Sydney Airport Message Board Sydney Airport Message Board  

Go Back   Sydney Airport Message Board > Spotting and Movements > Spotting and Movements


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 3rd June 2009, 03:46 PM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

As Mick says, it is the policy of some operators... others do it other ways.

Before we go down the line that QF are less safe than SQ in arrival fuel (and I'm not going to discuss individual airline fuel policy in great detail), I believe SQ do carry an alternate to all destinations, however that does not mean that they always arrive over their destination with more fuel. You need to go into a lot more detail about how they define their alternates, and the minimum fuel they are allowed to arrive at their destinations with, to make that assessment.

My point was simply that CASA do not necessarily require you to carry an alternate at all times... remembering that all airlines' fuel policies have to be approved by CASA.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 3rd June 2009, 09:03 PM
Radi K Radi K is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 785
Default

It helps that the crew base for the 744 & 380 is in SYD...

Fog cough..cough...

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 3rd June 2009, 10:58 PM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

What are you suggesting Radi?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 4th June 2009, 06:47 PM
Craig Murray's Avatar
Craig Murray Craig Murray is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 371
Default

Hey Radi, we're still waiting for your response to Owen re the crew base/fog post. Care to enlighten us or was this just another "I work for DJ" token comment about the opposition?!

C'mon buddy, enlighten us with a detailed answer. All I hear so far is crickets, lots of crickets..........
__________________
Whatever happened to Ti Dak?

Last edited by Craig Murray; 4th June 2009 at 07:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 4th June 2009, 07:34 PM
Nigel C Nigel C is offline
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The farm
Posts: 4,022
Default

I must admit Radi, I'm curious as to your post too. As they say, put up or...
__________________
I am always hungry for a DoG Steak! :-)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 4th June 2009, 10:45 PM
Radi K Radi K is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 785
Default

Well indeed sincere apologies for not responding immediately, some of us have a life outside the forum.

The implication, as a joke, thus the smile was, that if I was a 744/380 crew and fog was forecast in MEL (or BNE for that matter) and I lived in SYD, I would be more personally inclined to divert to home than somewhere else, all things being equal.

If you had the chance to end up at home instead of a base away from home, I think you would all take home. Of course some crew commute etc, so this isn't a hard and fast rule. Just an observation.

It's not unique to QF at all. If crew can't get into OOL or MCY it's not uncommon to divert to BNE (a DJ Base) and for crew to terminate early. It's not unethical because no one can control the weather. Also, it's better to divert to a crew base to ensure the operation can continue with less restrictions unlike a diversion to a un crewed port. So please don't make this a tit for tat discussion Craig.

Today's fog was a perfect example of the implications of crew running out of hours.

As long time members, you need to lighten up and stop taking everything so personally & literally.

I shall be sure to keep discussion fully professional from now on. How dare anyone question a pilots integrity on this forum of all places, especially a Qantas pilot.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 5th June 2009, 05:19 AM
Nigel C Nigel C is offline
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The farm
Posts: 4,022
Default

Radi, I didn't take it as a direct slur on the integrity of Qantas pilots as such, but you did leave your post rather open-ended.
__________________
I am always hungry for a DoG Steak! :-)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 30th June 2009, 07:54 AM
Adam.S Adam.S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 318
Default

This flight is again diverting to Sydney this morning, after departing Los Angeles on time according to flightstats.com.

Does anyone know why? Scheduled for just a 30 min stopover so perhaps needing a top-up of fuel?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 1st July 2009, 09:30 PM
Anthony J Anthony J is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 307
Default

The Melbourne TAF had thunderstorms added after the flight left LA.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 1st July 2009, 11:05 PM
Adam.S Adam.S is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 318
Default

Thanks Anthony but excuse my ignorance here; wouldn't the TAF be updated the closer this flight came to the Australian mainland?

As to my knowledge it turned out there were no thunderstorms around Melbourne yesterday morning. QF 94 was the only international flight delayed.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 06:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Sydney Airport Message Board 1997-2022
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Conditions of Use and Privacy Statement