Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More problems for Qantas

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • More problems for Qantas



    Qantas chief defends maintenance record

    Posted 1 hour 5 minutes ago
    Updated 1 hour 2 minutes ago
    The head of Qantas says he stands by the airline's maintenance record despite another two mid-air equipment failures.
    A Qantas flight from Los Angeles to Sydney has been forced to 'piggyback' an Air New Zealand plane after its weather radar failed.
    And a Sydney-bound flight was forced to make an emergency landing in Melbourne this afternoon because of problems with its landing gear indicators.
    Geoff Dixon says he believes recent incidents, including one in Western Australia in which scores of people were injured when a Qantas airbus suddenly lost altitude, were not the airline's fault.
    "Those two major incidents look like they were more to do with the manufacture of the aircraft or parts of the aircraft than anything to do with Qantas' maintenance," he said.
    "I don't think that that's a well known fact and as you know once something gets out there it's always hard to take it back."

  • #2
    Weather radar failures happen almost daily somewhere around the world. Once en route, I don't know of an airline that requires an operational weather radar to continue a flight unless thunderstorms are present. I don't know of an incident where a weather radar failure was reported in a news paper.
    Don
    Standard practice for managers around the world:
    Ready - Fire - Aim! DAMN! Missed again!

    Comment


    • #3
      On Sunrise (Channel 7 TV) this morning they had some "Avation Expert" from Perth who said that due to the failure the aircraft was "Flying blind". Is he for real?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by exswissair View Post
        On Sunrise (Channel 7 TV) this morning they had some "Avation Expert" from Perth who said that due to the failure the aircraft was "Flying blind". Is he for real?
        A load of crap. As Don mentioned unless there were thundershowers present he was totally fine. Next the press will be reporting if Qantas has a lav out of service.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mackie_1951 View Post
          A Qantas flight from Los Angeles to Sydney has been forced to 'piggyback' an Air New Zealand plane after its weather radar failed.
          I believe it was the ANZ flight doing the piggybacking

          Originally posted by exswissair View Post
          On Sunrise (Channel 7 TV) this morning they had some "Avation Expert" from Perth who said that due to the failure the aircraft was "Flying blind". Is he for real?
          Supposedly that was how the captain described it to the passengers, or at least what one of them heard

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ptbodale View Post
            A load of crap. As Don mentioned unless there were thundershowers present he was totally fine. Next the press will be reporting if Qantas has a lav out of service.
            Errrrr...

            http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/...014090,00.html
            My contribution to JetPhotos

            Comment


            • #7
              The fully laden 737-300 was forced to divert to Adelaide one hour into a flight from Sydney to Perth because staff had forgotten to empy the toilets after the plane's last trip from Honolulu and consequently four of the seven weren't working, Fairfax reported.
              lol wut? That must be one hell of a 733 if they are flying it all the way to HNL

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Greg Wilson View Post
                Looks like the Australian press is lurking around like crocs in a billabong.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ok, so a few things to consider.

                  QF (prior to these recent events) had been world-renown for safety standards, and for their impeccable safety record. As for the events raised, (the weather radar being the most prominent) should the flying public not applaud QF and the QF staff for not flying the aircraft. Many other airlines would not have hesitated to fly the aircraft anyway. The event is commonplace, and more importantly QF pro-actively dealt with the situation.

                  Something else - Dixon might need to improve on his word-smithing. The statement ("Those two major incidents look like they were more to do with the manufacture of the aircraft or parts of the aircraft than anything to do with Qantas' maintenance,") could be misconstrued and could cause a rift between the airline and the manufacturers. But, I am sure that it will be overlooked in the long scheme of things.
                  Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by AA 1818 View Post
                    Ok, so a few things to consider.

                    QF (prior to these recent events) had been world-renown for safety standards, and for their impeccable safety record. As for the events raised, (the weather radar being the most prominent) should the flying public not applaud QF and the QF staff for not flying the aircraft. Many other airlines would not have hesitated to fly the aircraft anyway. The event is commonplace, and more importantly QF pro-actively dealt with the situation.

                    Something else - Dixon might need to improve on his word-smithing. The statement ("Those two major incidents look like they were more to do with the manufacture of the aircraft or parts of the aircraft than anything to do with Qantas' maintenance,") could be misconstrued and could cause a rift between the airline and the manufacturers. But, I am sure that it will be overlooked in the long scheme of things.
                    I'd happily fly a plane with no weather radar as long as I got a good look at the weather and there is no chance of any precip that is moderate or greater. Planes fly with broken stuff all the time, but whenever they do there are extra limitations that we must comply with to make it safe. You'd be surprised at some of the things that we can dispatch with inoperative.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by AA 1818 View Post
                      Ok, so a few things to consider.


                      Something else - Dixon might need to improve on his word-smithing. The statement ("Those two major incidents look like they were more to do with the manufacture of the aircraft or parts of the aircraft than anything to do with Qantas' maintenance,") could be misconstrued and could cause a rift between the airline and the manufacturers. But, I am sure that it will be overlooked in the long scheme of things.
                      its called "sabre rattling".
                      Dixon is most likely going to make a big warranty/insurance issue out of it. A way of Saying to Airbus "warning, warranty claim coming".
                      You cant have the best virtual airline in the world without the best people. Ansett Australia.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by exswissair View Post
                        On Sunrise (Channel 7 TV) this morning they had some "Avation Expert" from Perth who said that due to the failure the aircraft was "Flying blind". Is he for real?
                        Yeah, this is common knowledge with "experts", when the radar drops out, blinds drop down across all the cockpit windows effectively blocking all vision to the outside, the navigation instruments all go U/S so no clues as to "where the F... are we?" as well LOL.
                        You cant have the best virtual airline in the world without the best people. Ansett Australia.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Screaming Emu... yes, daylight ops where you can see the weather, and you have a forecast and sat chart showing weather patterns, its not too much of a problem.

                          Of course, crossing the ITCZ at night is a different matter. The right (and practical) thing was done, and this is certainly not the first time I've heard it happening. Shame the media just can't report anything without a slant.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Unfortunately the Aussie media is at it again after two 747-438s were towed into eachother at Avalon. VH-OJK, just back from repair in Manila, has had her nose cone smashed by the winglet of another 744 under tow.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ini the meantime I just heard on a regional Swiss radio station about a B767 bound to Manila (?) having a hydraulic failure.

                              I searched the net and found an article in Swiss yellow press "Blick" (more or less like the Sun in the UK, so don't bother....), which ended something like "Big problems for QF ... horrendous problems .... and yaddayaddayadda".
                              My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X