Wonder how long SWH has been employed by Airbus?
In any case he must be the only who thinks they make quality aircraft. :p
CX had plenty of problems when they came; including shutdowns (remember the gear boxes). 340-600-Aerodynamically flawed, you need a new yaw damper every second sector. Ask the "ginger beers" that have to constantly fix them. To compare them (quality/dispatch etc..) to a 744 is a joke!

Geoff likes them for one reason-their cheap! Remember GOD’s comments at the 380 Superjunk launch, “the most attractive quality is the price!”:ooh:

Yet another expert ....

CX had plenty of problems when they came; including shutdowns (remember the gear boxes). 330-600-Aerodynamically flawed, you need a new yaw damper every second sector. Ask the "ginger beers" that have to constantly fix them. To compare them (quality/dispatch etc..) to a 744 is a joke!

Must be a new model that I dont know about.

:ugh:

BankAngle50

I am very well aware of the limitations of Airbus products, particularly the A340-600. Frankly I have not heard of any problem with the yaw damper on the said aircraft with CX. This is news to me. I will ask a LAME next week when I take one to New York.

SWH..expert?
 

...and your not representing yourself as an expert?

Kap M. Is it true that most Japanese pilots carry an open dated ticket out of the country on them every flight?

This, in case they have an incident in which someone gets hurt or worse, with the idea of leaving the country before the bovver boys of the police get to them?

There is a lot to this incident, particularly the way the tech crew were treated by the Japanese police, that still needs to come out in the wash. Suffice to say that there are real flight safety implications in how a crew with a similar emergency, or worse, may view what may await them if the nearest suitable airport happens to be in Japan.

nuff said for the time being.

Here we go, Airbus is crap and Boeing is the best, argument :hmm:

The_Cutest_of_Borg

I have heard that too about the Japanese pilots, wouldn't surprise me considering the Japanese authorities seem to be in a world of their own.

Oz

Yep, china airlines loss of hydraulic pressure ends up in a off the side of the runway stop at sydney in an A340...would have been arrested elsewhere...no one arrested or prevented from flying in oz..some countries do actually take ICAO annex 13 in the sprit it was intended...i.e. the promotion of safety....

Your point being ...

:hmm:

A cut and paste from crikey.com re QANTAS's cost cutting measures.

--------------------------

Is Qantas compromising its passengers' safety by cost-cutting?

Crikey Daily - Wednesday, 24 August

Crikey received this tip from an anonymous subscriber:
It is a requirement of Japanese law that all foreign air carriers, operating into and out of Japan must have a Japanese language speaker as part of the crew complement. Qantas have as a matter of course, over the past 18 months or so been operating into and out of Japan with domestic crews. Historically these crews are not language qualified. I am led to believe that the Qantas crew involved in this week's emergency disembarkation in Japan didn't have a Japanese language speaker as part of the crew complement. The PAs to passengers were made by a holidaying Qantas employee. If this is the case, Qantas has violated its agreement on flying into and out of Japan.
Advertisement

That's a pretty serious accusation against Qantas following the recent emergency landing in Osaka where nine people were injured. The plane, carrying 178 passengers and 13 crew, was on its way from Tokyo to Perth when it diverted to Osaka.

So did Qantas contravene Japanese law? No, says Geoffrey Tudor, director of public relations at Japan Airlines, telling us that there is "no legal requirement – under Japanese aviation law – for Qantas or any foreign airline to have Japanese speaking crew."

But in another respect, our tipster seems to be on the money – the recent emergency landing and subsequent passenger evacuation was apparently "anything but usual," an ex-Qantas exec tells Crikey. "I have it on very good authority" that a "non crew member on board gave the emergency evacuation PA after landing, where the predominantly Japanese passengers were herded out of the aircraft via the slides."

Why wasn't there a bilingual crew member on hand to assist Japanese passengers? We called Qantas, where a spokesman called Lloyd (he wouldn't give his last name) told us that there had been a fluent Japanese speaker on board. In a follow up call, we asked Lloyd whether this person was a member of the flight's crew? The answer: no. On this particular flight, he said, the normal Japanese speaker was ill, and wasn't on board. So it was another Qantas crew member – not assigned to the flight – who stepped in.

Had this stand-in not been available, however, would Qantas have left its Japanese passengers in the dark? When asked if Qantas always has a local speaker on board, Lloyd told us that it wasn't Qantas policy per se. Instead, it's a "matter of course" – and Qantas "aims to have" a fluent speaker on board. So if a Japanese speaker hadn't been available on the day, Japanese passengers could have been left without a guide.

In fact, says our ex-Qantas exec, Qantas "used to employ Japanese Flight Attendants based in Japan who flew on the route for both customer services reasons eg helping Japanese passengers fill in immigration entry cards for Australia, and for safety reasons. Being Japanese Cabin Crew, these crew were fully trained in all safety and emergency evacuations procedures on a regular basis." So why is this no longer the case? "Simple, cost cutting of the like still being advocated by Dixon and Dame Margaret!!" Ah well, he says, "as long as no shareholders on-board were inconvenienced then I guess it was OK (not)."

