The things Qantas and Boeing talk about

[oz_mark]

An article at
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/06/1044498910569.html

had this little bit

He said Boeing was in continuous discussion with Qantas, both in terms of aircraft but airline services it could provide.

"One thing about having a great relationship with airlines around the world like Qantas is that you continually talk about all kinds of new ideas," he said.

"Some of discussions we've just had here (include) what happens if United disappears?, what happens if Continental comes in, what happens if Singapore Airlines comes in."

©2003 AAP

Now I am aware of United, and had heard of SIngapore, but what's this about Continental?

 

[shillard]

[quote="oz_markNow I am aware of United, and had heard of SIngapore, but what's this about Continental?[/quote]

Biggest load of rat's bollocks since the great gun-grab of 1996.

Continental is even closer to death than United, a completely useless shell of an airline. Singapore won't be making an entry into the Australian domestic market - there likely won't be room for a second full-service airline for decades - QF and Vermin have the market stitched up quite nicely. The tiny matter of Vermin occupying all the former AN terminal space kind of buggers it for SIN as well.

Good thing too - the last thing we need in Australia is more aircraft from an airline that has such a flagrant disregard for the safety of its aircraft, crew, and passengers.

 

[oz_mark]

SIA?

You must know something about their safety policies that I don't.

 

[thadocta]

SIA?

You must know something about their safety policies that I don't.

Pretty common knowledge, really. The whole (lack of) safety culture existing in that airline is truely astounding.

Dave

 

[QF WP]

ozmark, just look at the number of fatal SQ accidents versus Qantas...particularly in last 5 years.

 

[oz_mark]

In that case it is 1 - 0, and there is some argument over where the blame for that accident lay

 

[shillard]

In that case it is 1 - 0, and there is some argument over where the blame for that accident lay

Rubbish, the blame lays squarely with the airline that puts schedules well ahead of safety. It has happened before, it will happen again - you just watch.

Nobody with an ounce of aviation knowledge would consider flying with those cowboys.

 

[oz_mark]

And the little slide Qantas took down a Bangkok runway was whose fault? Read the report, there were a number of failures within Qantas that point at $$$ being put ahead of safety. Qantas were just lucky the outcome was not worse than it was.

 

[shillard]

And the little slide Qantas took down a Bangkok runway was whose fault? Read the report, there were a number of failures within Qantas that point at $$$ being put ahead of safety. Qantas were just lucky the outcome was not worse than it was.

The number of people placed in boxes is the only measure that counts at the end of the day. Sorry if I've ruined your impression of Singapore Airlines as the bee's knees, but those monkeys don't give a rat's about passenger welfare or safety. They'll happilly shaft any aircrew that put safety ahead of schedules - their record on that matter is notorious.

Take your own life in your hands if you must, I'd fly Aeroflot before I'd set foot on a Singapore Airlines plane.

 

[shillard]

And the little slide Qantas took down a Bangkok runway was whose fault? Read the report, there were a number of failures within Qantas that point at $$$ being put ahead of safety. Qantas were just lucky the outcome was not worse than it was.

The number of people placed in boxes is the only measure that counts at the end of the day. Sorry if I've ruined your impression of Singapore Airlines as the bee's knees, but those monkeys don't give a rat's about passenger welfare or safety. They'll happilly shaft any aircrew that put safety ahead of schedules - their record on that matter is notorious.

Take your own life in your hands if you must, I'd fly Aeroflot before I'd set foot on a Singapore Airlines plane.

 

[oz_mark]

I don't view SIA as the bees knees, simply that I see no evidence that it is as bad as you say. Similarly I don't hold Qantas as being the be all and end all of safety excellence as they have been caught out as well.

I guess we can just agree to disagree. Enjoy your aeroflot flights.

 

[thadocta]

oz_mark - the thing to remember here is that when VH-OJH decided to partake of a round of golf at BKK, Qantas were operating the aircraft within manufacturers guidelines.

Boeing set various parameters for aircraft operation, and Qantas deliberately chose the settings which would cost it the least - nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately, the guidelines issued to pilots were less than adequate (as far as informing pilots that they had the discretion to go outside those guidelines when circumstances permit) and that was the cause of the BKK incident.

The fact that the PIC of QF 1 on that day is still flying for Qantas is evidence that Qantas made a *mistake* as far as issuing directives to flight crew goes. I do not blame an airline for making *mistakes*.

