Re: East Coast Very High Speed Train Scoping Study

["Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>]

"Al" <alpout@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
3add8743$0$25468$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:3add8743$0$25468$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> > After all, a plane that is going to fly with 250 bodies is not going to
cost
> > much more to fly with 300 bodies, if those extra 50 seats have been sold
at
> > AUD50 each (that is an extra AUD2500 in revenue for that flight). This
is
> > something that Impulse and VirginBlue do not have. (And if the safety
record
> > re: Impulse was known, they would have almost NO passengers).
>
> What nasties has Impulse done?

Impulse have gone through a string of Chief Pilot's, all of whom resigned
over what they perceived as safety concerns within the airline. There are
many people who know a great deal about aviation who would not fly on
Impulse for a million dollars.

>  I'd say what Ansett failed to do scares me a hell of a lot more.

The inaction of CASA scares me even more. Boeing issued a Service Bulletin
(SB) - airlines are supposed to comply with SB's, but regulators are
*supposed* to evaluate the SB's and if considered serious enough, issue an
Airworthiness Directive (AD) which airlines HAVE to comply with.

Now whilst Ansett should have done something with regard to the SB, so
should CASA. An AD should have been issued if it was as serious as it is
being made out. But in a highly competitive environment where taking your
aircraft out of service for several days will reduce your capacity, thus
reducing your ability to compete, it is quite understandable to wait for an
AD to be issued, and to think that if no AD was issued it can't be as bad as
you thought. After all, it is CASA's job to check these SB's out and to act
appropriately, isn't it?

Dave
(who is not sticking up for Ansett because he flies on them, but who always
flies Qantas because they have better in-flight service).