Cobham the new Qantas?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh please, the only ones bidding to avoid it were the old boilers who refused to embrace the technology. Sure it had teething problems to begin with (like all new developments) but overall it works great.
End of the day the ipads will work fine for the short sectors the 717 performs, the only challenge on the 767 was the long patterns it had projected before a restock (BNE/PER/BNE/PER) or (PER/BNE/DRW/BNE/PER).
End of the day the ipads will work fine for the short sectors the 717 performs, the only challenge on the 767 was the long patterns it had projected before a restock (BNE/PER/BNE/PER) or (PER/BNE/DRW/BNE/PER).
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does Cobham go through the annual IOSA audit process? Does it get audited under the Qlink AOC? How or what SMS are in place for what is effectively a labour contract company used by Qantas?
Anybody?
Anybody?
I'd say just as much Q audit as other Qs
....how much Q mainline audit do the Dash Qlink blokes get anyway? Just because Sun-East are now called Qlink, their own surveillance doesn't really suggest a real Q audit...... Or does it?
..... Maybe you would suggest that the Dash blokes audit those renegade Cobham fellas?
....how much Q mainline audit do the Dash Qlink blokes get anyway? Just because Sun-East are now called Qlink, their own surveillance doesn't really suggest a real Q audit...... Or does it?
..... Maybe you would suggest that the Dash blokes audit those renegade Cobham fellas?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As i understand it Cobham operate under their own management system with their own AOC, Qantas has little control over the operation, that said Qantaslink SMS from time to time Audits the operation. Qantas just supply the Aircraft and Qantaslink decide on the routes etc
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick check of the IOSA web page shows the neither Qlink or Cobham comply with IOSA or report to IOSA. That means that the jet operation is and will be operated to a standard where the recognised bench mark for auditing and operational safety standards is not audited by an IOSA representative. If Joe Punter buys a ticket on Virgin/Qantas/Jetstar then he knows these airlines meet the IOSA standards of operation and are audited on a regular basis, unlike Cobham. Will this become public knowledge and does CASA really care?
Bottums Up
A quick check of the IOSA web page shows the neither Qlink or Cobham comply with IOSA or report to IOSA. That means that the jet operation is and will be operated to a standard where the recognised bench mark for auditing and operational safety standards is not audited by an IOSA representative.
If Joe Punter buys a ticket on Virgin/Qantas/Jetstar then he knows these airlines meet the IOSA standards of operation and are audited on a regular basis, unlike Cobham.
Aside from that I note that Air North, Alliance, Network, Skytrans, Skywest (Virgin Regional) and Tiger just to name a few off the top of my head are not listed as being IOSA audited. Does this concern you that these companies are not applying to be audited by IATA or is Cobham the only one that worries you due to their contract with Qantas?
And as Capt Claret said maybe Easterns/Sunstate come Qantaslink fall under the Qantas IOSA audit banner and this may also extend to the Cobham 717 operation aswell. However I do not have access to nor do I feel like applying for access to the Qantas IOSA report so I don't know if it does or not.
Last edited by Check_Thrust; 19th Sep 2013 at 23:51.
A quick check of the IOSA web page shows the neither Qlink or Cobham comply with IOSA or report to IOSA.
IOSA = credibility ZERO.
Next, Shlong hauler...
Qantas IOSA Audit covers Qantas mainline only.
You obviously have no understanding of the IOSA program!
A quick check of the IOSA web page shows Asiana is registered with IOSA.
IOSA = credibility ZERO.
IOSA = credibility ZERO.
Last edited by Potsie Weber; 20th Sep 2013 at 05:22.
A quick check of the IOSA web page shows Asiana is registered with IOSA.
IOSA = credibility ZERO.
IOSA = credibility ZERO.
Your myopic view of aviation would go well in any charter outfit.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas just supply the Aircraft and Qantaslink decide on the routes etc
A few years ago i was crewing a flight PER-PHE-PER where we had a senior QF Captain (one with the oak leaves on his hat) jumpseating to Audit us on behalf of mainline.
It does happen!
It does happen!
Originally Posted by Kaboy
IATA membership is not important right?
Your myopic view of aviation would go well in any charter outfit.
Your myopic view of aviation would go well in any charter outfit.
If such an "esteemed" program can let through a major international airline, it does call into question the validity of what it is doing. Or are you just going to ignore Asiana's stack as an aberration?
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 20th Sep 2013 at 13:30.
hasn't Qantas always used Qlink to grow routes? Utilise smaller aircraft like the Dash and 717s... test the market with cheaper operating costs, and when demand requires it, bring in the 737... Was the same back in the days when NationalJet operated the 146 as Qlink...
hasn't Qantas always used Qlink to grow routes?
737s and 767s in the west now operating on routes developed by the 717.
The 717 cannot replace the 737-800, it is only suited for the thinner routes. Maybe the Canberra and Hobart routes can no longer support a 737 but are too much for a Dash. The 737-400s are tired and worn and unpleasant from a passenger perspective and the 800s are too big for some of these routes at certain times. The 717 fills the gap perfectly.
Not all decisions are made solely to screw mainline crew.
The 717 cannot replace the 737-800, it is only suited for the thinner routes. Maybe the Canberra and Hobart routes can no longer support a 737 but are too much for a Dash. The 737-400s are tired and worn and unpleasant from a passenger perspective and the 800s are too big for some of these routes at certain times. The 717 fills the gap perfectly.
Not all decisions are made solely to screw mainline crew.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez...there's some funny thinking going on here and it starts when people don't know the difference between a 717 branded QLink and a Dash 8 with the same branding. Its also not helped when people don't know that Qantas operates mainline, Jetstar and QLink into Hobart. Quite a mix.
They tried dropping mainline services and replacing with Jetstar and copped a pasting from business pax for their troubles so the 737 service was brought back at business travel times. They have introduced a Dash 8 service as well but not proving popular with the punters. Something about propellers and travel times I understand.
Now a 737 can't be supported by pax numbers to and from Tassie outside of peak travel times so why not replace the Dash 8 with a proven airframe for less than optimal pax numbers. There is a contractor with the right airframe and there are a limited number of extra airframes going cheap. Job jobbed, or hopefully so.
They tried dropping mainline services and replacing with Jetstar and copped a pasting from business pax for their troubles so the 737 service was brought back at business travel times. They have introduced a Dash 8 service as well but not proving popular with the punters. Something about propellers and travel times I understand.
Now a 737 can't be supported by pax numbers to and from Tassie outside of peak travel times so why not replace the Dash 8 with a proven airframe for less than optimal pax numbers. There is a contractor with the right airframe and there are a limited number of extra airframes going cheap. Job jobbed, or hopefully so.