The figures are questionable because OAG lacked date for 5.5 per cent of QF's flights: the report states it only had '94.5 per cent coverage' of QF's flights, lower than OAG's coverage of VA"s flights, which was 95.9 per cent (or 4.1 per cent unaccounted for.)
What if the 5.5 per cent of QF flights that were not included in OAG's database had 20 or 30 per cent that were 15 minutes 00 seconds or more late? Some of QF's operations such as QantasLink in country NSW have a large number of flights that do not meet this timekeeping benchmark.
Notably the second ranked carrier in Asia Pacific for punctuality, JL, had 99.7 per cent coverage of its flights by OAG. This makes it extremely possible that JL is actually Asia Pacific's most punctual airline.
Similarly, third ranked Singapore Airlines (SQ) had 99.1 per cent coverage of its flights by OAG, so it may also be above QF were every flight operated to be included in the statistics.
Yet sixth ranked mainline airline worldwide for punctuality, Flybe, only had 80.1 per cent of its operated flights included in the OAG survey. That makes its ranking highly speculative.
It's an interesting read but until OAG is able to cover almost every flight operated by each airline, the results should be treated with a grain of salt. Ask frequent passengers on the westbound routes ex LAX to Australia what they think of QF's almost habitual late running (particularly LAX - SYD and LAX - BNE) and one might get a dismissive result about any such survey. Similarly, the performance of Australia's domestic airlines (JQ, QF, TT and VA) on the Melbourne - Sydney route (our busiest and the world's fourth busiest) with its up to six per cent flight cancellations in a month and numerous instances of flights that are 15 minutes or more late is not great.
We do not know which QF flights have been excluded from the survey. About 14,700 (5.5 per cent) of QF's 2016 total of 268,106 flights have not been included.
Notably, worldwide by region, OAG claims 99 per cent coverage in its database of USA and Canadian flights and 98 per cent of European flights, but only 89 per cent of Asia-Pacific flights and a poor 81 per cent of African flights.
The reasons for this are not explained anywhere. Is it lack of radar coverage in some areas of the world, or under (or no) reporting by some airlines of punctuality performance? Would an airline such as 8M in Burma (Myanmar) report its flights and punctuality to such gatherers of statistics as OAG, or be covered by any government statistical agency?
The OAG punctuality statistics also cannot account for lazy schedules. If airlines build in extra time to their schedules such as QF did on its two routes from Oz serving LHR, or it routinely does on flights such as eastbound from Australia to Los Angeles, the results will be skewed towards better punctuality figures, but really all that may be happening is that a flight that departs half an hour late from a gate can still easily arrive less than 15 minutes 00 seconds late at its destination.
OAG's claim that the results are 'incredible' when compared against other modes of transport is stupid, because where it is measured by surface transport operators in the West, the punctuality of trains/ ferries/ trams/ streetcars/ buses typically includes every trip operated by these modes. There is also usually a lot less (or no) padding in many surface transport operators' schedules, unlike many airlines.