But when airlines blatantly ignore safety directions is when I get worried. I have been at airports where the display monitor read (in order):

DELAYED
DELAYED
DELAYED
DELAYED
[insert departure time (one and only SQ flight of the night)]
DELAYED
DELAYED
DELAYED
DELAYED

And this is not an isolated occurrence.

Weather conditions have arisen which has caused each and every other PIC to delay the departure of their flights, yet SQ has persisted on.

So far, this has not resulted in a fatality, but I know that I would prefer my flight-crew to err on the side of caution, rather than be a slave to the schedule. You cannot tell me that PIC's from six or seven different airlines, all flying wide-bodies (thus having years of experience) who all decided to delay their departures until the weather was better, were ALL wrong and the SQ PIC was right on EACH occasion.

Dave

 

[donjsimons]

Don't worry OZ-Mark, The executive team of knockers have locked in on Singapore Airlines just like Bush has locked in on Iraq and in both cases there is no backing of.
One quote should make it clear to you that they know all there is to know about everything to do with aviation: "Nobody with an ounce of aviation knowledge would consider flying with those cowboys."
What us "ordinary" people are supposed to believe is that we haven't "an ounce of aviation knowledge"
Singapore are a fine airline and to compare them with Aeroflot is really sad. Why is it people get a trip out of demeaning others?
And take a tip from someone "without and ounce of ego" that SIA definately are interested in Australia.

 

[shillard]

Don't worry OZ-Mark, The executive team of knockers have locked in on Singapore Airlines just like Bush has locked in on Iraq and in both cases there is no backing of. And take a tip from someone "without and ounce of ego" that SIA definately are interested in Australia.

And just like Iraq, Singapore Airlines deserves everything it gets.

SIA may well be interested in Australia - much like Russia is interested in Alaska. Doesn't mean either party will ever get their dirty mitts on it.

SIA is a no-hoper for a domestic operation in Australia, won't happen this side of 2020 - if ever. SIA may not even be in business then - particularly if their planes keep falling out of the sky.

 

[QF WP]

And the little slide United took down Sydney runway this week was whose fault?

Whilst I inserted United over Qantas, I still haven't seen any negative reports lately about Qantas's maintenance...but I have read another about DJ (Virgin) lately...

Don, Scott is simply stating the facts...Qantas has a much better maintenance and safety record than SIA (simply look at the statistics). I agree with him and Dave. Whilst I have only flown twice in my lifetime with SIA (with no troubles), I have clocked up over 330 flights with QF in the past 15 years and from my recollection, I have been lucky to have never had a cancelled flight and only once had a delay of over 1 hour. I can't say the same for BA or CX. I can only go by second hand knowledge from my best friend (a *A Gold Elite member) [who has flown probably twice as many sectors, but on *A carriers] that he has had many more delays/cancellations.

Considering how much flying Shillard has done and his knowledge, I accept the information in his posts as being correct.

I'm sure that we will never agree with everybody and we are entitled to our opinions.

(Edited to tidy up floating

that somehow got there)...

 

[donjsimons]

Oz-mark, just print off the last two replies and keep them in the draw. 2020? I think I am in for a free drinky!!

 

[oz_mark]

I suspect that at some future point, Singapore will be playing some sort of role in Australia's domestic aviation scene. I think the current free trade stuff between Singapore and Australia will make it easier for them.

As for saftety, there are many airlines around with worse safety records than SIA, aeroflot being one of them. I accept the anecdotal evidence presented on this board re Singapore, as I have no reason not to.

Unfortunately for me, I have had a somewhat worse record of delays/cancellations on QF than Lindsay, but then, if there a problems with the safety of the aircraft (which there sometimes were), then obvioulsy it is best to delay (or in the case of a red eye from Per->Syd a few weeks back cancel) the flight.

None of this however, has been enough to get me onto Virgin, if I can help it.

 

[QF WP]

Particularly considering the recent FAA slap on the wrist for DJ about their pilots not doing all safety checks, abrogating their responsibility by delegating to engineers to do pre-flight checks.

 

[oz_mark]

FAA? Would be more likely to be either CASA or ATSB. I would lean toward such a thing coming from the ATSB in Australia.

 

[QF WP]

oz mark, ah yes, been a long day, indeed it was CASA. Sorry for confusion. Welcome to being on-line at the same time. Alas, I'm off to zzzz now...big day tomorrow.