Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Global Airline Alliances > oneworld
Reload this Page >

oneworld's questionable safety

oneworld's questionable safety

Old Oct 13, 02, 5:03 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Programs: AA PLT 2MM
Posts: 560
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by 777-232LR:
It's Cathay</font>
In 1972, a CX Convair CV-880 was bombed en route from SIN to HKG; all 81 passengers killed. In 1954, a CX DC-4 crashed into the ocean off of Hainan after being shot down by the Chinese military. Details on http://www.airdisaster.com .

Of course, these events were long ago, perhaps unpreventable, and CX still has one of the best safety records out there.

And yes, the press release above sounds awfully suspicious... perhaps the pilots in question would like to go work for Scary, er, Sky Team?

[This message has been edited by danang (edited 10-13-2002).]
danang is offline  
Old Oct 13, 02, 5:45 pm
  #17  
NM
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: AA Plat & LTG; QF LTG
Posts: 9,837
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Koala:
That does give QF more than 50 years without a pax dying in a flight accident, which is pretty good by any criteria.

Koala
</font>
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.
NM is offline  
Old Oct 14, 02, 12:07 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Philippines
Programs: CebGo 5J, Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum, Choice Diamond, Alaska 75K
Posts: 4,620
Are not both CX and QF pilots trained by BAE at Parafield in South Australia?
davistev is offline  
Old Oct 14, 02, 12:31 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,040
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NM:
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.</font>
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).]
ConcordeBoy is offline  
Old Oct 14, 02, 6:33 pm
  #20  
NM
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: AA Plat & LTG; QF LTG
Posts: 9,837
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.
NM is offline  
Old Oct 14, 02, 11:21 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,040
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NM:
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. </font>
*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
ConcordeBoy is offline  
Old Oct 15, 02, 1:21 am
  #22  
NM
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: AA Plat & LTG; QF LTG
Posts: 9,837
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ConcordeBoy:
*caugh* Air France! *caugh caugh*


</font>
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
NM is offline  
Old Oct 15, 02, 6:13 am
  #23  
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Katoomba (Blue Mountains)
Programs: Mucci
Posts: 8,083
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NM:
Originally posted by ConcordeBoy:
*caugh* Air France! *caugh caugh*


</font>
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
thadocta is offline  
Old Oct 15, 02, 6:31 am
  #24  
NM
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: AA Plat & LTG; QF LTG
Posts: 9,837
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by thadocta:
I will NOT bet a SQuillion dollars that nobody will be able to guess who you are referring to here.

Dave
</font>
.... 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.
NM is offline  
Old Oct 15, 02, 9:39 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,040
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NM:
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.</font>

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).]
ConcordeBoy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: