How are the vibes at SAS nowadays?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: N55"32'0 E13"21'0
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How are the vibes at SAS nowadays?
After the continous stream of pathetic journalism being fed to the public lately ("incident" after "incident") and with the reported profit drop (one of the steepest drops in europe according to Flight Intl.) in addition to the 'Maersk affair' and the "Braathens' slip", I'm just curious of the average attitude and the vibes amongst the employees at SAS nowadays. Is the 50 in 5 still valid? Taking into account the current slowdown in global economy, is there anything that indicates that SAS is getting onto thin ice? What's the word on the flightdecks???
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one am very disappointed in the way all the issues you have mentioned have been handled in relation to the media. I saw the press conference in Sweden regarding the Maersk case with J. Lindegaard and H. Norvik, and their performance was embarrasing, to say the least. In this case, as with the "incident-hysteria" this summer, SAS should have gone out much earlier with thorough and correct information to the media. It is incredible that SAS has allowed a series of more or less undramatic incidents to became a media feast of speculation and drama. This is most disheartening among those of us who consider safety as our prime objective and concern.
Concerning the Braathens case, I am worried for fellow pilots over there, as I now think they face an uncertain future. From a SAS pilots point of view however, i think it is for the better.
Concerning the Braathens case, I am worried for fellow pilots over there, as I now think they face an uncertain future. From a SAS pilots point of view however, i think it is for the better.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: N55"32'0 E13"21'0
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Somehow I feel that the power and impact of media is underestimated by the airlines. My opinion is that not only is it necessary to have a "spokesperson" to be in contact with the media, should anything occur that necessitates an official word, but there should be a broader role for this person or persons. There should be an office that positively and "profesionelly" deals with the press, not only at the occasions of incidents but as an ongoing relationship. Almost like a PR machine, constantely there to smooth out the medias skew picture and to make 'proper', media friendly statements. Even though I resent journalists, it is going to be difficult to get rid of their reporting which just gets worse and worse. So if you can't fight them, work with them. Remember the unfortunate trust the public places with them. This is the trust the airlines need. Every pilot who has ever read an aviation related article knows that at least 50% is poorly reported or just not true. So if this is the "truth" the public believes than something needs to be done....
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gulf playing Golf
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cartel or not. Who decides if a cooperation between airline ( or bakeries for that matter) is a cartel or just commom business practise?
If I go down to my fitness center, they advertice that I may workout in 400 studios all over the world. Is that acartel or just common sense. The later I would say!
In scandinavia, or atleast denmark, we love to bash SAS. Maybe because the common feeling is that it is more swedish than danish. This whole story is going to damage SAS' image in the general public. And we are not to popular in the first place. Need I mention danish domestic versus Q400.
The big question is will the board of director have to go?
If I go down to my fitness center, they advertice that I may workout in 400 studios all over the world. Is that acartel or just common sense. The later I would say!
In scandinavia, or atleast denmark, we love to bash SAS. Maybe because the common feeling is that it is more swedish than danish. This whole story is going to damage SAS' image in the general public. And we are not to popular in the first place. Need I mention danish domestic versus Q400.
The big question is will the board of director have to go?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Propsar......... are correct about media in general. It is to much. All most incidents are called emergencies etc. It is totally unacceptable. I do not think there is any other business there are that often being written or spoken that wrong about. In Berlingske Tidende - a Norwegian owned newspaper, written in Danish by Danes - they show a picture of a "daily thing going on in Denmark". Once there were a picture of a Fokker 100 (or 70?) from Austrian being deiced in CPH - they wrote: And here is a plane, just landed from Australia being cleaned after a long flight.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting onto thin ice...?
Most unlikely. I think Nick has a good point. When it comes to props, boats and all that stuff; I'd like to point out that thin ice is for fans (remember?), fans are for heroes, and, correct me if I'm wrong here, but Vmu is a good guy, member of boot boyz, and he has a PROPagation velocity known as beeing in the upper part of the scale, right?
Most unlikely. I think Nick has a good point. When it comes to props, boats and all that stuff; I'd like to point out that thin ice is for fans (remember?), fans are for heroes, and, correct me if I'm wrong here, but Vmu is a good guy, member of boot boyz, and he has a PROPagation velocity known as beeing in the upper part of the scale, right?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is; Thou shalt act in prudence! When I read PAFBs attitude concerning journalists, my mind was carried back in time to the rememberable periodical CallOut!, and, as i recollect, it had quite a few good men engaged as journalists. 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But before you get carried away slagging off the journo's-
Are you suggesting that ALL airlines are suffering a similar number of incidents as a matter of course?
A number of these incidents involve the Queasy, are you going to argue that its a great, trustworthy, reliable, profitable aircraft?
I've only read properly, a couple of the articles but found them to be essentially accurate. That is to say, all the hype in their vocabulary couldn't get past the fact that something quite exciting but basically not dangerous was handled in a professional manner by the crew.
Are you suggesting that ALL airlines are suffering a similar number of incidents as a matter of course?
A number of these incidents involve the Queasy, are you going to argue that its a great, trustworthy, reliable, profitable aircraft?
I've only read properly, a couple of the articles but found them to be essentially accurate. That is to say, all the hype in their vocabulary couldn't get past the fact that something quite exciting but basically not dangerous was handled in a professional manner by the crew.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From todays "Dagbladet", a norwegian paper:
"In July this year SAS had 30000 flights. SAS' own requirement is that the number of technical incidents should be less than 1 per 1000 flights. In July there were 10 tech. incidents. This gives less than 1 incident per 3000 flights. During the first seven months of this year the number of tech. faults that must be reported decreased by 20 percent, compared to the same period of time last year."
