Originally Posted by The Bullwinkle
(Post 10160563)
If my memory serves me correctly, didn’t QANTAS themselves use similar tactics by parking tugs etc behind “Compass” aircraft in an effort to destroy their competition? Can’t have it both ways! Maybe if the bean counters weren’t determining fuel policy these days, there’d be less “unexpected landings”. I think the dirty tricks were limited basically to Ansett and Australian being required to provide two gates to the new entrant so both provided gates that were nearly a km apart at the end of separate concourses. |
Originally Posted by Dee Vee
(Post 10163562)
I'm pretty sure there was no emergency, Just Qantas deciding to divert there due to bad weather and no planning on their part.
this is the crux of the matter. |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 10164673)
I seriously doubt that, diverting is a major decision and not taken lightly. The airports that have been privatised all have form in this area so regardless of what people think of Qantas or any other airline, this is BS and the airports should be re-nationalised or regulated within an inch of their lives. They are still located on Commonwealth land and Commonwealth Law applies due the country's obligations as a Contracting State.
A report was given at the most recent IATA AGM in Sydney about airport privatisation. It didn't regard privatised airports at all well. Surprisingly, only a literal handful of countries have ventured down the privatisation path, Australia being one. A summary of the report can be found here: http://www.iata.org/publications/eco...ary-report.pdf |
Fundamental mistake in the second section:
Without airports, airlines have no business. Without airlines, the airports have no business. only a literal handful of countries have ventured down the privatisation path |
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:55. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.