"Operation No-Control"
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P1, perhaps your definition of adversity and my definition are different. I don't regard flying IFR or at night or in accordance with MEL's as adversities. As you said, it's an everyday part of an operation. It's part and parcel of doing the job.
Wizofoz, I'm just thinking Valujet was a low cost carrier.
Wizofoz, I'm just thinking Valujet was a low cost carrier.
Last edited by Lodown; 9th Aug 2003 at 06:45.
Lodown,
True but not of the Southwest model.
Old aircraft, dodgy practices and running on a shoestring certainly do add to risk. The type of operator I am talking about (and VB is modelled on) are usually well capitalised, use young fleets and attract competant staff.
Interestingly, those operating much more expensive, new aircraft seem consistantly more profitable than the operators trying to get a few more hours out of tired old heaps.
True but not of the Southwest model.
Old aircraft, dodgy practices and running on a shoestring certainly do add to risk. The type of operator I am talking about (and VB is modelled on) are usually well capitalised, use young fleets and attract competant staff.
Interestingly, those operating much more expensive, new aircraft seem consistantly more profitable than the operators trying to get a few more hours out of tired old heaps.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin - a sense of loss most certainly, but not of one particular airline, but simply of an industry - hey, I'm the first to admit that it's nostalgia to a certain degree. But I'm proud of the fact that I did know a better time.
Wizofoz - I do not claim that ALL budget carriers are unsafe or inefficient. There are many around the world that proove their quality in operation. However, it's easier to look like a budget carrier than it is to look like a full-service carrier. All you need do is have a big mouth and claim underdog status. Its the oldest marketing trick in the book - ask Freddie Laker, and Branson after him. VB is a pretender to the budget side of the industry. If Ansett hadn't collapsed VB would have already been dead for many months. And please dont tell me that AN's collapse was part of VB's strategy. Further, the fact that VB has any reliability at all is a testament to the aircraft manufacturer more than to the airline.
I'm not against the budget carrier philosophy per se, as I believe it fills a need in many markets. I believe that there is a market in Australia for it as well. But heed my warnings - VB is not doing it right. It's the most well documented statement amount budget carriers - "don't forget your business plan and philosophy". VB has. VB is operating well above its capability.
Your quote - "Old aircraft, dodgy practices and running on a shoestring certainly do add to risk. The type of operator I am talking about (and VB is modelled on) are usually well capitalised, use young fleets and attract competant staff."......
...VB wasn't well capitalised - and RB is not the sort to keep digging into his own pocket....attract competent staff?....exactly when are they supposed to show up?
Wizofoz - I do not claim that ALL budget carriers are unsafe or inefficient. There are many around the world that proove their quality in operation. However, it's easier to look like a budget carrier than it is to look like a full-service carrier. All you need do is have a big mouth and claim underdog status. Its the oldest marketing trick in the book - ask Freddie Laker, and Branson after him. VB is a pretender to the budget side of the industry. If Ansett hadn't collapsed VB would have already been dead for many months. And please dont tell me that AN's collapse was part of VB's strategy. Further, the fact that VB has any reliability at all is a testament to the aircraft manufacturer more than to the airline.
I'm not against the budget carrier philosophy per se, as I believe it fills a need in many markets. I believe that there is a market in Australia for it as well. But heed my warnings - VB is not doing it right. It's the most well documented statement amount budget carriers - "don't forget your business plan and philosophy". VB has. VB is operating well above its capability.
Your quote - "Old aircraft, dodgy practices and running on a shoestring certainly do add to risk. The type of operator I am talking about (and VB is modelled on) are usually well capitalised, use young fleets and attract competant staff."......
...VB wasn't well capitalised - and RB is not the sort to keep digging into his own pocket....attract competent staff?....exactly when are they supposed to show up?
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P1
How do you know how VB operates unless you are on the inside.
Ansett were in trouble before VB came along. If it wasn't Virgin to benefit it would have been Impulse.
VB is well capitilised, do have the youngest fleet and have attracted competent staff. I am from an airline background as are many staff within VB. They purposely hired the minimum number of experienced people so as not to bring in the old culture such as you are proffessing to.
The only time VB was under capitilised was when there was four airlines and no one knew who would last the distance. Ansett was always going to be there and always figured in future plans.
The aviation world has changed and for many reasons. What you say is for all the wrong or bad reasons. I don't agree. It is a natural cycle. We ask for more and more money eventually pricing ourselves off the market, or allow start ups such as VB, Southwest, etc, to prosper.
You contradict yourself in your replies and it is very obvious that you have a dislike for VB and not the model (your words). What ever you say does not matter as VB is successful and keeps on growing. There is a place in Oz for budget and full service. This is better than what we had before. Now we have true, identifiable choice. The only things that are the same are the rules we play by. Regulations are not written for a VB - budget and a different set for QF - full service.
Please do not comment on safety standards of any airline without proof. You do not have access to anything to do with VB whereas I do. I take your comments as a personal attack on my integrity and competency to administer the rules laid down by the governing bodies. I can assure you VB are audited regularly by CASA, DOTARS and external companies with satff made up of ex AN people. If anything is wrong it is fixed as is in QF.
In my experince not much is done different to what Ansett did as they were a vibrant, innovative airline that was destroyed by bad management and union power. VB is how Ansett used to be a long time ago. The under dog. Do you remember those days?. I do and they are back again and it is exciting to be a part of it.
Ansett will be back or is it already.
How do you know how VB operates unless you are on the inside.
Ansett were in trouble before VB came along. If it wasn't Virgin to benefit it would have been Impulse.
VB is well capitilised, do have the youngest fleet and have attracted competent staff. I am from an airline background as are many staff within VB. They purposely hired the minimum number of experienced people so as not to bring in the old culture such as you are proffessing to.
The only time VB was under capitilised was when there was four airlines and no one knew who would last the distance. Ansett was always going to be there and always figured in future plans.
The aviation world has changed and for many reasons. What you say is for all the wrong or bad reasons. I don't agree. It is a natural cycle. We ask for more and more money eventually pricing ourselves off the market, or allow start ups such as VB, Southwest, etc, to prosper.
You contradict yourself in your replies and it is very obvious that you have a dislike for VB and not the model (your words). What ever you say does not matter as VB is successful and keeps on growing. There is a place in Oz for budget and full service. This is better than what we had before. Now we have true, identifiable choice. The only things that are the same are the rules we play by. Regulations are not written for a VB - budget and a different set for QF - full service.
Please do not comment on safety standards of any airline without proof. You do not have access to anything to do with VB whereas I do. I take your comments as a personal attack on my integrity and competency to administer the rules laid down by the governing bodies. I can assure you VB are audited regularly by CASA, DOTARS and external companies with satff made up of ex AN people. If anything is wrong it is fixed as is in QF.
In my experince not much is done different to what Ansett did as they were a vibrant, innovative airline that was destroyed by bad management and union power. VB is how Ansett used to be a long time ago. The under dog. Do you remember those days?. I do and they are back again and it is exciting to be a part of it.
Ansett will be back or is it already.
