Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Qantas faces special safety probe

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Qantas faces special safety probe

Old 4th Aug 2008, 07:21
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: joburg
Age: 61
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
probably a little crock .. but i'm still booking BA or SAA or Emirates or anyone else flying Joburg Sydney, Qantas is now second last on the list after Indonesian Airlines. As Stephen Wolfram eloquently shows, patterns cannot be denied. Sniffed any nitrogen in your oxygen lately ?
maddes is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 09:12
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Off track, again
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Isn't loss of hydraulic fluid a serious issue? As in...loss of landing gear, flaps, control surfaces, essential flyability of the aircraft?
These aircraft have redundant hydraulic systems so loss of hydraulic fluid from one system will not prevent safe operation of the aircraft. In fact you can lose all the fluid in one system and still not have to land at the nearest suitable airport, therefore this was a precautionary turn back only and not an emergency.

The media gets a bit excited after a serious incident like QF30 and start reporting everything as a major incident. Many precautionary air turn backs are never reported in the media at all. Whilst they might still be news, they don't deserve this level of sensationalism.
aerostatic is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 09:57
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 3 Posts
Qantas is a good airline and I hope that the issues which have been publicised are just a run of bad luck.

Don't dismiss comments from SLF about u/s IFE. To alot of people these small issues matter, not just for comfort, but also because they tend to lead to the question 'what else doesn't work'. Working in the industry I take the view point that they don't work because engineering is directing resources at keeping the important bits going. But talking to SLF I often find the counter view 'if the airline cannot keep the small things serviceable, how do they cope with the bigger issues.' My perspective is the minority view outside of this forum which is why it matters.
PC767 is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 10:00
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Downunder
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
maddes, enjoy flying BA via LHR from JNB to SYD...or EK via DXB...certainly hope your IFE works...as you are doubling the length of travel! If my memory is correct is only a couple of years since EK came very close to losing an A340 taking off from JNB...and its only a few months since BA wrote off a 777 at LHR...think I will keep taking my chances on QF...with some of the worlds best pilots...and they still havent lost a Jet!
TMAK is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 10:09
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Downunder
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PC...you are right, they are important to pax and many relate these to other parts of the aircraft. But as NSEU pointed out it is fairly basic tech especially on these older planes. Which if Boeing and Airbus could deliver an aircraft to plan, may not be in service now...or for much longer at least. Im not sure...but I wouldnt think so much that engineers direct attention elsewhere, its just not that reliable tecnology...its old and basic (the early IFE) and there is little point replacing it at millions per aircraft, when new aircraft and IFE are just around the corner....somewhere!
TMAK is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 10:56
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: southeast
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think some ought to re-read mybrico's post - he/she's not just referring to a failure of IFE for gawd's sake!!!!!!!!
sidtheesexist is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 11:43
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Qantas is a good airline and I hope that the issues which have been publicised are just a run of bad luck.
No they're not; they're awful, as anyone has flown with them can testify. I speak as someone who works for BA too. Arrogant, think they're the best, but about ten years behind the rest of the industry in terms of service. Comes about from having a virtual monopoly. As for their operating standards, I refer you to the previous; Aussies think they're great, and can't wait to tell everyone how great they are. Is that a good thing in the flight deck? Not as far as I could see, when I did my training in Oz (alongside QANTAS cadets, I might add).

think I will keep taking my chances on QF...with some of the worlds best pilots...and they still haven't lost a Jet!
TMAK is offline Report Post Reply
Now you're making me laugh. I trained with said "World's best pilots", remember? Never lost a jet? What, apart from from Bangkok, when they decided to land in a thunderstorm, then decided not to, at which point the captain unilaterally decided to land, but landed long and failed to deploy reverse thrust, ending up in a golf course. It cost QANTAS more to put that together again than it would have to buy a new one. But hey-ho, QANTAS never lost a jet..........

Last edited by Slickster; 4th Aug 2008 at 12:31.
Slickster is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 11:52
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry Safety is not the issue - it's lousy on-time performance

Sidtheesexist said :-
I think some ought to re-read mybrico's post - he/she's not just referring to a failure of IFE for gawd's sake!!!!!!!!
I agree. I am very frequent international SLF out of Oz. I have no qualms at all in travelling Qantas for safety reasons as the current media crap is just mainly dressing up normal operational issues as near-disasters ! The thing that is pulling me away from QF and towards airlines such as SQ and EK is the sheer number of major delays and cancellations I have experienced with QF International flights for a long time now. On average SQ run 86% ontime for SYD-SIN (and that includes some teething probs with the A380) whereas QF only manages 44% ontime performance. (source www.flightstats.com select Flights then Flight Rating).

I had one situation two weeks ago when I was booked on QF5 SYD-SIN, it got cancelled and I was rebooked on QF31 SYD-SIN, that then got delayed by 6 hours so Qantas sent me to Melbourne ("the only way we can get you to Singapore today") to catch QF9 MEL-SIN which was then itself delayed by 6 hours. I was lucky enough to be able to switch to SQ out of MEL as the only way then left for me to get to Singapore that day. That is crap service and it is by no means the only time I have experienced these sort of delays that other airlines just don't seem to have. It seems to me that QF has spent the last several years pissing off their staff and they have now turned on their passengers !

