Scrolling headlines...

[Nigel C]

Currently scrolling across the bottom of the TV screen on Channel 7's Sunrise program is "Qantas mishaps blamed for increasing Sydney Airport curfew breaches"

Their news reports haven't mentioned it, instead focussing on Kevin747 visiting Peru and the patheticly named Rugby League World Cup.

Is it just a cheap shot by the media with no real proof?

Has anyone seen any facts to back up what is being reported? They obviously got their headline from somewhere.

Thoughts?

[Chris Griffiths]

Qantas, Jetstar fly in the face of curfew

From the SMH--
http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-jetstar-fly-in-face-of-curfew/2008/11/22/1226770809294.html
Another flight broke the curfew after engineers discovered "metal on the magnetic engine".

That would be the cause, trying new fangled things, they should have stuck to tried and true jet engines like other airlines!!!

[David M]

On March 25, Qantas's "entire operations [in Sydney] were operating from just two landlines and two mobile phones" after lightning strikes caused a communications failure. As a result Qantas was unable to arrange accommodation for 72 stranded passengers and was granted permission to fly after curfew.

And Lightning is totally Qantas' fault! :confused:

David.M.

[Nigel C]

Thanks for the link Chris.

It would be no surprise if they did have over half of the dispensation requests...surely they (Qantas/Jetstar) operate over half the total number of flights into and out of Sydney?


If Gulf Air still operated into Sydney, the report might read slightly different...

[Marty H]

If Gulf Air still operated into Sydney, the report might read slightly different...

No Gulf Air stopped flying into SYD in July 2007.

[Nigel C]

Marty, if you re-read what I have posted and then what you have quoted, you'll see I was talking in past tense. I am well aware that Gulf Air don't fly into Sydney anymore, which was entirely the point of my post. They had an ordinary record when it came to pushing the curfew boundaries.

[Chris Griffiths]

It would be no surprise if they did have over half of the dispensation requests...surely they (Qantas/Jetstar) operate over half the total number of flights into and out of Sydney?


I think they operate approx 42% of flights and according to the article make (and receive) approx 66% of the dispensation requests.

Before anyone turns this into a Qantas bashing exercise(or thinks I am), if further research was done into the late night movements, the ones likely to cause a curfew issue it is entirely possible the Qantas group operate a larger percentage of those.

Cheers

[Nigel C]

And just to clarify my position, the thread wasn't started for the purpose of bashing Qantas or Jetstar. I merely saw the scrolling headline but had seen no other information or reference to it and was curious as to its source.

[Mark M]

Yeah I saw that Nigel, was actually waiting for something else to follow, maybe 'Jetstar sponsorship blamed for Billy Slater's brain explosion against New Zealand last night !"

Am going to have to admit that I feel sorry for Qantas at the moment.

[phil.l]

proposal lets have a qantas free week or keep them under one (1) thread.

[Pieter S]

Coming from someone who subscribes here as a regular flyer, and part-time spotter (I find it a relaxing past time), but is not so tied into the technical side of flying/spotting or the industry - I have a few points to make about this article (http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-jetstar-fly-in-face-of-curfew/2008/11/22/1226770809294.html) - specifically:

- It would appear that the article was written from 'logs' which are not in the normal public domain (perhaps obtained under FOI, but that is not publicly available). How the heck are everyday readers supposed to be able to critically digest/question writing like this without access to all the facts?
- I guarantee that the paper/journalists had this story lined up to go, and merely waited for the next Qantas 'emergency' (in this case CHC) to occur - so they could 'follow up' with this 'related' article.
- For an article about the curfew, which as we know is a completely separate political issue from the ‘problems of Qantas’, the journalists involved sure do mention a lot of recent Qantas ‘incidents’?
- Anyone with a passing interest in evaluating the media in a critical fashion (i.e. thinking about what they read) would have had alarm bells going off in their head halfway through this piece.
- These articles should be written by someone with a level of expertise and experience in the aviation industry.

In summary, Fairfax seems to be playing into Murdoch's hands by moving its stable, of once reputable mastheads into the domain of sensationalism and click-driven Internet news. There may well be a good reason for the media to look into Qantas's state of affairs, and be questioning its safety procedures/record etc. But this type of reporting does nothing but generate fear amongst the general flying public and unfactually denigrate what is still a wonderful airline and our national carrier - where is the respect??

I am going for a Valium and a lie down now … :D

[Mark D]

Coming from someone who subscribes here as a regular flyer, and part-time spotter (I find it a relaxing past time), but is not so tied into the technical side of flying/spotting or the industry - I have a few points to make about this article (http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-jetstar-fly-in-face-of-curfew/2008/11/22/1226770809294.html) - specifically:

- It would appear that the article was written from 'logs' which are not in the normal public domain (perhaps obtained under FOI, but that is not publicly available).

A quick Google found https://secure.dotars.gov.au/webforms/infopages/CurfewDispensationsReports_2008.htm

lots of reading to read :-)

That's where the magnetic engine reference came from : rescheduled departure due to engineers finding metal on the magnetic engine upon landing in Sydney in the previous leg 15 MAR 2008

[Pieter S]

:) Always happy to learn more ...