Way O/T:

That's fair. The absurdity had more to do with QF being more at fault than AF in this case, even though it was AF's aircraft that had failed and ultimately led to the death of this pax, even if his ticket showed he was flying with QF. What could have QF done to prevent the death of this pax? AF aren't going contact QF about the fault beforehand and ask them what they'd like to do - they're going to handle it how they like and in this case it led to a pax's death. OK, so you say QF should have just cut the codeshare altogether in the first place, then this death wouldn't have happened. Therefore, still QF's fault. Yeah right - and I own a crystal ball. This is not as if AF had been systematically killing people on QF codeshares - this happened once, but it's still not fair to say QF should shoulder the entire let alone the majority of the blame.

I think it wouldn't take an idiot to show the full negligence on AF's part.

I'm not sure if AF actually got any justice out of this whole shermozzle. In any case, it was never reported back to the media, and no sign that AF were implicated in any legal action, so QF are - for all intents of reporting - still 99.9% if not 100% responsible for killing this pax.


So I'm supporting the view of J-Class: and it's not just safety, it's reliability and the fact that there are a sizable number of codeshares out there where the whole cross-airline customer service thing is a complete mess. You also have some really messy codeshares like full cost carriers codesharing on a flight operated by a low cost carrier. Now how can you honestly say that some carriers who participate in codeshares are honestly thinking about their reputation (of which safety is one factor of it) rather than their bottom line, which is the real reason why codeshares exist?