Qantas Twin Dangers~Ben Sandilands
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 5th Dimension
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas Twin Dangers~Ben Sandilands
Dual dangers hanging over Qantas, as we know it
May 22, 2011 – 8:15 am, by Ben Sandilands
Some alarming questions hang over Qantas because of recent events.
One is the extent to which management decisions have harmed the full service Qantas branded product in order to improve investor perceptions of the value of the Jetstar brand, which many of its full service customers detest.
And another question, and far more important one, is whether or not management disconnection from the operational and standards processes in Qantas carriers has impacted on safety.
Several days ago a Plane Talking reader departed Melbourne for Sydney on a Qantas service on which several rows of business class were occupied by Jetstar crew in uniform.
Yet there was a Jetstar flight from Mebourne to Sydney within 10 minutes of the Qantas flight.
That is just another illustration of massive cross subsidisation of Jetstar operations by the full service brand, which each financial year would run into hundreds of millions of dollars in the transfer of A330s alone.
But to deal with safety.
One of the most willfully stupid things Qantas management ever did was to ban the use of full flap reverse thrust on landings by Boeing 747s in the late ‘90s in order to save a million dollars a year fleet wide.
It was the principal factor in the runway overrun at Bangkok’s older (Don Muang) airport in September 1999, where no attempt was made to use reverse thrust after QF1 touched down much further than desirable along a wet and slippery runway after the captain ‘had a rush of blood to the head’ and countermanded an instruction to go-around to the first officer, who was the pilot flying, and closed the throttles, unfortunately missing one.
This left the 747 in a configuration not even Boeing had contemplated, with three engines shut down, and one spooling up, as the jet with more than 400 people on board fishtailed off the end of the runway at 88 knots and then ploughed through trees and onto a golfing green, from where Bangkok airport sources claimed that a radio call was made for a tug to the terminal, despite the fact that the landing gear had been ripped off, together with an engine.
It is a legal requirement that the management and directors of Qantas take full responsibility for the safety of operations, and this was a gross failure.
The similarities with the near crash of a Jetstar A320 at Melbourne’s Tullamarine Airport in July 2007 are striking. Some weeks before that flight from Christchurch was in the final stages of its approach to a landing in foggy conditions Jetstar had improperly changed the standard operating procedure for a missed approach in the manufacturer’s approved flight manual.
This was contrary to very clear regulations that had been in force since 1998 that prohibited such changes. On top of that the management of Jetstar, then headed by current Qantas CEO Alan Joyce as its founding CEO, failed to conduct a safety systems management analysis of the changes, and also failed to keep any written records that the ATSB could discover in the course of an investigation caused by this reporter after the airline failed to conform to its reporting obligations.
The Jetstar crew elected to conduct a missed approach because of poor visibility but because of the changes made to the missed approach procedure, were required to do other things before checking that the jet’s throttle settings had been advanced to the ‘go around’ detent.
As the ATSB found, this left the pilots in a state of confusion as the jet continued to sink very close to the ground because the throttles had been left in the wrong position. It was a very close call for the 140 people on board the flight.
At the Senate Inquiry into pilot training and airline safety, which among other things, is inquiring into this incident, the ATSB and CASA have been emphatic as to the cause of the serious incident, yet in its submission to the inquiry Qantas fails to mention these findings, and supplied the inquiry with what in this reporter’s opinion is an exercise in humbug.
What was Jetstar’s then head of standards John Gissing, thinking when these changes were made, why did he break the clearest of regulations, and why weren’t records kept, and assuming that Alan Joyce was involved in approving something he is legally responsible for, what was he thinking?
The answers will hopefully be revealed in the inquiry’s final report, due on June 15.
The disconnection of Qantas management from operational realities persisted in the decision to outsource the maintenance of the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines used on most of its remaining 747 fleet to a facility in Hong Kong.
One of these engines failed, quite spectacularly according to eye-witness comments posted here, on QF1 on its departure from Bangkok for London on Friday morning. There has been a series of failures of RB211 engines on Qantas jets since the closure of its specialized engineering shop for these engines in Sydney.
Management did explain, quite logically, that it sent the work offshore because the reduction in 747 fleet size made it uneconomic compared to the cost of using the Hong Kong facility.
