This is where I look incredibly sad - but I think it goes something like:

"...you'll need to know it instantly. Can you reach the seat in front of you? If so, fold your arms on the seat back and rest your forehead on your arms. If you can't reach the seat in front of you, lean as far forward as you can and hold on to your legs. Put your feet flat on the floor to prevent them from moving forwards."

Anyone with corrections? :D

Also perhaps of interest, DL has a new in-flight safety video in an attempt to actually get your attention...:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MgpzUo_kbFY

I really appreciate being called a Troll
 

Guys and Gals

Charming bunch of fellow travellers!!!

I state an opinion based on information that I have gleaned from reading articles and reports, and conversations I have had over the years with people in the know.

I never said that the Boeing or any other airlines recommendations were not up to par.

QF used to do extra maintenance, they then decided to go with just the recommended amount.

The Unions were upset that due to this the high standard of QF could be impacted. Personally I draw the conclusion that it has been.

Now if my views and comments are libellious I will enjoy my time in court with the author of this article published in this mornings media.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599...014090,00.html

Forums are like blood lines - they need fresh blood or fresh ideas.

Odd how a "troll" has the same views as a respected journo.

I know what has happened I have ruffled the feathers of people who think QF is the best airline in the sky.

Grow up.

Now I will go back to being a troll!!

Carpe Diem

Adam

First you say
Then you say
Which is it?

I see kinda see what your trying to explain. Qantas has lowered their standard which is becoming more inline with the manufactures standard. But all the airlines (most anyway) meet this standard and I don't see planes falling out of the sky left right and centre everyday, and if the media didn't dramatize everything (take this example - QANTAS: TERROR ON THE RUNWAY or QANTAS FLIGHT ABORTS TAKE-OFF IN LA - which is going to sell more papers?) there probably wouldn't be as much reporting as there is.

I'm outsourced - Would you feel less safe with me as your flight attendant?

Cheaper labour does not mean the quality of work is any less.

For the record - I do not think QF is the best airline in the world - the J cabin crew are often disappointing, the IFE is woeful, Neil Perry should be dismissed or ignored, standard J/F pricing is obscene and check in staff are rubbish - most of the time. So my credentials as a non-apologist are established?

The article you quote basically quotes without any other independent evidence the head of the Australian engineers union.

This is the same person who was widely quoted blaming offshore engineers (aka dirty foreigners) for the stapling incident. For example in this article in the Australian.

The truth of that incident isnt clear as other people allege that the staple incident was the fault of Australian staff.

Adam - when you bring some independent evidence maybe your arguments about QF safety might be listened to.

Just to clear up once and for all is this your own opinion or is it fact, I think we are all a bit confused?

I can't find any opinions of the "respected journo" he is quoting directly from a union official or quoting facts that are accepted and publicly known and documented you are not.

If what you have said was printed your editor and publisher would be in court pretty quickly with a libel suit there is nothing in that article that could be considered libelous. Facts are given as facts, but opinions are prefaced with "according to" etc, there is nothing wrong with giving an opinion just when it is passed off as fact.

Not really I personally fly CX when I can, I prefer the level of service on them. But there is no need to create malicious rumours in the absence of solid evidence.

So what is the problem then?

I think the unions were more upset that jobs would be lost.

That author did not express any opinions or facts other than the quoted union official, unlike yourself.

Actually, the most frequent posters on this forum probably think otherwise.

The same could be said to you as you're attitude and postings in this thread have been far from polite or mature.

This is the statement I found most disturbing. Is the OP saying this exact discussion took place. He appears to be saying just that.

Minutes do not usually record the discussions about an issue although there could be a audio tape kept I do not know.

Suffice to say that if the board based a decision on this premise then they should all be sacked and be in gaol( I am not sure if there is any criminal or quasi criminal offence that fits but I would certainly hope so)

Or is the OP just related to Hilary (not the "SIR")

Adampenrith,

the main issue that has ruffled everyone's feathers is not that fact that you have a different opinion, it is the source of your information.

Of course union officials are going to say the things they are saying. They are trying to protect their own job. I don't think you would ever hear a union official say to management that they have a couple of guys standing around doing nothing and they should be sacked or that everyone is only working at 80% of their capacity and should be docked 20% of their pay.

If you approached the argument quoting reliable, independent sources then I think you would find that everyone would take your comments very seriously.

Also too, I don't think you can use the work respected and journo in the same sentence.

Just like truthful and policitian

orhonest and lawyer

orcompetent and doctor

Please stay on the subject
 

[mod hat II]

Guys - please stick to the subject matter, and generalisations about particular groups of people is definitely not going to help with this endeavour.

[/mod hat]

Sorry bravoecho made me do it:D

Confusing manuals blamed
 

Interesting update on SMH, lunchtime today:

The article seems to be updated and related to an issue last year not this year. No way would they have been able to bring out two manuals during take off.

I rememberreading the original article and thinking they had confused two incidents. As far as I am aware there is no report on the aborted takeoff yet.

Sorry, mea culpa, I posted it very quickly, thinking this was the same incident.
I wanted to put it with the original incident and this headline approximated the story's "was moments from lifting off in late March" but I picked the wrong one.

No soup for me!