Detrimental effects of media coverage (QF)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: eca
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Detrimental effects of media coverage (QF)
I dunno about the rest of you guys but I am fast tiring of the media's reporting of relatively standard engineering incidents. ie: QF delaminated side windshield......(as many would know this is ABSOLUTELY a NON event)
Cracked windshield grounds Qantas plane | The Australian
The media seem unrelenting in their continued Qantas bashing.
These events occur in every single airline from small turboprop regionals to large jet international operators with the best of safety reputations, this I can promise!!!!
When will we come across a journo with some credibility... one who is willing to research and compare these events with other similar operators and report in a non biased manner??
Perhaps QF need to become more clandestine about the cause of delays, engineering events and other internal matters. More akin to SQ....
Cracked windshield grounds Qantas plane | The Australian
The media seem unrelenting in their continued Qantas bashing.
These events occur in every single airline from small turboprop regionals to large jet international operators with the best of safety reputations, this I can promise!!!!
When will we come across a journo with some credibility... one who is willing to research and compare these events with other similar operators and report in a non biased manner??
Perhaps QF need to become more clandestine about the cause of delays, engineering events and other internal matters. More akin to SQ....
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Perth australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All airlines have their issues. But Qantas just seams to cop it from the media day in and day out. My question is, why don't DJ issues end up in the media? Like a air return back to SYD yesterday with a mech issue?
If it had a rat on the tail, there would've been choppers taking footage of it landing, with it being "breaking news"
If it had a rat on the tail, there would've been choppers taking footage of it landing, with it being "breaking news"
Nunc est bibendum
I suspect that the particular group that Clarrie is referring to fed the media for so long that it became a self perpetuating thing. Now not only does that group feed it all but every wannabe wanting their 15 minutes of fame is feeding it also.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 64
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a PPrune reader and SLF, I feel sorry for QANTAS each time this media frenzy goes on. The media must be so desperate for headlines to dredge up these non-events.
The other side of the problem is the (lay) consumers' USA-type expectation of everything going perfectly, and that no equipment failure can be acceptable ! While ludicrous, this is the brave new world we now inhabit. While they may be inconvenienced on the ground, would these pax really prefer flying across the pond in less than reasonable condition? Anyway, to their minds, an engine flame out is no different to a wing falling off (admittedly a poor comparison) .
Good luck to all you professional aviators. The media sharks are here to stay.
The other side of the problem is the (lay) consumers' USA-type expectation of everything going perfectly, and that no equipment failure can be acceptable ! While ludicrous, this is the brave new world we now inhabit. While they may be inconvenienced on the ground, would these pax really prefer flying across the pond in less than reasonable condition? Anyway, to their minds, an engine flame out is no different to a wing falling off (admittedly a poor comparison) .
Good luck to all you professional aviators. The media sharks are here to stay.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will tread cautiously about what I say in regards to the Media, as my last media coments were removed.Obviosuly false and ficticious stories printed by the media are accepatable, but my references and comparisons of media to 'brown matter' have been deemed unaccepatble,even though the majority of what Journo`s write is the colour of 'brown'.
But in response to Bolto_79's comment :
The reason QF gets so much attention over DJ is simple.
* QF has been in existance for around 90 years,compared to DJ's mere 10 years.
* QF has a proud history of servicing Australia,and is a part of Australian history,a pioneer.Whereas DJ is part of Branson's legacy and has always ridden on the coat tails of others which hardly rates in comparison.
* QF HAD a reputation built upon excellence,service and safety.Most who flew with QF in its prime,or worked for QF when money was spent on safety,service and excellence would agree.The honest truth is that DJ has never built for itself a reputation that would come even close to matching QF in its prime.That is why DJ flies under the radar while QF receives the negative spotlight.Sure,some will argue that today DJ offers an alternative to flying QF,but that is the fault of greedy mismanaged pathetic QF mangement at the top and middle layers in the past 7 years or there abouts,not because DJ is a half decent carrier.
Sadly QF has its senior people to blame for the negative publicity.It is one of the most monumental and famous losses of all time,to see an airline who profited by simply providing an absolutely world class safe service decline to an airline scrambling weekly to uphold and maintain it's former standards that made it without doubt the safest airline in the world.
And no,I am not bagging out QF on this thread.Sadly the present day facts speak for themselves.Its just a shame that the media don't listen to the frontline people who are trying to hold the place together.The media spotlight should focus on the poor legacy of managers and leaders at QF. And I am not talking about profits,which were managed quite well,I am talking about the morale,service,faults,safety decline and mismanagement of resources and skills and outsourcing and downsizing that has taken the worlds most reputable airline down to a level comparable with second rate carriers operating in third world countries.