But had management considered the technical reality, that Qantas worked its RB211s on its 747s harder and rather differently to any other user, and that these jets and 747s are going to be in service until up to 2020, it might have chosen differently.
The Hong Kong move may well have cost in far more than it saved in a series of incidents that are harmful to the brand’s image and reputation, in addition to the bad mouthing full service long haul Qantas flying is already getting from management hell-bent on diversifying Qantas operations into off shore based entities that will take over some flying now performed by the ‘Spirit of Australia’ Qantas.
Neither British Airways nor Cathay Pacific use RB211 engines on route stages as long, or exposed, as those that Qantas flies non-stop across the Pacific or the sub-Antarctic route to Johannesburg.
Despite the acknowledged need to make certain manufacturer devised modifications to these RB211 engines, Qantas is also taking its own sweet time having this work done, and it apparently had not been done on the engine that failed at Bangkok on Friday, even though Qantas has been aware of the situation for some time.
It may be time for Qantas and Jetstar management to address some operational imperatives with these airlines, rather than trade on a reputation hard earned, or attack those who deliver the product, or keep trotting out inaccurate platitudes about ‘safety being our prime concern.’
Safety is in fact their No 1 responsibility, in law. ‘Safety is our No 1 aim’ might be a much more reassuring slogan for the side of Qantas jets than ‘Spirit of Australia’.
May 22, 2011 – 8:15 am, by Ben Sandilands
Some alarming questions hang over Qantas because of recent events.
One is the extent to which management decisions have harmed the full service Qantas branded product in order to improve investor perceptions of the value of the Jetstar brand, which many of its full service customers detest.
And another question, and far more important one, is whether or not management disconnection from the operational and standards processes in Qantas carriers has impacted on safety.
Several days ago a Plane Talking reader departed Melbourne for Sydney on a Qantas service on which several rows of business class were occupied by Jetstar crew in uniform.
Yet there was a Jetstar flight from Mebourne to Sydney within 10 minutes of the Qantas flight.
That is just another illustration of massive cross subsidisation of Jetstar operations by the full service brand, which each financial year would run into hundreds of millions of dollars in the transfer of A330s alone.
But to deal with safety.
One of the most willfully stupid things Qantas management ever did was to ban the use of full flap reverse thrust on landings by Boeing 747s in the late ‘90s in order to save a million dollars a year fleet wide.
It was the principal factor in the runway overrun at Bangkok’s older (Don Muang) airport in September 1999, where no attempt was made to use reverse thrust after QF1 touched down much further than desirable along a wet and slippery runway after the captain ‘had a rush of blood to the head’ and countermanded an instruction to go-around to the first officer, who was the pilot flying, and closed the throttles, unfortunately missing one.
This left the 747 in a configuration not even Boeing had contemplated, with three engines shut down, and one spooling up, as the jet with more than 400 people on board fishtailed off the end of the runway at 88 knots and then ploughed through trees and onto a golfing green, from where Bangkok airport sources claimed that a radio call was made for a tug to the terminal, despite the fact that the landing gear had been ripped off, together with an engine.
It is a legal requirement that the management and directors of Qantas take full responsibility for the safety of operations, and this was a gross failure.
The similarities with the near crash of a Jetstar A320 at Melbourne’s Tullamarine Airport in July 2007 are striking. Some weeks before that flight from Christchurch was in the final stages of its approach to a landing in foggy conditions Jetstar had improperly changed the standard operating procedure for a missed approach in the manufacturer’s approved flight manual.
This was contrary to very clear regulations that had been in force since 1998 that prohibited such changes. On top of that the management of Jetstar, then headed by current Qantas CEO Alan Joyce as its founding CEO, failed to conduct a safety systems management analysis of the changes, and also failed to keep any written records that the ATSB could discover in the course of an investigation caused by this reporter after the airline failed to conform to its reporting obligations.
The Jetstar crew elected to conduct a missed approach because of poor visibility but because of the changes made to the missed approach procedure, were required to do other things before checking that the jet’s throttle settings had been advanced to the ‘go around’ detent.
As the ATSB found, this left the pilots in a state of confusion as the jet continued to sink very close to the ground because the throttles had been left in the wrong position. It was a very close call for the 140 people on board the flight.
