HIR - a risky destination?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HIR - a risky destination?
Was talking to a colleague who expressed his concern that QF are still operating services to Honiara on behalf of Solomon Airlines . Whilst he's currently not on the 737 at QF and thus they won't be able to send him there, he is nonetheless wondering why the troops are accepting of flying into such a hot spot. The current Oz Govt. Travel Advice is that it is unwise to go there with mention of possible civl disorder. When I was last there, the ADF had left and security was up to a small contingent from the AFP. We are all aware they were overwhelmed in the last riots, just ask the Chinese shop owners. Is there simmering unease amongst the pilot group that is about to surface?
I don't fly for QF but I would say flying to any Middle Eastern destination is more dangerous than the Solomon Islands and personally I really don’t worry too much about flying there either.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: brisbane
Age: 68
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno titan It doesn't matter whether it's the middle east or not all you need is some idiot during a riot to damage an aircraft or worse injure crew and I wouldn't mind betting insurance would be void. I'm surprised both Qantas and the pilots would take the risk.
I saw bigger riots in PNG during my time there than there has been in the Solomons. The only difference is that a number of expats were caught in the middle of the Honiara riots and the media got hold of the story.
Insurance companies already impose a surcharge or higher premiums to airlines for some destinations around the world. If or when the charges got too high would ultimately determine whether an airline would fly to some places, not the insurance compay telling the airline you can't fly there. Hell there are some operators that fly into Bagdad that have insurance coverage. The risk a crew and an airline take going to some destinations is all relative. I would consider going into a place like Ryad in the middle of the night where we have to turn all exturnal lights out below 20000 ft for fear of some nut on the ground firing a shoulder launched surface to air missile at us is more of a risk than a riot in Honiara. Yet I still don't give it a second thought.
Insurance companies already impose a surcharge or higher premiums to airlines for some destinations around the world. If or when the charges got too high would ultimately determine whether an airline would fly to some places, not the insurance compay telling the airline you can't fly there. Hell there are some operators that fly into Bagdad that have insurance coverage. The risk a crew and an airline take going to some destinations is all relative. I would consider going into a place like Ryad in the middle of the night where we have to turn all exturnal lights out below 20000 ft for fear of some nut on the ground firing a shoulder launched surface to air missile at us is more of a risk than a riot in Honiara. Yet I still don't give it a second thought.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: brisbane
Age: 68
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Titan If you have been to Hir you would know just how unsecure the airport is and with a breakdown of law and order it becomes very unpredictable. I think I would feel safer in some ways going to middle east destinations where precautions are in place than nonchantly going to a place like Hir where anything could happen. I remember being in Cambodia when violence broke out and insanity ruled and life became very cheap within hours of law and order breaking down and mob mentality in charge. Besides I think you will find people operating into the middle east are handsomely rewarded for their efforts but I bet Qantas don't give any danger pay. My philosophy is it's no use latching the gate after the horse has bolted.
Last edited by Friggit; 16th Oct 2006 at 01:44.
