Qantas on You Tube
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topher
Well well! Who woulda thought! Good on yo T. Your'e in the spotlight now, so go get 'em! Right the wrong and do the research, then another Vid, this one scathing of QF management and their destruction of Qantas. We'll make sure it gets out, and you get famous! Ahh, happy days....
Efficient!!
Could this possibly mean having & using 777,s??? Maybe this genius 'TOPHER' could explain to us all why Qantas doesnt operate them and while he is at it tell us who made the decision not to own them-dont think it was a union decision!!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: moomooland
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead of insulting the guy, why don't you lot help feed him with the leads and evidence he needs to create the video that we all know could, and indeed should, be made? 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c173 and Hotas,
Well said.
I thought Topher's delivery was pretty good - he obviously has a passion for what he is doing. Until I read his reply to SN, I was inclined to think he was simply a stooge for QF .. paid for ... and I couldn't bear to finish watching his mis-information.
However ..
Given that he has shown honesty and backbone in his reply - we need to explain to him WHY he has been mistaken. If our explanations are good enough we will convince him. He is not the enemy.
As for me? Yes, I'd like a subsequent video to be favourable - it COULD be a great positive for Australian Aviation, however more than anything, I want a truthful, honest video.
N
Well said.
I thought Topher's delivery was pretty good - he obviously has a passion for what he is doing. Until I read his reply to SN, I was inclined to think he was simply a stooge for QF .. paid for ... and I couldn't bear to finish watching his mis-information.
However ..
Given that he has shown honesty and backbone in his reply - we need to explain to him WHY he has been mistaken. If our explanations are good enough we will convince him. He is not the enemy.
As for me? Yes, I'd like a subsequent video to be favourable - it COULD be a great positive for Australian Aviation, however more than anything, I want a truthful, honest video.
N
Originally Posted by blubak
Could this possibly mean having & using 777,s??? Maybe this genius 'TOPHER' could explain to us all why Qantas doesnt operate them and while he is at it tell us who made the decision not to own them-dont think it was a union decision!!
The list prices of a 77W is US$284 million, and given standard industry discounts it would take over 8 years of operating 77Ws for the fuel difference to pay for the US$4.5billion investment in new aircraft. By the time they are paid off, the A350 will be in service, offering comparable performance of a 77W, with a 30t lower empty weight.
If QF were going to buy the 777, they should have done so years ago when they had a real competitive advantage. Today the A380 offers a 15-20% lower fuel burn per seat over the 77W, it no longer has the advantage.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
swh,
I would argue that your reasoning is "spreadsheet analysis". I fly the A380 and believe the 777 is a great machine to buy even now. It is here, it is proven and reliable. Not every route is suitable for the A380, and the A350 has yet to prove it can fly.
The answer to most problems QF has operationally is .... 777.
N
I would argue that your reasoning is "spreadsheet analysis". I fly the A380 and believe the 777 is a great machine to buy even now. It is here, it is proven and reliable. Not every route is suitable for the A380, and the A350 has yet to prove it can fly.
The answer to most problems QF has operationally is .... 777.
N
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Prime Meridian
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quality of Staff and Leadership
This is why no airline manager will ever achieve anything great (other than lining his own pockets) and why the various organisations that we work for are so poorly run.
There are 7 parts.
There are 7 parts.
Originally Posted by noip
The answer to most problems QF has operationally is .... 777.
8 years later, all of sudden it is a good idea.
Qantas 'billions' warning | Herald Sun
In other words, they could be flying right now and could've complemented the 787 when it finally arrives.
Alas!
- July 09, 2007 12:00AM
Mr Dixon later said Qantas was not interested in Boeing's 777 jet because it was old technology, and nor would the airline buy the proposed remake of the now 40-year-old 747 jumbo, which is to be given new engines and rebadged as the 747-8.
"We're not going to buy old technology that has been . . . I won't say . . . tarted up. But there, I said it," Mr Dixon declared.
"We're not going to buy old technology that has been . . . I won't say . . . tarted up. But there, I said it," Mr Dixon declared.
Alas!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good response from Topher (if you're reading 
) and I look forward to seeing the researched video. No doubt it will end up on here one way or another.
The 'old' way is the proper way and how journalism used to be defined (as opposed to hack writing). Too many members of the modern press have chosen to forget that the basic premise of journalism consists of researching an issue and commenting about it. Even many established writers have sold their souls to write misinformed hysterical pieces that stir up the mob or keep the advertisers happy, rather than fact and fact based opinion. Then they bitch because people stop buying papers and rely on the internet, where at least the misinformed hysteria is free!
However, apology notwithstanding it pays to remember the words of Omar Khayyam (1048-1131) who wrote long before the internet or even the printing press were ever thought of:
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
On the internet, what's said is said and what's done is done. The video is still out there despite the author's own admission that it contains factual errors. It will still be viewed and believed by many and Qantas may still use it for their own purposes. No apology or corrective video can change that and this is the problem with lousy, error filled reporting, particularly in the WWW era.
) and I look forward to seeing the researched video. No doubt it will end up on here one way or another. The 'old' way is the proper way and how journalism used to be defined (as opposed to hack writing). Too many members of the modern press have chosen to forget that the basic premise of journalism consists of researching an issue and commenting about it. Even many established writers have sold their souls to write misinformed hysterical pieces that stir up the mob or keep the advertisers happy, rather than fact and fact based opinion. Then they bitch because people stop buying papers and rely on the internet, where at least the misinformed hysteria is free!
However, apology notwithstanding it pays to remember the words of Omar Khayyam (1048-1131) who wrote long before the internet or even the printing press were ever thought of:
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
On the internet, what's said is said and what's done is done. The video is still out there despite the author's own admission that it contains factual errors. It will still be viewed and believed by many and Qantas may still use it for their own purposes. No apology or corrective video can change that and this is the problem with lousy, error filled reporting, particularly in the WWW era.
Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 9th Aug 2011 at 12:41.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny QLD
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
