2. What I read was 2 pretty straight forward stories that present the facts
Yes, its factual. But so would be reporting that I have had 2 cups of coffee this morning. Factual, yes ... newsworthy, not in my opinion.
4. "because of congestion" - this is news worthy because it is indicative of poor service from the government via Airservices Australia. i.e the controllers are getting the bashing for threaten the perfect record of the national carrier, Qantas. - implied conclusion IMO
I think you may be making an assumption as to the meaning of "congestion'. In terms of an ATC requested go-around, its most likely because the aircraft that landed ahead of the Qantas 747 had not yet cleared the runway. This is unlikely due to any government or Air services Australia limitation, but more likely the fault of the pilots of the aircraft in front taking longer than expected to clear the runway. How that becomes ATC, Qantas or Air Services problem is difficult to imagine (unless the aircraft in front was another Qantas aircraft).
5. by the same token - the airport is getting the bashing because of the congestion at their airport caused by poor facilities that threaten the perfect record of the YADA, YADA, YADA - again implied conclusion depending on interpretation
Go arounds due to "runway congestion" (i.e. previous aircraft has not cleared the runway in time) are common and happen very regularly at busy airports. At somewhere like LHR, I expect its even a daily occurrence (has happened to me twice at LHR). Such an occurrence is in no way a poor reflection on the airport, ATC, or airlines involved. Its a reflection of the fact that the proper safety controls are in place and being used properly.
In fact if the visual conditions were good at the time (9am) then its quite likely the pilot was aware of the situation and ready for the go-around before directed by ATC. The pilots probably had the best view of any previous aircraft failing to clear the runway in time.
The number of passengers on board, the type of aircraft or the operating airline makes no difference to the procedure or the probability of the requirement to execute the procedure.
6. weren't you lot all here complaining about how the almost worst avaition disaster (EK late lift off) in Australian history was not reported in the papers. So they didn't report a takeoff/landing/airport incident and you whinge, now they do report it and you whinge
I suggest there is a very different situation involved in the recently reported incident. One is following normal and correct procedure to avoid a potential catastrophic result, the other was a serious breach of procedure that almost caused catastrophic results.
