Qantas hit with 15 safety notices

[NM]

From news.com.au:

A DETAILED regulatory review of the way Qantas maintains individual aircraft has resulted in about 15 requests for corrective action.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority undertook the "tail audit" in the wake of a series of incidents that included a mid-air oxygen bottle explosion that blew a hole in the side of jumbo jet and a computer glitch that sent an Airbus jet on wild ride over Western Australia, reports The Australian.

 

[harvyk]

It'd be interesting to see this article in perspective. Is that 15 notices over the planes that where inspected, or over the airline as a whole? Where they 15 major things, or did that include minor? What sort of notices would DJ or any other airline flying into Australia expect to get if CASA did a similar audit against them?

I personally have trouble believing anything that is written by nonews about QF. I'm still convinced that they are running an anti QF campaign.

 

[NM]

It'd be interesting to see this article in perspective. Is that 15 notices over the planes that where inspected, or over the airline as a whole? Where they 15 major things, or did that include minor? What sort of notices would DJ or any other airline flying into Australia expect to get if CASA did a similar audit against them?

From the linked report:

"During this process we identified a number of areas we believed required some attention and we have issued approximately 15 – I think 13 to date on a 737 and 767 – requests for corrective action," Mr Quinn said.

"These are areas – not critical safety areas of non-compliance – where CASA believe(s) the process needs some attention to detail."

So seems to be related to process and not to individual aircraft faults. The review seems to have focused on how Qantas actioned air worthiness directives that would have been received from Boeing or regulatory bodies relating to the aircraft types. So it would seems the 15 (or 13 as reported later in the article) notices are likely to be about procedural issues rather than aircraft faults.

 

[Nigelinoz]

"These are areas – not critical safety areas of non-compliance – where CASA believe(s) the process needs some attention to detail."

.
I don't really see any implied criticism of Qantas here,just a headline
designed to sell papers,anyone who read the detail of the story would
realise that it's just a case of CASA telling Qantas that there were some
things that could be done better-not that they were saying that things
had either not been done or had been done badly.
Taking up harveyk's point,I would agree that if they did the same audit
on either Virgin or Tiger they may have similar things to say about those
organisations,but to my mind none of this,or the incidents that happened
to Qantas last year has affected my confidence in flying with Qantas or
indeed any major Australian airline one iota,and I'm fairly sure that
my feelings would be echoed by most sensible travellers.