Sounds suspiciously like a bunch of union bludgers using "safety" as a mask for money-grabbing.

Agree whole-heartedly. There are many airlines operating today that have displayed gross safety issues, some resulting in tradgic loss of life. However, they are not part of OneWorld.

Are not both CX and QF pilots trained by BAE at Parafield in South Australia?

Ummm NM, have you never heard of American Airlines!?!

Of course, that's something of an anecdotal statement. AA has long had more aircraft than most airlines, so its high number of hull loses/fatalities in proportion to its ASM count is nowhere near say China Airlines *shivers*, but the 1,200+ people killed on AA metal is nothing worth bragging about either.


------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

Try the Unofficial Continental Dictionary

[This message has been edited by ConcordeBoy (edited 10-14-2002).]

And safety should not just be measured by hull loss of fatalities. Safety is a way of operating. Safety is an attitude. I am horified when I hear things like "Air XXXX does not go around", or captains being demoted or repremanded for refusing to fly an aircraft with defects, or covering up operational mistakes/incompitence can calling it something else (like blaming turbulance for passanger injuries when they were caused by a lack of hydrolics).

Past tragedies are unfortunate history. If an airline learns from these unfortunate events and changes the way the operate, then that is a good thing for future staefy. When "saving face" or containing costs are what motivates operating and safety policy, then that is a future tragedy waiting to happen.

I won't name names here, but there are some very well known and respectied airlines that offer among the best premium class services in the industry, that seem to consider safety as optional in come circumstances. As I said, it is an attitude, and that attitude must be instilled from the top right down through the tech crew, caboin crew and ground staff.

*caugh* Air France! *caugh caugh*





------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

Try the Unofficial Continental Dictionary

Wan't actually who I had in mind, but ... Would one describe AF as having one of the better premium services in the industry? I wouldn't know, having not ever flown with them.

Some of the QF regulars who also hang out at aus.aviation will have be able to take a good guess though

I will NOT bet a SQuillion dollars that nobody will be able to guess who you are referring to here.

Dave

.... nuff said Now what flavour (currency) dollars are you not offering?

Must say I loved the answer from an aus.aviation regular to the question "What is XX's attitude to safety?". To which the repsponse was "Optional". Made me . But then again we should not laugh at such serious issues.

They can, just depending on how/when you fly them.

Believe me, any airline that KNOWINGLY flies a special aircraft with vital missing parts (an action that was at-the-time legal, but incredibly stupid).... and then blames it on another carrier when this happens to that special aircraft.... warrants serious concern


------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

Try the Unofficial Continental Dictionary

[This message has been edited by ConcordeBoy (edited 10-15-2002).]