Finally a balanced article about the hysteria this summer, my credit to the journalist.
Mr. mofo, the point is that SAS did not experience an extraordinary number of incidents this summer. But the media-hype made it look like the company was falling apart, and that safety in SAS was compromised. Now for those of us who have safety within SAS as our prime task, it was immensely frustrating to watch from the sideline, as things went out of control in the media, and SAS made such a terrible job of handling it; allowing the hysteria to escalate.
"In July this year SAS had 30000 flights. SAS' own requirement is that the number of technical incidents should be less than 1 per 1000 flights. In July there were 10 tech. incidents. This gives less than 1 incident per 3000 flights. During the first seven months of this year the number of tech. faults that must be reported decreased by 20 percent, compared to the same period of time last year."
Finally a balanced article about the hysteria this summer, my credit to the journalist.
Mr. mofo, the point is that SAS did not experience an extraordinary number of incidents this summer. But the media-hype made it look like the company was falling apart, and that safety in SAS was compromised. Now for those of us who have safety within SAS as our prime task, it was immensely frustrating to watch from the sideline, as things went out of control in the media, and SAS made such a terrible job of handling it; allowing the hysteria to escalate.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the Q400, everybody agrees that its introduction has been a painful one, riddled with technical faults. There is no doubt that Bombardier delivered SC a product which was not ready for commercial use, and which still has its problems. Because of this experience, SAS will never again be the launch-customer of a new model. And when the Q someday is cured from all its ailments, it will still be discussed whether it is the right aircraft or not. (I think my position on this is pretty self-evident )
)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The introduction has indeed been a painful one, but has it ever been an issue whether SC was ready for the Q? It will be of great interest to follow the Qs upcoming introduction at WIF... guess they've had only minor problems with their Bombs through the last decade. But I guess the SAS/SC regime knows better than the rest of the aviation industry as always.
Just to illustrate further: It's not the first time SAS operates Airbus (remember the 320's specifically designed without centertanks?)
-Always treat your aeroplane like you treat your woman; avoid the SC treatment...
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: Fwd Wonder Cerebrum ]
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: Fwd Wonder Cerebrum ]
Just to illustrate further: It's not the first time SAS operates Airbus (remember the 320's specifically designed without centertanks?)
-Always treat your aeroplane like you treat your woman; avoid the SC treatment...
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: Fwd Wonder Cerebrum ]
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: Fwd Wonder Cerebrum ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fwd wonder cerebrum,
Lets get some facts straight, shall we;
1) There´s a h**l of a diff. between the Bombs that WF have been operating for the last many years, and then the -400. They might just find out the hard way, or they´ll be smart and ask for some info. from SC about experiences. Have you got inside info from SC, that leads you to speculate that SC was not ready. My 2 cents worth: the -400 was not ready for anything, when it left Toronto.
2) SAS operated A300, not 320´s in the eighties. Range was limited w/out the centertanks, but they were not intended for longhaul anyway.
But hey, SAS has scre**d up enough times already when buying good airplanes, and then fiddling with them. MD90 w/out front stairs springs to mind. And there are more..
Lets get some facts straight, shall we;
1) There´s a h**l of a diff. between the Bombs that WF have been operating for the last many years, and then the -400. They might just find out the hard way, or they´ll be smart and ask for some info. from SC about experiences. Have you got inside info from SC, that leads you to speculate that SC was not ready. My 2 cents worth: the -400 was not ready for anything, when it left Toronto.
2) SAS operated A300, not 320´s in the eighties. Range was limited w/out the centertanks, but they were not intended for longhaul anyway.
But hey, SAS has scre**d up enough times already when buying good airplanes, and then fiddling with them. MD90 w/out front stairs springs to mind. And there are more..
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gee Fu@ckin Wizz, Wonderboy.
What exactly are you trying to say?
Are you trying to start a pissing contest here? Well, WIF haven't exactly treated all their Twin Otters that nicely either. If you catch my drift.
You don't know jack sh!t about the readiness of the SC technical department. And the fact that "half" the technical department of Bomardier have been in CPH, working on the SC Q400s for the last year or so, speaks for itself.
And wat's tat Airbus comparison? Have you heared anything of SAS having problems with the introduction of the A330/340s?
Your comments and underlying conclusions stink.
Hopefully the introduction of the "Q" in WIF will be smoother than what the guys in SC experienced. But you should keep in mind that this will be due to the experiences gained through the Launch Customer: SAS Commuter.
The SC guys are probably more than happy to discuss the introduction of the Q with you, and there are probably lots of things that SC could have been more focused on, both technically and operationally (the tailstrike experiences is one example).
But your post shows that you are not interested in dialogue. Your primary goal is SAS bashing.
SC Q400 guys: Boycot this idiot.
OffCourse.
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: OffCourse ]
What exactly are you trying to say?
-Always treat your aeroplane like you treat your woman; avoid the SC treatment...
You don't know jack sh!t about the readiness of the SC technical department. And the fact that "half" the technical department of Bomardier have been in CPH, working on the SC Q400s for the last year or so, speaks for itself.
And wat's tat Airbus comparison? Have you heared anything of SAS having problems with the introduction of the A330/340s?
Your comments and underlying conclusions stink.
Hopefully the introduction of the "Q" in WIF will be smoother than what the guys in SC experienced. But you should keep in mind that this will be due to the experiences gained through the Launch Customer: SAS Commuter.
The SC guys are probably more than happy to discuss the introduction of the Q with you, and there are probably lots of things that SC could have been more focused on, both technically and operationally (the tailstrike experiences is one example).
But your post shows that you are not interested in dialogue. Your primary goal is SAS bashing.
SC Q400 guys: Boycot this idiot.
OffCourse.
[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: OffCourse ]