700 incidents have been reported at Tullamarine over the past two years.

[whatmeworry]

I think most of the big incidents have been reported on this forum.

Lasers pointed at pilots, near misses between aircraft and gas bottles taken onto planes are just some of the alarming safety breaches that have occured at Melbourne Airport.

Figures obtained by 7News reveal 700 incidents have been reported at Tullamarine over the past two years.

Airport incidents 'putting lives at risk' - Yahoo!7

[video=youtube_share;nXUHuLbxrno]http://youtu.be/nXUHuLbxrno[/video]

 

[harvyk]

So whilst obviously 1 incident is one too many, in the real world is 700 a lot or a little for a large international airport handling hundreds of flights per day?(according to airservices AU, Melbourne has 565 aircraft movements on average per day, so at 200,000 movements per year, that means that you have a 0.175% chance of been on an aircraft which has an incident)

Me thinks that comparing MEL to the global average of incidents per year for a similar sized airport would be far more informative and far less sensationalist.

 

[eastwest101]

So whilst obviously 1 incident is one too many, in the real world is 700 a lot or a little for a large international airport handling hundreds of flights per day?(according to airservices AU, Melbourne has 565 aircraft movements on average per day, so at 200,000 movements per year, that means that you have a 0.175% chance of been on an aircraft which has an incident)

Me thinks that comparing MEL to the global average of incidents per year for a similar sized airport would be far more informative and far less sensationalist.

Agree - 700 incidents may sound like a lot until you realise that the definition of "incident" may range from genuine aircraft near-misses/incidents such as aircraft entering incorrect taxiways all the way through to fairly routine stuff like oil/fuel spills, people getting sore backs lifting baggage, airside vehicles being tagged out of service, debris found on runways, mobile phones or transmitters found in aircraft, security screening failures yada yada yada....

They were all worth reporting though, and as long as stuff is being learnt and not ignored then I am comfortable with that.

 

[oz_mark]

A reporting culture, with proper investigation, is a good thing.

 

[SeatBackForward]

And also, its a testament to the safety culture of airlines, that you can have 700 incidents (including many which as already noted, would be considered as minor), and yet nothing catastrophic that has led to serious injuries and/or deaths.

However, all it takes, is one.

 

[harvyk]

Agree - 700 incidents may sound like a lot until you realise that the definition of "incident" may range from genuine aircraft near-misses/incidents such as aircraft entering incorrect taxiways all the way through to fairly routine stuff like oil/fuel spills, people getting sore backs lifting baggage, airside vehicles being tagged out of service, debris found on runways, mobile phones or transmitters found in aircraft, security screening failures yada yada yada....

They were all worth reporting though, and as long as stuff is being learnt and not ignored then I am comfortable with that.

But again is 700 over a two year period really that much compared to other airports? The article did a nice job of giving a scary sounding figure (and good point on the fuzzy definition of "incident" as used in the article) without really putting it into context (eg stating the average number of incidents over the same time period for this sized airport)

Also I find that a two year period given doesn't really show the trend year to year which is the standard scale. Is those 700 spread evenly over the two years, or was year 1 worse than year 2 therefore stating the tread is the airport is improving.

As I said in my first post, the article is simply a rubbish article designed to illicit responses without any real context to allow someone to make an informed decision.

 

[eastwest101]

As I said in my first post, the article is simply a rubbish article designed to illicit responses without any real context to allow someone to make an informed decision.

I don't disagree with your conclusions there.... without comparison to similar sized airports its very un-informative.

 

[OATEK]

I don't disagree with your conclusions there.... without comparison to similar sized airports its very un-informative.

As has been said, the number of incidents could be indicative of a strong culture of safety reporting and therefore a positive, providing the trend over time is down (i.e. that reporting is making a difference rather than just emblematic of a problem). Probably the lasting impression of safety incidents at MEL comes more from the tail-dragging episode of EK407 which sticks in my mind as one of the most worrying incidents in Australia in recent years.

 

[yeahbut]

Some incidents would be reported by ground staff, some by ATC others by pilots all bundled up into the 700 incidents. An incident report can be a break in the fence two school kids trespass on the airport. Or a dog, or in one old time case in Canberra, a camel on the airfield....

Just saying...