Last edited by ronca; 4th Aug 2008 at 23:31. Reason: clarity
ronca is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 12:35
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, if you're going to get that picky, at least use capital letters. Despite our collective deficiencies, it doesn't change the fact that QANTAS are pooh!
Slickster is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 12:37
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slickster dribbled.....
No they're not; they're awful, as anyone has flown with them can testify. I speak as someone who works for BA
I've traveled with BA three times over the last few years and whilst Qantas certainly don't have the best service, I must say your comment is very hypocritical.
BrissySparkyCoit is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 12:48
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Irony obviously escapes you then. Perhaps I should have said "Even though I work for BA, and know how bad they can be, sometimes".
Slickster is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 13:09
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: above it all
Posts: 367
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The local media have found another newsworthy story today. They say another 767 was found leaking hydraulic fluid even before the flight took off

Qantas flight grounded by tech fault
Finn47 is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 20:51
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
Propjet, the CASA investigation is nothing to do with the media and everything to do with the disclosure of numerous breaches of QF's own maintenance procedures that were reported to CASA by QF's own engineers during an industrial dispute.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2008, 23:13
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Danger


Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Casa) is part of Qantas,
that's why Casa doesn't take any action to warning Qf.

QF engineering can issure EA to cover MEL when expaired.
luckboy is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 01:13
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: YMML
Posts: 288
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Casa) is part of Qantas,
that's why Casa doesn't take any action to warning Qf.

QF engineering can issure EA to cover MEL when expaired.
Can anybody translate that into proper English...?
Teal is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 01:35
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I had one situation two weeks ago when I was booked on QF5 SYD-SIN, it got cancelled and I was rebooked on QF31 SYD-SIN, that then got delayed by 6 hours so Qantas sent me to Melbourne ("the only way we can get you to Singapore today") to catch QF9 MEL-SIN which was then itself delayed by 6 hours. I was lucky enough to be able to switch to SQ out of MEL as the only way then left for me to get to Singapore that day. That is crap service and it is by no means the only time I have experienced these sort of delays that other airlines just don't seem to have. It seems to me that QF has spent the last several years pissing off their staff and they have now turned on their passengers !
Two weeks ago, you were almost certainly flying in the middle of the QF engineer's industrial dispute (where none of them were doing any overtime, which meant there was a backlog in routine and non-routine maintenance). Everyone concerned is hopeful for a resolution in the next few days, but, no doubt it will take a few weeks for things to get back to "normal" at QF. To help the process, Qantas has suspended its maintenance contracts with almost all foreign operators (to concentrate on its own fleet). The foreign operaters are now either servicing their own aircraft .. or are using engineers-for-hire (or a combination of both)
NSEU is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 02:00
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: australia
Age: 59
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ronca #29

"qantas has spent the last several years pissing off their staff....". qf has spent a lot more than 3 years pissing off their staff. 5 years ago, or more, an engagement survey result showed long haul cc were 27% engaged, pilots result was lower. consulting company reported that these were the worst results ever in a survey of any company. 18 months later another survey conducted, results never published. why? no company surved twice had ever shown a decline in 'engagement'. qantas created history once more
indamiddle is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 04:00
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
The phenomenon of CASA bending over to be nice to QF is an old one, studied in economics textbooks as "Regulatory Capture", where those regulated form a nice cosy mutual relationship with the Regulator.

This isn't corruption either, it happens through friendships, relationships, shared experiences and so on. Smart companies do their best to suck the regulators in and make them "Friends", and it's very very hard to resist because once it exists at senior levels, junior regulators know they can be punished or victimised in their own organisation for being "too strict" with companies who have links to their bosses.

Questions for example to CASA. Exactly who is paying for CASA's work in gaining Australian approvals for the QF A380 and B787? Exactly who is going on what courses with whom, and who else is going? I'm fairly sure I already know the answer. We are talking pilots and engineers here.

Again, it ain't corrupt, just very very unhealthy to let your regulator get "captured" by someone. Furthermore, smart players love it when regulators add a few more layers of regulation, because usually their compliance costs are less if the "own" the regulator, and the extra (suitably impenetrable) regulations then become a barrier to entry into the market to other players.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 04:38
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: leafy suburbs
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I appreciate that an SLF may have concerns for the airworthiness of the aircraft if small things in the cabin do not work, but this is the real life operational service situation. If time is available, which it isn't always, then IFE etc gets sorted if possible. My priorities on a turn round are:
  • Get the routine done first
  • Sort out Aircraft tech problems
  • then have a go at cabin defects
If I do have the time to work in the cabin I try my damnest to get the IFE working.

At stations down the line where there are staff available, then I would expect the cabin to get worked.

Last edited by keel beam; 6th Aug 2008 at 03:35.
keel beam is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2008, 05:24
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nobody's happy with the way QF is doing things at the moment, that includes the staff. But for christ sake, if you don't like the service, or you think somebody else is better or whatever, just F@ck off and fly with them. The Bankok accident was NOT a write off, and if you can replace a 747 400 for 90 million dollars, then I suggest you should be in the business of aircraft sales. Lots of airlines would love to talk to you. Media beatups for the great unwashed. Spare me........
porch monkey is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.