At the Senate Inquiry into pilot training and airline safety, which among other things, is inquiring into this incident, the ATSB and CASA have been emphatic as to the cause of the serious incident, yet in its submission to the inquiry Qantas fails to mention these findings, and supplied the inquiry with what in this reporter’s opinion is an exercise in humbug.
What was Jetstar’s then head of standards John Gissing, thinking when these changes were made, why did he break the clearest of regulations, and why weren’t records kept, and assuming that Alan Joyce was involved in approving something he is legally responsible for, what was he thinking?
The answers will hopefully be revealed in the inquiry’s final report, due on June 15.
The disconnection of Qantas management from operational realities persisted in the decision to outsource the maintenance of the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines used on most of its remaining 747 fleet to a facility in Hong Kong.
One of these engines failed, quite spectacularly according to eye-witness comments posted here, on QF1 on its departure from Bangkok for London on Friday morning. There has been a series of failures of RB211 engines on Qantas jets since the closure of its specialized engineering shop for these engines in Sydney.
Management did explain, quite logically, that it sent the work offshore because the reduction in 747 fleet size made it uneconomic compared to the cost of using the Hong Kong facility.
But had management considered the technical reality, that Qantas worked its RB211s on its 747s harder and rather differently to any other user, and that these jets and 747s are going to be in service until up to 2020, it might have chosen differently.
The Hong Kong move may well have cost in far more than it saved in a series of incidents that are harmful to the brand’s image and reputation, in addition to the bad mouthing full service long haul Qantas flying is already getting from management hell-bent on diversifying Qantas operations into off shore based entities that will take over some flying now performed by the ‘Spirit of Australia’ Qantas.
Neither British Airways nor Cathay Pacific use RB211 engines on route stages as long, or exposed, as those that Qantas flies non-stop across the Pacific or the sub-Antarctic route to Johannesburg.
Despite the acknowledged need to make certain manufacturer devised modifications to these RB211 engines, Qantas is also taking its own sweet time having this work done, and it apparently had not been done on the engine that failed at Bangkok on Friday, even though Qantas has been aware of the situation for some time.
It may be time for Qantas and Jetstar management to address some operational imperatives with these airlines, rather than trade on a reputation hard earned, or attack those who deliver the product, or keep trotting out inaccurate platitudes about ‘safety being our prime concern.’
Safety is in fact their No 1 responsibility, in law. ‘Safety is our No 1 aim’ might be a much more reassuring slogan for the side of Qantas jets than ‘Spirit of Australia’.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: On a date with destiny.
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's time senior management stood up for their serious shortcomings... Stand up and face the music! The fat lady (apologies to fat people) is singing and it's hurting my ears!
Remember that it's these senior managers that justify their excessive salaries because "the buck stops with them..." Or so they keep telling us...
Remember that it's these senior managers that justify their excessive salaries because "the buck stops with them..." Or so they keep telling us...
The reality of the RB211 fiasco is that there are no spare Rollers at the moment. The rate of failure is so high they have run out of serviceable engines and are now cannibalising the heavy maintenance aircraft again. This is the same for 330 engines. No spares. Well done idiots!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Here There Yonder
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I taxied passed the QF 747 in BKK yesterday, Saturday. It was not a good look with engines and cowling spread out all over the stand-off bay. A nice big red tail for all in the terminal to see 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orstralya
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny how we don't get to see Ben being interviewed on the Qantas sponsored Sunrise or Today shows.
Memo to GT. Study Ben's articles closely. There you will see what a properly informed article on the current situation at Qantas looks like.
Memo to GT. Study Ben's articles closely. There you will see what a properly informed article on the current situation at Qantas looks like.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am loathe to play the man, as opposed to the ball but knowing GT reads this, I invite him to submit a brief resume - what have you done, where have you been to earn the title " Aviation Expert "
Serious question.
Have you held an SPL? CPL? ATPL, AME license, Loadmaster's certificate? have you operated in any professional capacity in the Armed Forces? an Airline? Travel Agency?
Personally, I'd like to know if you are just a spotter who lucked out with minor gigs that landed you on your feet.
Happy to be educated.
I admit to reading Ben Sandiland's reportage with more respect but know as little of his credentials as I do yours.
Serious question.