But in response to Bolto_79's comment :
All airlines have their issues. But Qantas just seams to cop it from the media day in and day out. My question is, why don't DJ issues end up in the media? Like a air return back to SYD yesterday with a mech issue?
* QF has been in existance for around 90 years,compared to DJ's mere 10 years.
* QF has a proud history of servicing Australia,and is a part of Australian history,a pioneer.Whereas DJ is part of Branson's legacy and has always ridden on the coat tails of others which hardly rates in comparison.
* QF HAD a reputation built upon excellence,service and safety.Most who flew with QF in its prime,or worked for QF when money was spent on safety,service and excellence would agree.The honest truth is that DJ has never built for itself a reputation that would come even close to matching QF in its prime.That is why DJ flies under the radar while QF receives the negative spotlight.Sure,some will argue that today DJ offers an alternative to flying QF,but that is the fault of greedy mismanaged pathetic QF mangement at the top and middle layers in the past 7 years or there abouts,not because DJ is a half decent carrier.
Sadly QF has its senior people to blame for the negative publicity.It is one of the most monumental and famous losses of all time,to see an airline who profited by simply providing an absolutely world class safe service decline to an airline scrambling weekly to uphold and maintain it's former standards that made it without doubt the safest airline in the world.
And no,I am not bagging out QF on this thread.Sadly the present day facts speak for themselves.Its just a shame that the media don't listen to the frontline people who are trying to hold the place together.The media spotlight should focus on the poor legacy of managers and leaders at QF. And I am not talking about profits,which were managed quite well,I am talking about the morale,service,faults,safety decline and mismanagement of resources and skills and outsourcing and downsizing that has taken the worlds most reputable airline down to a level comparable with second rate carriers operating in third world countries.
It's a perfect example of Tall Poppy Syndrome, and Australians are the world's worst offenders.
Definition from Wikipedia:
Definition from Wikipedia:
Tall Poppy Syndrome (TPS) is a pejorative term used in the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada to describe a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticised because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a 'big story' that the media gimps can string together.
There was a magnitude 7.2 quake today affecting Mexico through to Califonia.Surely QF somewhere in the world has received a minor delay somewhere,caused by the flow on affect of the quake ?
Surely the media can create some ****e stained sensationalised story linking the two? Perhaps the quake was caused by a QF plane making a heavy landing somewhere in that region ( naturally massive sparks,flames and fire would also be reported by a distraught pax) !
Sorry folks, I figure why wait for the media to make up a crap story, I will do it myself !
There was a magnitude 7.2 quake today affecting Mexico through to Califonia.Surely QF somewhere in the world has received a minor delay somewhere,caused by the flow on affect of the quake ?
Surely the media can create some ****e stained sensationalised story linking the two? Perhaps the quake was caused by a QF plane making a heavy landing somewhere in that region ( naturally massive sparks,flames and fire would also be reported by a distraught pax) !
Sorry folks, I figure why wait for the media to make up a crap story, I will do it myself !
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On average how many planes are grounded eachday world wide? But I think it reassuring that a plane is designed so well it can still fly with cracked windscreen, still land without disaster when tyres blow
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: With Ratty and Mole
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Change Its Spots
Until Qantas stops treating all and sundry with contempt~by that I mean customers staff and media~nothing will change.
Qantas as a National Carrier is an embarrassment.Its all about the bottomline and management bonuses,bugger the customer and the product.They have learnt nothing from the WFC.The snouts are still in the trough
Qantas as a National Carrier is an embarrassment.Its all about the bottomline and management bonuses,bugger the customer and the product.They have learnt nothing from the WFC.The snouts are still in the trough
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dunno about the rest of you guys but I am fast tiring of the media's reporting of relatively standard engineering incidents. ie: QF delaminated side windshield......(as many would know this is ABSOLUTELY a NON event)
Perhaps you should experience one before declaring it a non-event.I have no problem with any non-normal event being reported as long as it's factual. The problem is that no-one within the airlines with a hint of knowledge is allowed to talk to the media. The only airline people who speak to the media are the PR spin-doctors who come out with worse one-liners than the media. Me thinks a 5min conversation with a Pilot or Engineer at the time of an event would reduce the chaff that gets reported.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joe delaminated cockpit windows while not an every day occurrence do happen. And while the media and the trolls feeding the media beat it up in to something that it isn't, it really isn't a news worthy item.
