the culmination of many months of hard work by teams within both camps.

RAD_ALT_ALIVE is obviously very close to the JQ people who do some of the work but he writes only of '"both camps". As Qantas is not part of the Japanese camp, did they have a tent within the Jetstar campground on this exercise? You bet your bloody life they did as the oracles at Jetstar would be lost if it couldn't or didn't draw upon the expertise of its parent.

Fess up RAD_ALT_ALIVE and tell us of the Qantas involvement and perhaps extend your good will for without the much faceted help that is given JQ without cost, or for less than cost, you'd be up sh!t creek without the proverbial paddle.

[busdriver007]

Australian Airlines never did get their approval to code-share. Why is Jetstar so different......that it will get it's approval straight away...good luck. The Japanese are very fussy.:=

[apacau]

After all the jetstar-bashing I read on here and elsewhere, I dreaded my first JQ experience, which happened to be on their longest routes MEL-HNL-MEL.

The opposite was true (from a pax perspective). Whilst half empty flights certainly helped, the cabin was clean and comfortable and service excellent. Yes, you pay for food etd, but at the fare i paid, I wasn't complaining. And there's no need to buy the entertainment units - there's plenty of decent mainscreen entertainment to keep you occupied too.

One curiosity though - on the outbound leg, the (cabin) crew wereall Thai, and on the return they were all Aussie. Quite a visual difference... How do the crew rotations work - I would have thought the Thai cabin crews would be mainly restricted to the BKK/HKT routes??

[Sonique]

Sorry Busdriver007 - Wrong.

AO did receive their approval to codeshare with JAL. It just never eventuated as QF closed the doors on AO before the first service to NRT. JAL execs at the time were gobsmacked with the outstanding AO service. AO were also going to refit the aircraft with a premium economy section for this.

There are 2 NRT flights from CNS each day. The first is a combined JAL/QF flight ( operated by AO ) and one hour later another service operated soley by QF ( AO ).

The Japanese are very fussy, but the striking colour scheme and Kangaroo on the tail made the airline synonomous with Qantas - so they loved it. Every bit of AO merchandise on board the aircraft was snapped up.

QF flights operate with a minimum of one Japanese language speaker( sometimes none as per the QF A330 KIX emergency landing ), however Australian Airlines always operated with a minimum of TWO japanese lanaguage speakers on the flights. This means a great deal to the pax as they have someone they can converse with in their own language if needed and ensures cultural sensitivity is being actioned on the flight ( I can tell you that this made a huge difference, compared to QF flights and soon to be JQ ).

Have a nice day.

[speedbirdhouse]

Quote-

"QF flights operate with a minimum of one Japanese language speaker( sometimes none as per the QF A330 KIX emergency landing ), however Australian Airlines always operated with a minimum of TWO japanese lanaguage speakers on the flights. This means a great deal to the pax as they have someone they can converse with in their own language if needed and ensures cultural sensitivity is being actioned on the flight ( I can tell you that this made a huge difference, compared to QF flights and soon to be JQ )."

---------

You are referring of course to the recent development whereby QF have it's domestic cabin crew operate [without language speakers] to Japan [and China etc]

When the flying was done by the international [ie more expensive] cabin crew there were plenty of language speaking flight attendants on board.

Those langauage speakers are still around of course.

It's just now they do Perth and Cairns returns.......

Executive performance bonus anyone?

[max autobrakes]

Dear Rad alt alive
You might see it as belittling, however it must be pointed out to all and sundry the differences in training standards between the Legacy carrier ,Qantas ,and the plethora of new upstarts, which include your beloved JetStar and even Virgin.
The most blaring difference is Command training. In Qantas you have many months and hours of the most trying training to prove your worth as a Qantas Captain.
However in the other carriers you have the bare minimum training? to pass the instrument training test. What, 4 sims is it, hardly training.
Then you have a reduced depth of experience on the "new age carriers" left hand seat to boot.How about corporate culture ? What culture is being espoused where trainers are reluctant to recommend extra sim time because of the ability of the new pilots to pay is in doubt.

Thrown in with this mix is the prospect of MPL co-pilots. Team an MPL with a low experience Captain, well the Risk Model just got riskier.

Yet time and time again we keep hearing about "The Qantas Group" as if there is one standard across the Qantas group.
About time the travelling public were given a fair and true assesment of the different carriers, and their training standards, then let them make a CHOICE!

[neville_nobody]

Not to mention QF doing double the cyclical training that VB and J*pilots are doing.

[dodgybrothers]

I wish I could be like you blokes. My heroes.

[Condition lever]

max_autobrakes - you well and truly over rate your own importance.

All that training and they still park an aircraft on a fairway!!:D

[Henry Winkler]

"I wish I could be like you blokes. My heroes."