Have you held an SPL? CPL? ATPL, AME license, Loadmaster's certificate? have you operated in any professional capacity in the Armed Forces? an Airline? Travel Agency?
Personally, I'd like to know if you are just a spotter who lucked out with minor gigs that landed you on your feet.
Happy to be educated.
I admit to reading Ben Sandiland's reportage with more respect but know as little of his credentials as I do yours.
Ben makes an interesting note about the Jetstar (now Qantas) head of saftey. I said it some time ago in the Senate Inquiry thread, who will Joyce and Buchanan make the scapegoat when it finally all comes out?
Personally, I think they should all go to jail!
Personally, I think they should all go to jail!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bundeena(AUSTRALIA)
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centre fo Asia Aviation
Harbison is the Chairman and Founder of what is essentially a think tank and provider of data and research.
A point of note is that John "Tubby" Ward is on the advisory board.Ward was a 25 year veteran and CEO of Qantas.He must very disappointed about whats happening to his former charge.As are we all
A point of note is that John "Tubby" Ward is on the advisory board.Ward was a 25 year veteran and CEO of Qantas.He must very disappointed about whats happening to his former charge.As are we all
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
To Ben Sandilands
Ben,
You are a beacon of hope in the world of aviation journalism.
You sir have my respect and that is not easily won.
You are a beacon of hope in the world of aviation journalism.
You sir have my respect and that is not easily won.
I have no idea what Mr Sandilands' credentials are, but there are plenty of 'Aviation Experts' with little or no aviation credentials. Australian Aviation magazine is the perfect example!
Regardless, it's a great article, well written and showing great insight. Well done
Regardless, it's a great article, well written and showing great insight. Well done
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Beyond The Envelope
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Best Qantas CEO
John Ward
Non-Executive Chairman
[email protected]
John was the CEO of Qantas Airways where his career spanned 25 years. On retirement from Qantas, John became General Manager Commercial at News Corporation where he spent a further 7 years.
John has been the independent non executive Chairman of Wolseley since inception and is an investor in both Funds.
John is actively involved in all governance and management aspects of Wolseley and Chairs the Wolseley Private Equity Advisory Committee.
John holds a BSc from the University of Sydney and is a graduate of the Advanced Management Program at Harvard. He is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, the Australian Institute of Management, the Australian Marketing Institute, and the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport.
Current Board Positions: Wolseley Private Equity (Chairman); Wolseley Advisory Committee (Chairman); Research Foundation of IT (Honorary Life Governor); Adelaide Airport Limited (Director); and Brisbane Airport Corporation (Director)
Previous Wolseley Board Positions: Chairman
Intelligent,well credentialled,charming and the inventor of J/C.Wonder if he would like his old job back?
Non-Executive Chairman
[email protected]
John was the CEO of Qantas Airways where his career spanned 25 years. On retirement from Qantas, John became General Manager Commercial at News Corporation where he spent a further 7 years.
John has been the independent non executive Chairman of Wolseley since inception and is an investor in both Funds.
John is actively involved in all governance and management aspects of Wolseley and Chairs the Wolseley Private Equity Advisory Committee.
John holds a BSc from the University of Sydney and is a graduate of the Advanced Management Program at Harvard. He is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, the Australian Institute of Management, the Australian Marketing Institute, and the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport.
Current Board Positions: Wolseley Private Equity (Chairman); Wolseley Advisory Committee (Chairman); Research Foundation of IT (Honorary Life Governor); Adelaide Airport Limited (Director); and Brisbane Airport Corporation (Director)
Previous Wolseley Board Positions: Chairman
Intelligent,well credentialled,charming and the inventor of J/C.Wonder if he would like his old job back?
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't read Australian Aviation much however, I do know of the credendials and background of a couplke of contributors.
Dave Prossor writes the Warbirds section. I knew Dave since the 1970's and 80's where he worked as a journalist and also flew gliders and the tugs at Bacchus Marsh. He also worked at Moorabin as a Charter Pilot and is a Flying instructor.
Owen Zupp was at Ansett as a B737 FO when the music stopped. He is now at QF flying as an FO on something.
Aviation 'commentator' might be the term to apply to Ben Sandilands and Geoff Thomas. This is not meant in a derogatory way, informed commentry is an essential component of news and current affairs coverage.