When an airline has what 200-250 aircraft flying thousands of flights a week then yes these things happen. I guess it is a statistical thing. i reckon the next time some journo see's a wheel change happen at the gate they will misconstrue it into something more routine than a wheel change.
I thought it was funny recently when the mainstream press got hold of the Air Safety magazine and they went on to blow it out of proportion. What a load of crap. I myself find it interesting to read and increase my knowledge of things that pertain to my occupation.
And another thing, if the trolls are going to feed the bottom dwelling misinformed journo's how about feeding them factual information. It annoys me so much to read an article that is factually incorrect and full of hearsay. Miranda Devine are you listening?
I also think the reason Qantas cops a lot of media flak is because they have brought it upon themselves over the years. These days people actually want the truth rather than corporate rhetoric. If you tell them the truth surely it helps to defuse the situation from the get go.
If Qantas has an engineering incident then let an engineer explain the issue. Don't let someone explain it who doesn't know the difference between a rotator splint and a flux capacitor. Most of the public relations people that front the media wouldn't know the difference between a nose wheel or a main wheel.
I will hop off my high horse now.
When an airline has what 200-250 aircraft flying thousands of flights a week then yes these things happen. I guess it is a statistical thing. i reckon the next time some journo see's a wheel change happen at the gate they will misconstrue it into something more routine than a wheel change.
I thought it was funny recently when the mainstream press got hold of the Air Safety magazine and they went on to blow it out of proportion. What a load of crap. I myself find it interesting to read and increase my knowledge of things that pertain to my occupation.
And another thing, if the trolls are going to feed the bottom dwelling misinformed journo's how about feeding them factual information. It annoys me so much to read an article that is factually incorrect and full of hearsay. Miranda Devine are you listening?
I also think the reason Qantas cops a lot of media flak is because they have brought it upon themselves over the years. These days people actually want the truth rather than corporate rhetoric. If you tell them the truth surely it helps to defuse the situation from the get go.
If Qantas has an engineering incident then let an engineer explain the issue. Don't let someone explain it who doesn't know the difference between a rotator splint and a flux capacitor. Most of the public relations people that front the media wouldn't know the difference between a nose wheel or a main wheel.
I will hop off my high horse now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: eca
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Psycho Joe
I have experienced 2 de-laminations and I re iterate they are in 90% of cases a non event. Next time you get the chance talk to a PPG aerospace (the windshield manufacturer) engineer ask him about de-laminations. The only layer that is structural is the inside layer so if you cant feel cracks on the inside it is still structurally sound. The other potential safety concern is obscured vision.... hardly a worry on a side window......
The point I'm trying to make is that this is a daily occurrence on the worlds fleet of heavy jets.... it is not at all indicative of ones safety culture or maintenance standards. If a journo did the research this would be obvious to even the ones with a learning disability.....
Instead they string together a list of recent engineering events regarding QF and start asking questions regarding the "failing maintenance standards" in order to paint our "national icon" in poor light.
Perhaps as superlame has suggested let the people within the company who have the knowledge be trained to speak to the media or just tell the media/public nothing at all....
It's just getting beyond a joke
Disclaimer: I dont work for QF, I'm just sick of being berated with rubbish by the Australian media
The point I'm trying to make is that this is a daily occurrence on the worlds fleet of heavy jets.... it is not at all indicative of ones safety culture or maintenance standards. If a journo did the research this would be obvious to even the ones with a learning disability.....
Instead they string together a list of recent engineering events regarding QF and start asking questions regarding the "failing maintenance standards" in order to paint our "national icon" in poor light.
Perhaps as superlame has suggested let the people within the company who have the knowledge be trained to speak to the media or just tell the media/public nothing at all....
It's just getting beyond a joke
Disclaimer: I dont work for QF, I'm just sick of being berated with rubbish by the Australian media
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interesting thing to note about the "cracked" windscreen incident is that before the engineers even entered the flight deck after the aircraft landed from LA a news helicopter was seen circling above. Could be coincidence and the helicopter being there on different business, I didn't even check the news on the day to see if there was TV coverage about it, or someone internal in the know must have informed the media.
As for the windscreen itself it was in this case indeed a nonevent, either the internal vinyl layer split or part of the window heat conductive layer, conflicting info being thrown around. Either way not a structural defect at all and the aircraft would have been able to continue if it wasn't for the fact that this particular window was manufactured by GKN which makes the limits for damage more stringent than a PPG window. So the window got changed, with a part from the preferred manufacturer. Unfortunately by that time the crew had run out of hours and the flight finally departed just after 01:00am the next day. So pretty much a completely safe non event that nonetheless ended up in a very big delay and big media coverage. Bad luck for Qantas and deserved media bashing for all the reasons other contributers in this thread already highlighted.