Why? You want to do twice as many Sims? Fool.

[Dynasty Trash Hauler]

Max Autobrakes,

I hate to burst your bubble mate but here in the US, there is no difference in safety levels of LCC "quickie training" versus major/Nat with thier "many months and hours of the most trying training to prove your worth" nonsense. The 2 biggest offenders have always been Delta and Fedex - just take a look at their safety record. QF is a typical legacy - making the job much more complex than it is.

[hotnhigh]

Has Jetstar completed their line audit like every other group airline ie AO, QF, Jetconnect, Eastern etc????
Or is it still a no go zone for the auditors?
How does this stack up for code share arrangements.
Yep, all about choice, protecting cultures (what the?).

[Feather #3]

It is a rumour network after all?? Yes, I think they did have an audit and passed fine. Maybe someone can confirm??

G'day ;)

[airbusthreetwenty]

Yes.. the audit has been and gone. All is well in camp JQ.

[max autobrakes]

Dear A320
You actually believe that?
I'm told the Qantas Board had a presentation by a certain person of interest who loves his farm dogs , what was passed onto the Qantas Board was, "We have reservations!" what ever that means!

Maybe thats why old "I don't wear a tie to look cool" cancelled the follow up audit.

PS Mr Condition Lever
Have you actually read the report on the "Fairway" incident.
If you had ,you would quickly work out that this is what happens when corners are cut with training etc.A systemic failure!

PPS Mr Fonz
Who the hell wants to put their job on the line more than they have to?
However at the end of the day I would rather have under gone the Qantas way and "know" that I can handle just about anything, than go the el-cheapo way and "think" I can handle just about anything.
As Dick Smith (love him or hate him) has written about on other posts ,
this is all about affordable safety. It is what management can cut from the bottom line and stuff in their own back pockets , not what is worlds best practice, because that costs money!

Maybe Qantas trains their pilots too much.
All that training and checking is probably just a waste of time after all.
All that checking and training and first class engineering couldn't possibly be the reason for Qantas' enviable safety record ,could it?

[Condition lever]

Dear Mr. Max,

Perhaps you should re-read your post:
"The most blaring difference is Command training. In Qantas you have many months and hours of the most trying training to prove your worth as a Qantas Captain."

And I re-state mine:
"All that training and they still park an aircraft on a fairway!!:D"

Yep.... I can see a big difference between QF and Virgin/Jetstar/Eastern et.al.

[Condition lever]

Oh by the way, I have read the report.
My recollection is the bulk of the blame was laid on the 2nd Officer who was sitting in the Jump Seat!!!!


And as an aside, as the wife of the FO (or was it the SO) was on the flight deck at the time - now the whole Qantas group is banned from having non-QF group ASIC holders on the flight deck.
Pity as I had Jen Hawkins on board the other day.....

[Keg]

Condition lever,

Way, way, way off the mark. If as you claim you have read the report and THAT is your recollection you have then your comprehension skills are about equal to my daughters- she's in year three. :rolleyes:

Families and friends continued to be allowed on flight decks for two years after QF1 in BKK. It was another event in September 2001 that put those things to an end. QF claim that the law doesn't allow significant others there. I disagree with them but I'm not the boss. To state that their interpretation of the law is on the basis of QF1 is up there with the biggest tangents I'm yet to see on PPRUNE.

Don't be so blinded by your hatred of QF drivers that you don't also acknowledge that no organisation is immune to systemic failures and subsequent prangs. Yep, all that extra training and we still did it. I wonder how many more we may have had over the years without all that extra training? I wonder how many accidents that extra training may have saved over the years? Impossible to measure but you're naieve if you think that doing 'less training' is a good way to go or that because you do less training and haven't had a prang that you must somehow be an ace. It's the EXACT attitude that people accuse QF drivers of having. Ironically, I have never, ever heard that kind of attitude from one of my colleagues. :ugh:

[Condition lever]

Regardless of it being 2 years after the fact or not, it was a contributing factor.

You make no mention of the significant burden of responsibility for the accident attributed to the SO.

And if you "have never, ever heard that kind of attitude from one of my colleagues" then you should read some of the previous posts.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Condition lever,

Mate, I have two copies of the report sitting on my book-shelf. What you assert/recall is horse-excrement. It does NOT attribute the significant burden of responsibility for the accident to the S/O. Complete nonsense, mate. And Keg is quite correct - banning of families has nothing to do with QF1. It is more to do with QF management playing hardball with its employees under the guise of "security". All part of a master plan to p!$$ people off, see them ultimately leave and replace them with cheap Jet* blokes, perhaps? Or so the cynics would say....

Have another read of the QF1 report at http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1999/AAIR/pdf/aair199904538_001.pdf

Talk about thread drift!