Should i do it ?? (fly EK)

[dajop]

By what measure do you come to that conclusion?

In purely sarcastic terms. Whilst QF have had a rough 12 months or so, extrapolate back a few years on there is quite a number of SQ incidents (that you don't hear about) and accident - if you go back as far as Taipei. I'm not sure who has the better record of the three airlines flying between SIN/MEL direct.

For EK, the problems seem to be with the A340 (JNB, MEL), don't know if it helps that MEL-SIN is a 777 operation.

 

[dajop]

I had a Finnair flight severely delayed in 2006 and I chose to try out EK business class BKK-HKG on the 777 (not sure if it was 200 or 300) and I was not impressed. Seats were nothing special and the service was not much better.

I did fly EK earlier this year in J MEL-SIN-MEL on 777. Wasn't expecting much, but the MEL lounge was second only to QF FCL, the seats were standard angle lie flat, and service was OK - probably on par with QF, but more generous with the food offering.

 

[NM]

In purely sarcastic terms. Whilst QF have had a rough 12 months or so, extrapolate back a few years on there is quite a number of SQ incidents (that you don't hear about) and accident - if you go back as far as Taipei. I'm not sure who has the better record of the three airlines flying between SIN/MEL direct.

I suggest the Australian media is not a very good source to get an indication of incident rates between airlines. They only report incidents that involved Australian airlines, flights to/from Australia, or major incidents they deem to be news worthy.

For example, how much local media coverage was there of a SQ 744 that diverted to Munich with a cargo fire alert on 2 March 2009? Or the SQ 77W operating Singapore to Zurich that returned to SIN with engine oil level and pressure problems on 5th Jan 2009.

For EK, the problems seem to be with the A340 (JNB, MEL), don't know if it helps that MEL-SIN is a 777 operation.

What about the EK 77W that returned to Vienna shortly after takeoff due to "technical problems" on 2 Feb 2009? Or the EK A380 that returned to DXB about 3 hours into a flight to JFK due to an electrical problem on 3 Dec 2008? Or EK 773 rejected take-off after an engine failure at Manchester on 23 Oct 2008? Or the EK 773 where the smoke detector activated near Budapest 29 July 2008? Or the EK 77W that diverted to Istanbul with low oil level on 18 May 2008?

 

[docjames]

Thanks NM for the link and info.

I agree totally with the skewed view of what is an incident and gets reported in Australia.

To me, the end of runway excusion EK had in MEL is as serious as the QF Maila decompression incident - the potential for deaths is equally there.

There's more QF "news" today - hardly newsworthy. One flight got delayed whilst they fumigated the plane. Must be a slow news day.

Snakes on a plane killed

 

[dajop]

I suggest the Australian media is not a very good source to get an indication of incident rates between airlines. They only report incidents that involved Australian airlines, flights to/from Australia, or major incidents they deem to be news worthy.

Yes that is exactly my point. There are lots of incidents on other airlines that we don't hear about.

 

[Flashback]

Also in regards to EK premium cabins, and I think it's Dave Noble who has mentioned this in the past; their J is nothing special but F is exceptional.

 

[browski]

I originally made the sarcastic comment regarding Qantas being a cheap "no-incident" airline because I thought the OP put his question on as a joke.
I mean, anybody with any travel experience would know that Emirates is a very large, professional company with highly trained pilots with a well deserved highclass reputation.
The same is easily applied to Cathay, Malaysian, Singapore and Qantas.
I just thought it unusual that in this day and age somebody would even pause at flying on any of these airlines (or any of these aircraft).
To be accepted as an Emirates pilot is no easy thing. They have an incredibly difficult criteria to achieve based primarily on an enormous number of flying hours.
Anyway, to each his own......

 

[Alanslegal]

their J is nothing special but F is exceptional.

Having a nice (5minute) shower on the EK A380's would be called exceptional indeed.

 

[Flashback]

Having a nice (5minute) shower on the EK A380's would be called exceptional indeed.

I'd hate to be using one, and then all of a sudden turbulence hits :shock:

 

[anat0l]

I'd hate to be using one, and then all of a sudden turbulence hits :shock:

Worse than slipping over the bar of soap, eh?
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[tuapekastar]

I'm not so sure that showers are not an overkill on planes. Surely people flying F would generally have access to lounges with showers (pre flight and post flight in some cases)? I guess there are always exceptions (people who are time poor being one), but it does seem a little OTT. IMHO.