No point crying foul, just get on with the job and get the public and media on the side, not with stupid PR spindoctors that talk obvious crap but honesty, safety and a great product serving Australians, not the managers bonusses. Is it going to happen? I seriously doubt it.
As for the windscreen itself it was in this case indeed a nonevent, either the internal vinyl layer split or part of the window heat conductive layer, conflicting info being thrown around. Either way not a structural defect at all and the aircraft would have been able to continue if it wasn't for the fact that this particular window was manufactured by GKN which makes the limits for damage more stringent than a PPG window. So the window got changed, with a part from the preferred manufacturer. Unfortunately by that time the crew had run out of hours and the flight finally departed just after 01:00am the next day. So pretty much a completely safe non event that nonetheless ended up in a very big delay and big media coverage. Bad luck for Qantas and deserved media bashing for all the reasons other contributers in this thread already highlighted.
No point crying foul, just get on with the job and get the public and media on the side, not with stupid PR spindoctors that talk obvious crap but honesty, safety and a great product serving Australians, not the managers bonusses. Is it going to happen? I seriously doubt it.
Last edited by Nudlaug; 6th Apr 2010 at 06:03.
Here we go again...
This is starting to become a bit of a worry
Sydney Morning Herald
This is starting to become a bit of a worrySydney Morning Herald
Qantas flight forced to turn back due to engine problem
CRAIG PLATT
April 6, 2010 - 11:13AM
Another Qantas flight has been forced to turn back after take-off, this time due to an engine problem.
QF1 from Bangkok to Heathrow Airport in London experienced an engine surge shortly after take-off at 4am (AEST) this morning.
The captain of the Boeing 747 shut down the engine and returned to Bangkok Suvarnabhumi Airport at 5.30am.
The incident comes the day after a Qantas passenger threatened to bring down a flight from Sydney to Singapore using the power of his mind.
Engineers were examining the QF1 aircraft and a replacement jet was being flown from Sydney to Bangkok. The flight's 335 passengers were transferred to a hotel, Qantas said.
"There was no safety issue at any stage – Boeing 747 aircraft can fly normally on three engines," Qantas said in a statement.
The incident comes after another long-haul Qantas flight was grounded in Melbourne yesterday after a cockpit window cracked during a flight from Los Angeles.
The Australian airline has faced a string of technical problems on its flights in recent months - from tyres blowing out during landing, to engine troubles.
On Friday, a flight from Perth to Brisbane was delayed after a wing flap defect was found.
On the same day, a Qantas Boeing 747 travelling from Brisbane to Los Angeles was grounded after a wiring problem was found in one of its engines.
Last Wednesday, two tyres burst on an A380 superjumbo as it landed at Sydney Airport.
The day before, a Sydney-Singapore flight turned back when a pilot found an engine problem.
In December, a 747 flight from Singapore to Melbourne was forced to turn back after an engine surge.
CRAIG PLATT
April 6, 2010 - 11:13AM
Another Qantas flight has been forced to turn back after take-off, this time due to an engine problem.
QF1 from Bangkok to Heathrow Airport in London experienced an engine surge shortly after take-off at 4am (AEST) this morning.
The captain of the Boeing 747 shut down the engine and returned to Bangkok Suvarnabhumi Airport at 5.30am.
The incident comes the day after a Qantas passenger threatened to bring down a flight from Sydney to Singapore using the power of his mind.
Engineers were examining the QF1 aircraft and a replacement jet was being flown from Sydney to Bangkok. The flight's 335 passengers were transferred to a hotel, Qantas said.
"There was no safety issue at any stage – Boeing 747 aircraft can fly normally on three engines," Qantas said in a statement.
The incident comes after another long-haul Qantas flight was grounded in Melbourne yesterday after a cockpit window cracked during a flight from Los Angeles.
The Australian airline has faced a string of technical problems on its flights in recent months - from tyres blowing out during landing, to engine troubles.
On Friday, a flight from Perth to Brisbane was delayed after a wing flap defect was found.
On the same day, a Qantas Boeing 747 travelling from Brisbane to Los Angeles was grounded after a wiring problem was found in one of its engines.
Last Wednesday, two tyres burst on an A380 superjumbo as it landed at Sydney Airport.
The day before, a Sydney-Singapore flight turned back when a pilot found an engine problem.
