Airbus - Scarebus: Ch 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
I decided not to waste my time, it sounded like utter rubbish...... next bring on the show about the dodgy builder, and the miracle weight loss solution.....:lol:
 
I keep hoping to get one of these exciting plane rides, however I have to put up with landing on-time or early.
 
Watched 3 mins, was a worse than usual beat up. Decided to put the trash out instead - more interesting!:rolleyes:
 
I saw the promo for it on Tuesday. So put it in my calendar to come on here and see the comments ;-)


Garno555 said:
I decided not to waste my time, it sounded like utter rubbish...... next bring on the show about the dodgy builder, and the miracle weight loss solution.....:lol:
Click to expand...

Everytime I see these things I think of A Chaser Affair.
 
I watched part of it, though didn't need a TV program to put me off Airbus's, I already dislike them enough and avoid them where possible.

TG
 
What a piece of poor sensationalist journalism...
Poor form trying to link QF72 with AF447. I can think of a lot of incidents on
Boeing's that have been caused by errors with flight control. Birgenair and Lauda Air are two accidents on Boeing that have occurred due to loss of flight control. Did MH not have a B772 have an ADIRU fail between PER-KUL nearly causing a similar situation? Air travel is a very reactive industry, and once incidents/accidents occur, things generally do become safer.

FWIW, PER intl. is becoming a very A330 hub. There is very little choice on the longer routes (SQ, some MH, TG, CX all use A330 on this route) for people flying out of PER. It never crosses my mind not to get on an A330 because of the happenings of past, it is still a very safe plane statistically.

And now to the knit picking, the A330 in the report was VH-QPF, and not VH-QPA which was involved in the QF72 incident. So much for Mr. Coulthard's investigative work...

Very Poor work indeed...
 
Last edited:
I did watch it, for laughs over poor journalism only, and thought it was a badly crafted story around the rumblings of a US based disgruntled ex-Boeing pilot who is trying to sell a new book.
 
Not surprised it was a Media bash fest on Qantas, just seeing the promo you could see what would happen. :rolleyes:
 
Hi alll,

Funnier still is the fact that "Sunday Night" is sponsored by Virgin Blue.

ejb
 
mannej said:
And know to the knit picking, the A330 in the report was VH-QPF, and not VH-QPA which was involved in the QF72 incident. So much for Mr. Coulthard's investigative work...
Click to expand...

He did say that it "could" have been the same one - I guess he couldn't be bothered checking the rego. But totally agree that it was a pretty pathetic/funny story with no credibility whatsoever.
 
ejb said:
Hi alll,

Funnier still is the fact that "Sunday Night" is sponsored by Virgin Blue.

ejb
Click to expand...

Good call. If Virgin Blue flew airbuses' that would be funny. But as they don't and TT, JQ, QF & NZ all do, this puts it squarely into Media Watch-esque territory (not suggesting that Virgin Blue had anything to do with the story), but still would have thought on C7's behalf that it should be inappropriate to run such a story without riders etc.
 
ejb said:
Hi alll,

Funnier still is the fact that "Sunday Night" is sponsored by Virgin Blue.

ejb
Click to expand...
Most people won't draw the link between the two.

When MH had two A330's turn back/abort a take off going to PER a few months ago, I remember one of the comments from a passenger was they would not fly MH to KUL until they got rid of the A330's...:oops:

Ignorance is bliss!
 
I agree with the comments above but feel the need to add a couple of things.

The comment 'If it ain't Boeing it ain't going' is fairly well known through out the pilot world and a lot of pilots subscribe to the theory literally.

mannej said:
Did MH not have a B772 have an ADIRU fail between PER-KUL nearly causing a similar situation?
Click to expand...
The B777 does have similar (maybe the same) ADIRU units. ie the units are not actually manufactured by Boeing or Airbus but are manufactured for Boeing and Airbus. A lot of components are the same or similar between types.
 
mannej said:
Air travel is a very reactive industry, and once incidents/accidents occur, things generally do become safer.

FWIW, PER intl. is becoming a very A330 hub. There is very little choice on the longer routes (SQ, some MH, TG, CX all use A330 on this route) for people flying out of PER. It never crosses my mind not to get on an A330 because of the happenings of past, it is still a very safe plane statistically.
Click to expand...


Flying is indeed statistically very safe, and this the odd misadventure here and there is quite out of the ordinary. While this report focussed on the computers doing the wrong thing, perhaps they should look to the past and see just how well humans went flying planes by themselves. There were many incidents attributable to human error that we no longer see.

So with computers assisting flying a plane, the aircraft has become much safer. But of course, we should not expect that we have reached perfection, or found the right balance betweem a human and a computer.

I think the issue pilots have with Airbus is the philosphical difference in the balance between computers and humans between Airbus and Boeing. People like control, and thus have a preference for the system where they perceive they have more control.

At this point, I don't think we can say the Airbus approach is right or wrong, and neither can we say the Boeing approach is right or wrong. Time will tell.
 
dajop said:
Good call. If Virgin Blue flew airbuses' that would be funny. But as they don't and TT, JQ, QF & NZ all do, this puts it squarely into Media Watch-esque territory (not suggesting that Virgin Blue had anything to do with the story), but still would have thought on C7's behalf that it should be inappropriate to run such a story without riders etc.
Click to expand...


Media Watch tip-offs
 
Score 10,000 Bonus PayRewards Points on your business spend!*
Elevate your business spending to first-class rewards! Sign up today with code AFF10 and process over $10,000 in business expenses within your first 30 days to unlock 10,000 Bonus PayRewards Points.
Join 30,000+ savvy business owners who:

✅ Pay suppliers who don’t accept Amex
✅ Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
✅ Earn & transfer PayRewards Points to 10+ airline & hotel partners

Start earning today!
- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

oz_mark said:
At this point, I don't think we can say the Airbus approach is right or wrong, and neither can we say the Boeing approach is right or wrong. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
... or it will continue as a perennial argument like which is better? Holden or Ford :!:
 
If "fly by wire" was the main objection to the Airbus 330 then why didn't they focus on the A380 and many other ABs?

Flying SYD-PER you've got a choice of the A330 with QF or DJ Cattle Express 737 where you wear your knees as earrings for 5 hours. I know what I'd prefer.

Is the 787 going to be "fly by wire"?
 
Today Tonight - A Current Affair - Journalism

Sorry people, the three don't go together.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Recent Posts

Currently Active Users

... and 23 more.
Total: 882 (members: 73, guests: 809)
Back
Top