 

[anat0l]

EK F, especially with the new suites, looks really refined.

So refined, in fact, from one perspective it looks really tacky! Maybe I need to "sit" in one to get a better idea, but all the pictures showing the gold trimmings, the mahogany, etc. etc. all exudes luxury and affluence, but for some reason when I stare at it, I don't feel comfortable, or able to put myself in the picture.

Of course, if someone dangled a EK F ticket in front of me for free, I won't turn it down!

Perhaps too much QF has killed my senses. I know plenty of people who are not particularly enamoured with QF's designs, even in the A380 (in all classes).

 

[JohnK]

I'm not so sure that showers are not an overkill on planes. Surely people flying F would generally have access to lounges with showers (pre flight and post flight in some cases)? I guess there are always exceptions (people who are time poor being one), but it does seem a little OTT. IMHO.

In my opinion it is extremely over the top. I am still amazed at the lengths some people will go to have a quick shower in the lounge during a 1 hour transit after being on the aircraft for <12 hours. But I guess to each their own....

 

[NM]

To me, the end of runway excusion EK had in MEL is as serious as the QF Maila decompression incident - the potential for deaths is equally there.

To me there is a major difference. Following what appears to have been a thorough investigation involving Qantas, Boeing, CASA and ATSB, there has been no evidence found to suggest that anyone at Qantas or Boeing, or any Qantas or boeing process was at fault or could be shown to be a contributing cause to the event. I very much doubt that will be the case with the recent EK tail strike and over-run.

The EK pilots "resigned" almost immediately. The QF pilots were hailed as heroes.

The official report will make very interesting reading.

 

[docjames]

To me there is a major difference. Following what appears to have been a thorough investigation involving Qantas, Boeing, CASA and ATSB, there has been no evidence found to suggest that anyone at Qantas or Boeing, or any Qantas or boeing process was at fault or could be shown to be a contributing cause to the event. I very much doubt that will be the case with the recent EK tail strike and over-run.

The EK pilots "resigned" almost immediately. The QF pilots were hailed as heroes.

The official report will make very interesting reading.

NM, I mean little difference in the potential of the incident for death. I think you quote me out of context / misunderstood my context.

I didnt mean little difference in response by repective airlines / authorities etc. That certainly favours QF and adds to the reasons I choose to fly them over EK. I agree with your points in that regard, but was not the initial point I was making. Cheers.:mrgreen:

 

[browski]

I didnt mean little difference in response by repective airlines / authorities etc. That certainly favours QF and adds to the reasons I choose to fly them over EK. :mrgreen:

Well then perhaps that is a reason you need to revisit. Do you honestly believe that the ATSB, Boeing, Airbus, CASA etc perform a different level of investigation because of the airline involved? This is just plainly untrue.

 

[docjames]

Well then perhaps that is a reason you need to revisit. Do you honestly believe that the ATSB, Boeing, Airbus, CASA etc perform a different level of investigation because of the airline involved? This is just plainly untrue.

No, I believe (rightly or wrongly) that QF act better in the immeidate aftermath (better than EK or many others).

I dont believe ATSB/CASA etc behave any differently.

 

[straitman]

Evan,

Not passing comment just making sure you have all the info.

See here !

I would of course apply the appropriate grains of salt to the news article.

 

[Evan]

I decided against it for now, i prefer to keep flying QF for many reasons and i had a voucher that made it the same price + double SC currently for me.

I have been entertaining a few long weekends away so on the looking out for some good OW fares.

The report when released will make very interesting reading, and sorry i don't buy the fact that expereinced pilots even if the wrong weight was entered would not notice that thrust on this day was a lot less than other days... maybe he really was tired... and the co-pilot.

 

[straitman]

The report when released will make very interesting reading, and sorry i don't buy the fact that expereinced pilots even if the wrong weight was entered would not notice that thrust on this day was a lot less than other days... maybe he really was tired... and the co-pilot.

I know first hand of other instances where this has occurred but where the outcome has not been as dramatic.
Part of the explanation comes from the fact that, for a turbine at high power, a small engine speed adjustment is a very large power adjustment.