In the legal arena, the differentiation between a witness and an 'expert' witness is that an expert can provide opinions and conclusions that a jury can be directed to take into account in reaching a verdict; an ordinary witness can only state what they observed.
Ordinarily, an expert witness would be a professional in a particular field. They would hold some formal qualification be it as a Trade qualification or a PhD. The higher the qualification, the stronger the weight of their evidence. However, there are experts and there are "experts"- Lindy Chamberlain was convicted of murder on the flawed evidence provided by a BSc Qualified Lab Technician and by a Professor of Forensic Science.
Of concern:
"Most of us are uncomfortable with the idea of being perceived as experts. In a traditional sense, an expert has engaged in years of research and has likely been published and scrutinized (in an academic sense).
Social networks and new media, such as blogs and Podcasts, have resulted in a new surge of perceived experts. This is because of two things:
Dave Prossor writes the Warbirds section. I knew Dave since the 1970's and 80's where he worked as a journalist and also flew gliders and the tugs at Bacchus Marsh. He also worked at Moorabin as a Charter Pilot and is a Flying instructor.
Owen Zupp was at Ansett as a B737 FO when the music stopped. He is now at QF flying as an FO on something.
Aviation 'commentator' might be the term to apply to Ben Sandilands and Geoff Thomas. This is not meant in a derogatory way, informed commentry is an essential component of news and current affairs coverage.
In the legal arena, the differentiation between a witness and an 'expert' witness is that an expert can provide opinions and conclusions that a jury can be directed to take into account in reaching a verdict; an ordinary witness can only state what they observed.
Ordinarily, an expert witness would be a professional in a particular field. They would hold some formal qualification be it as a Trade qualification or a PhD. The higher the qualification, the stronger the weight of their evidence. However, there are experts and there are "experts"- Lindy Chamberlain was convicted of murder on the flawed evidence provided by a BSc Qualified Lab Technician and by a Professor of Forensic Science.
Of concern:
"Most of us are uncomfortable with the idea of being perceived as experts. In a traditional sense, an expert has engaged in years of research and has likely been published and scrutinized (in an academic sense).
Social networks and new media, such as blogs and Podcasts, have resulted in a new surge of perceived experts. This is because of two things:
- consumer power to make choice is greater now than it has ever been
- people are able to translate their passion into a communicable form for mass consumption
Last edited by Anthill; 22nd May 2011 at 03:33.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: The Boardroom
Age: 65
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Management are watching
More silly biased Journalist rhetoric pointing fingers at QF. Do these reporters have nothing better to do? Why bring up the Bangkok ‘incident’ now? That was years ago and is well and truly buried in history and was only a minor occurrence anyway, nobody died did they?
Mr Sandilands article does nothing to improve shareholder confidence hence he should keep quiet. Why mention Jetstar staff travelling in Qantas business class? This is actually a good thing. It proves that cohesion, harmony and friendship exists within the core groups – this ultimately leads to an effective cross utilisation of resources, a cohesive synergy and a better outcome for the Shareholders investment. It matters neither way if one wears a Qantas, Jetstar or Asian uniform as the organisation is a diverse brotherhood, it is a symbiotic relationship and we are always seeking to add new members to our family.
Mr Sandilands has no right to question management decisions in relation to outsourcing, offshoring, or questioning ‘safety standards’. Management are incredibly astute, have a finger on the pulse and are always ensuring the upper echelon and the shareholder is appropriately remunerated. Happy shareholders equals a happy management team which in turn ensures that money flows freely, and free flowing profits enables the airline to spend more on safety, worlds best practises and latest technologies, an absolute win win.
So, Mr Sandilands, you would be better off reporting things more accurately to reflect the true facts – QF has never been in better shape. QF has the strongest robust management team ever to be assembled in one airline, the best outsourced maintenance companies, the best outsourced telephone answering services, the best outsourced I.T contractors and some of the newest, brightest and cheapest outsourced Pilots in its subsidiary companies. All of this spells out an exciting, profitable and long future for our all Australian icon.