In December, a 747 flight from Singapore to Melbourne was forced to turn back after an engine surge.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have experienced 2 de-laminations and I re iterate they are in 90% of cases a non event. Next time you get the chance talk to a PPG aerospace (the windshield manufacturer) engineer ask him about de-laminations. The only layer that is structural is the inside layer so if you cant feel cracks on the inside it is still structurally sound. The other potential safety concern is obscured vision.... hardly a worry on a side window......
My point was simply that I'm happy for all and any non-normal events (such as this) being reported, simply so that:
1. The general public understand that these machines can, do, & will break. And if the flight is delayed as a result it's not because we're all too lazy to go flying on time; and
2. The general public understand that we pilots do more for our wage than mindlessly watch the plane fly itself, sip latte's, and shag lingerie models.
The problem as i see it is not so much bad journalism (although that's certainly true) but lousy PR people who throw out glib one liners instead of an accurate and articulate press release, in the hope that giving as little info as possible will make the news article go away. Of course it only makes it worse because it looks like the company has something to hide.
example:
There was no safety issue at any stage – Boeing 747 aircraft can fly normally on three engines," Qantas said in a statement.
I don't wish to pick on QANTAS PR specifically but they seem to be the most prolific at this. It seems to me that if PR people could follow a simple pro-forma like:
1. confirm airline
2. confirm aircraft type
3. confirm location
4. give a brief (accurate) description of problem
5. give a brief description of how the crews achieved a short term resolution
6. give a brief description of long term resolution and if necessary why the event wasn't a near death experience.
Then the quality of reporting would be somewhat improved.
It would also cut down on the expert opinion of some pax sittiing in the back who would obviously know more about what happened than the crew.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: On Uranus
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes, Q management has to sit back and ask itself if all this -ve publicity is worth the few dollars they may be saving themselves by being unreasonable in negotiations. Me thinks many of these issues may be linked to the fractured interaction between management and the current EBA negotiations!!!
I wish I could post all of CX's operational issues each week but if I did then......
QF are no better or worse than most legacy carriers worldwide.
The problem with QF is they market themselves as "the worlds most experienced Airline". ( I feel sick everytime I see an advert )This can leave them open to ridacule,
people that live in Glass houses etc etc.
QF are no better or worse than most legacy carriers worldwide.
The problem with QF is they market themselves as "the worlds most experienced Airline". ( I feel sick everytime I see an advert )This can leave them open to ridacule,
people that live in Glass houses etc etc.
Isn't it funny.
The media hammer Qantas, leaving everyone else alone.
I am trying to be sensitive here, but stating facts... I don't know about you guys, but I have not seen ANY media coverage of the sad story out of Darwin. I mean, struth, it's a high capacity RPT aircraft that killed people. Then a window delaminates on a Qantas flight and it's headline news. The Darwin accident killed people, the delamination in no way even threatened life!
Then there is Emirates. As everyone is aware, they have had a very dangerous incident departing YMML (I am refering to the tail strike) and then their flagship, the A380, landed in Sydney, runway 16R, nearly on the road before the runway!! WELL outside of the TDZ, and that get's no media attention! To see what I am talking about refer to the video link on youtube.com below.
YouTube - Emirates A380 hard and short landing AKL-SYD
Yes, tyres blowing isn't a great thing to happen and the sparks make great viewing on the TV, but a pilot, landing, well short of a runway, no pitch up on touch down, no regard/understanding of a TDZ and they get no media attention!! This could have killed people more than a flaky window!
Come on media, get your act together!
The media hammer Qantas, leaving everyone else alone.
I am trying to be sensitive here, but stating facts... I don't know about you guys, but I have not seen ANY media coverage of the sad story out of Darwin. I mean, struth, it's a high capacity RPT aircraft that killed people. Then a window delaminates on a Qantas flight and it's headline news. The Darwin accident killed people, the delamination in no way even threatened life!
Then there is Emirates. As everyone is aware, they have had a very dangerous incident departing YMML (I am refering to the tail strike) and then their flagship, the A380, landed in Sydney, runway 16R, nearly on the road before the runway!! WELL outside of the TDZ, and that get's no media attention! To see what I am talking about refer to the video link on youtube.com below.
YouTube - Emirates A380 hard and short landing AKL-SYD
Yes, tyres blowing isn't a great thing to happen and the sparks make great viewing on the TV, but a pilot, landing, well short of a runway, no pitch up on touch down, no regard/understanding of a TDZ and they get no media attention!! This could have killed people more than a flaky window!
Come on media, get your act together!
