Claims Qantas is planning to ditch life rafts from some flights to save money | Australian Frequent Flyer
Australian Frequent Flyer

Welcome to Australia's leading independent Frequent Flyer and Travel Resource since 1998!
Our site contains tons of information that will improve your travel experience.

Joining AFF is fast, simple & absolutely free - register now and take immediate advantage of these great BENEFITS.

Once registered, this box will disappear. And you will see fewer advertisements :)

Login Now to remove this and all advertisements (GOLD and SILVER members)
Not a member? Register Now for free

Claims Qantas is planning to ditch life rafts from some flights to save money

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reggie

Established Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
1,640
South Australian Independent Senator Nick Xenophon claims Qantas is planning to ditch life rafts from some flights to save money.

Qantas considering ditching life rafts: claim

Xenophon said he had been approached by pilots and cabin crew who alerted him to the “hare-brained” scheme to remove rafts from Boeing 737s that do not travel more than 400 nautical miles off the coast.“If a plane has to ditch off shore, every minute counts, and the savings are a joke,” Xenophon told News Corp. “It might be a million a year in fuel, but they’re burning up $4 million a month with planes on tarmacs (due to issues with their Asian ventures).”
He said that while the removal of the rafts would be within the regulations “people fly Qantas because it goes above and beyond the minimum regulatory requirements. That’s brand Qantas”.
 

markis10

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
30,449
For balance here is the QF response:




  • No decisions have been made regarding changes to on-board equipment.
  • The aviation industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in the world.
  • Qantas would not implement any change that would compromise safety or CASA’s strict standards.
  • Any suggestion that we would compromise safety is wrong and scaremongering.

Qantas responds to reports on B737 life rafts


 

Fruitcake

Established Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,692
He said that while the removal of the rafts would be within the regulations “people fly Qantas because it goes above and beyond the minimum regulatory requirements. That’s brand Qantas”.
If the Senator would like to dictate who flies Qantas, why they fly Qantas, where Qantas flies, and the equipment they carry, then he should buy Qantas. When it's his airline, he can get it to do what he wants and more important take financial responsibility for his actions.

Alternatively, if he thinks the law is wrong, then keep a level playing field and propose changes to the law that affect all carriers.

Did the Senator object to QF's application for a waiver from the 1:37 FA/Pax ratio for its 737s?
 
Last edited:

under the radar

Established Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,087
here we go again... the 'media'/uninformed/uneducated 'going off half cocked' ...grrrrrrrrrr.. (looking forward to the 'pages' of 'comments' on here!! :D)
 

under the radar

Established Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,087
I think your selling our members a little short, given the source of the comments.
I will be very happy to be proven wrong :) (I already have a fair idea whose posts will be fact driven/sensible...and whose will not)...
an indication will be through my 'likes' ;)
 
Last edited:

Ansett

Established Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
3,630
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
Whilst I am no expert my concern would be along the lines of what would happen if they had to ditch over the sea or immediately after take off from say Sydney where departures are often out over the sea how would passengers escape? I personally would feel safer on an airline that has as much safety equipment as possible even if not a formal requirement.
 

mrdctau

Intern
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
93
I can't much see the point of life rafts, particularly on aeroplanes that don't fly over the open seas. Has anyone ever been saved by one?
 

Boris spatsky

Established Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
1,870
Whilst I am no expert my concern would be along the lines of what would happen if they had to ditch over the sea or immediately after take off from say Sydney where departures are often out over the sea how would passengers escape? I personally would feel safer on an airline that has as much safety equipment as possible even if not a formal requirement.
They would wear lifejackets and use the escape slides that double as rafts. I would suggest it is only the excess ones in the roof that would be removed.
 

MarcB

Active Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
701
Flights
My Map
There are plenty of aircraft in plenty of countries that don't even have life vests as standard equipment. On many AA flights, the seat cushions double as flotation devices.
 
Get paid up to 25% in real cash from your everyday purchases from leading companies such as Virgin Australia, Booking.com, Woolworths, Coles, Apple, Microsoft and much more. Free to join and no catches!

Recommended by the Australian Frequent Flyer

Ansett

Established Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
3,630
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
They would wear lifejackets and use the escape slides that double as rafts. I would suggest it is only the excess ones in the roof that would be removed.
That may well be the case but wouldn't that mean there may not be sufficient capacity in addition this would limit the aircraft to certain routes only which could impact operations in the event of an aircraft going US?

I am not for a moment suggesting it is right or wrong but do have concerns.

Can anyone advise what VA do in terms of life rafts on the 737's?
 

SeatBackForward

Established Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
4,265
Flights
My Map
For balance here is the QF response:




  • No decisions have been made regarding changes to on-board equipment.
  • The aviation industry is one of the most highly regulated industries in the world.
  • Qantas would not implement any change that would compromise safety or CASA’s strict standards.
  • Any suggestion that we would compromise safety is wrong and scaremongering.

Qantas responds to reports on B737 life rafts
So, they didn't deny it either.
 

Boris spatsky

Established Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
1,870
As stated, the removal would be required to still meet the capacity requirements of the civil aviation regulations.
 

Mwenenzi

Established Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
1,816
Can anyone advise what VA do in terms of life rafts on the 737's?
Do not ask sensible questions!!

Most of us realise that what is OK for VA and other airlines is not OK for QF according to the QF unions, Syd radio announcers and the likes of some Senators from South Australia. Remind me again what primary vote was for all the senators for in the last elections. One post July senator got 0.51% and has a seat
 

Fruitcake

Established Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,692
Can anyone advise what VA do in terms of life rafts on the 737's?
My understanding (based only on observation) is that VA has some aircraft equipped with rafts primarily to operate VA short haul international services. These turn up domestically from time to time (I flew in one on Monday BNE-SYD). The pre-recorded safety briefing is extended a little to note the presence of the rafts and that the crew may ask for your assistance in getting them to the exit.

CAO 20.11 is the applicable legislation:
Civil Aviation Order 20.11 - Emergency & life saving equipment & passenger control in emergencies (02/12/2004)

CAO said:
[FONT=Times New (W1)]5.2 Life rafts[/FONT]5.2.1 An aircraft that is flown over water at a distance from land greater than the permitted distance must carry, as part of its emergency and lifesaving equipment, sufficient life rafts to provide a place in a life raft for each person on board the aircraft.
5.2.1.1 For the purposes of paragraph 5.2.1, the permitted distance is:
(a) in the case of an aircraft that has:
(i) 4 engines; or
(ii) 3 turbine engines; or
(iii) 2 turbine engines and complies with section 20.7.1B;
a distance equal to 120 minutes at normal cruising speed, or 400 miles, whichever is the less; or
(b) in any other case — a distance equal to 30 minutes at normal cruising speed, or 100 miles, whichever is the less.

VA and QF's entire domestic fleet has two turbine engines so the applicable standard is 120 minutes / 400mi. I don't think that would be a problem on any route except those to PER on occasions where optimal winds might dictate a far southern route over the Bight.

Also, if you did suffer a double engine failure at cruising altitude 400mi from land the aircraft would be able to glide ~100mi.
 

JohnPhelan

Established Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
2,087
So these rafts are stored in the roof? Where? How do they get them down/out in an emergency?
 

lovestotravel

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
6,105
As long as QF is operating within the appropriate rules then I couldn't' care less!

Just more standard QF bashing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top