The Boardroom Beckons
Mr Sandilands article does nothing to improve shareholder confidence hence he should keep quiet. Why mention Jetstar staff travelling in Qantas business class? This is actually a good thing. It proves that cohesion, harmony and friendship exists within the core groups – this ultimately leads to an effective cross utilisation of resources, a cohesive synergy and a better outcome for the Shareholders investment. It matters neither way if one wears a Qantas, Jetstar or Asian uniform as the organisation is a diverse brotherhood, it is a symbiotic relationship and we are always seeking to add new members to our family.
Mr Sandilands has no right to question management decisions in relation to outsourcing, offshoring, or questioning ‘safety standards’. Management are incredibly astute, have a finger on the pulse and are always ensuring the upper echelon and the shareholder is appropriately remunerated. Happy shareholders equals a happy management team which in turn ensures that money flows freely, and free flowing profits enables the airline to spend more on safety, worlds best practises and latest technologies, an absolute win win.
So, Mr Sandilands, you would be better off reporting things more accurately to reflect the true facts – QF has never been in better shape. QF has the strongest robust management team ever to be assembled in one airline, the best outsourced maintenance companies, the best outsourced telephone answering services, the best outsourced I.T contractors and some of the newest, brightest and cheapest outsourced Pilots in its subsidiary companies. All of this spells out an exciting, profitable and long future for our all Australian icon.
The Boardroom Beckons
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Glade
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better Late Than Never
The disintegration of Qantas has been going on for ten years.No body in the media paid attention for the first eigth.
Finally the story is seeing the light of day thanks to the likes of Mr.Sandiland.
Whether Qantas is saveable will be borne out by time and the Senate report.
Finally the story is seeing the light of day thanks to the likes of Mr.Sandiland.
Whether Qantas is saveable will be borne out by time and the Senate report.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly the problem! Does the majority of the flying public read Mr Sandiland's blog? Nope. Does the majority of the flying public read PPRUNE? Nope.
Ben is just preaching to the converted. Yet GT and others get their stuff published in real publications (and apparently get TV gigs).
I agree with most things Ben says,but he has a seemingly biased view on Qantas. He also has a very limited audience,even though those of us here may like his insight,'Joe Public' will never have heard of him or read his blog.
Ben is just preaching to the converted. Yet GT and others get their stuff published in real publications (and apparently get TV gigs).
I agree with most things Ben says,but he has a seemingly biased view on Qantas. He also has a very limited audience,even though those of us here may like his insight,'Joe Public' will never have heard of him or read his blog.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't believe that any other ASX100 company receives any where near the Alt-M (alternative media) scrutiny that Qantas does, particularity here. Is there any other ASX top 100 company that has a forum with the traffic & scrutiny that DG&P Reporting Points does?
The analysis is much more sophisticated now than for the Ansett collapse and APA bid. Where else do you see a top 100 company's business model dissected so thoroughly by the staff on a public forum. Aviation is a very small and very connected world, particularly for Australians. Not much can be done operationally without the proverbial cat getting out of the bag. PPRuNe is like a spiders web, where the smallest twitch is instantly transmitted to the rest of the web. Management can hide their plans amongst themselves, but when it comes time to actually implement them, we all become aware very quickly. This presents a significant challenge for managers. Why they just don't sit down and work with their employees still astounds me. If all the energy here was directed towards the business things could be so different.
Using Ansett as an example, much of the analysis was post-event, now for QF it is pre-event. This is a small but highly significant It also documents the chronology of events, which may be used later if a forensic investigation is ever undertaken. It must be one of the things that keeps them awake at night.
The analysis is much more sophisticated now than for the Ansett collapse and APA bid. Where else do you see a top 100 company's business model dissected so thoroughly by the staff on a public forum. Aviation is a very small and very connected world, particularly for Australians. Not much can be done operationally without the proverbial cat getting out of the bag. PPRuNe is like a spiders web, where the smallest twitch is instantly transmitted to the rest of the web. Management can hide their plans amongst themselves, but when it comes time to actually implement them, we all become aware very quickly. This presents a significant challenge for managers. Why they just don't sit down and work with their employees still astounds me. If all the energy here was directed towards the business things could be so different.
Using Ansett as an example, much of the analysis was post-event, now for QF it is pre-event. This is a small but highly significant It also documents the chronology of events, which may be used later if a forensic investigation is ever undertaken. It must be one of the things that keeps them awake at night.