------------

Qantas- "Where it is all about money."



:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

"S$%T HAPPENS"!
Yours truly,
QANTAS.


I was told this by "Three Bars", a QANTAS contributor on this forum discussing another thread.

I spoke to a few of the passengers who were on that flight. Very interestingly, one passenger told me he was interviewed by one of the airport police. He showed me the cops business card. The cop asked him (through an interpreter), "Do you think the crew should be punished?".

Bear in mind this was only hours after the incident. The passenger said he was flabbergasted and could not even understand why he was being asked this question. He said the crew had done everything in their power to help the passengers even to the extent of protecting passengers from media in the terminal.

Cover your ass in japan.

The evacuation command was given by the Captain via the evacuation horn- end of story.

If anyone has ever heard how loud that horn is , you'd know that any PA was superfluous.

Once again Jettlager,

yes there was a language speaker on board which went ill in Narita, so a paxing japanese speaking F/A was used. What would be the case if you had 2 or even 3 language speakers onboard and they all went sick from food poisoning or something, you would use your resources and use a passenger like a tour leader etc that could speak both English and Japanese. I am made aware by a long haul CSM that she has been on numerous Japan trips with long haul crew and no language speaker, so..........

Also the evacuation was not given by a PA, it was initiated by the evacuation signal alarm which prompt crew to start the evacuation commands/process, including the paxing language speaker yelling the commands in Japanese in the cabin, because as every paxing crew member is required to assist in such a situation.

There are still about 6 QF long haul Japanese crew still based in Japan, it is all very quiet though, don't hear much about it.

Again i say, don't try and post facts when you don't know. I was on the damn flight, message me and i will tell you directly! There is no finding fault in the crew, absolutely i agree we need atleast 2 language speakers onboard and this has been expressed to management.

Oz

Yeah Chook. "S$%T Happens". Particularly in aviation. If you think it doesn't, you obviously don'y have any right to contribute to these forums, because all who fly know that S$%T happens every day to every one of us (whoever we fly for). Sometimes its just the depth that varies and how we manage to deflect it.

If you hate QF, why don't you just say that instead!! It'd be much clearer for everybody, than trying to imply somehow that its just Qantas that these incidents happen to.

Sorry mate .........

"S$%T Happens. Particularly in aviation."

See ya in four days........

Woomera

Chook,

You are obviously just trying to bait me, so I am not going to reply to your crap again. If you want to believe a conspiracy theory then go ahead - nothing I can say is ever going to change your tiny mind. The issues have been argued repeatedly.

S$%T does happen in aviation over and over again. I will continue to try to deal with it as best I can - ever if your worthless carcass was on board my aircraft.

Goodbye! :yuk: :yuk: :mad:

CC, you have nailed your anti-QF colours to the mast. Just go and play with yourself elsewhere old son, we know your twisted opinions.

Those of you trying to find fault with the way a situation was handled, look elsewhere. The word is that this crew did it right and did it well.

If a language speaker went sick and wasn't available, that happens. You don't cancel a flight because of it.

I just marvel that some would attempt to find some aspect of this situation that didn't go as a canned exercise would, and use it as some pathetic excuse to further their own tiny little vendettas against QF.

Prior to shorthaul taking over the NRT flight, there were 2 Longhaul Japanese speakers on every flight. At 1 stage it was only 1, but after about 2 years, with enough complaints it was raised to 2 - this was not made a requirement per say, but in the bidding, 2 were planned. In short hauls attempt to undercut mainline, these language speakers were removed.

That is until the NRT groundstaff were inundated with complaints from Japanese passenegers, not just about lack of language speakers but also because of service (this presumably was teething trouble) - the longhaul cabin crew, had been giving special training for Japanese pax - being made aware of cultural issues, and service issues - the money saving solution, was to put an extra crew member on board - purely as a language speaker - they are only meant to help out over PAs or to deal with customers when there is a problem. They dont work carts, so they cant actually serve the passenegers.


Because of the pay structure, the PER-NRT flights have gone from the most popular flights, to the highest sick rates. In many cases it is young casuals who operate the flights.

Ultimately it is the passengers who suffer.

This event begs the question............why do international operators continue to operate to a country that ignores ICAO conventions and locks up crew after an incident???

The message should be clear, follow the ICAO standard or pilots WILL NOT FLY INTO YOUR BACKWARD COUNTRY...!!!

Why don't the pilot Unions get together on this.

IFALPA etc, this is a damn serious issue and should be addressed before one of us is locked up for doing our job.

:* :mad:

Because the airlines don't give a flying forex about the crew. As long as they are making a profit...!!