It’s the sort of incident that could get turned into a screaming tabloid story, and that’s NOT what it is.

The incident was corrected. The plane didn’t fall from the sky while the pilots grappled with the controls, or anything like that.

But it is something of concern, and we need to be clear about this, if it wasn’t of concern it wouldn’t be under investigation.

This is what the ATSB says on its site.

On 4 January 2013, a Boeing 737-8FE aircraft, registered VH-VUZ, was operating a scheduled passenger service from Launceston, Tasmania to Melbourne, Victoria. Soon after takeoff, the auto-flight system was selected to Level Change mode. In this mode, the aircraft climbed at a constant airspeed to about flight level 260, when the auto-flight system sequenced automatically to continue the climb at a constant Mach number. The flight crew, who were experiencing a relatively high workload at the time associated with the short sector, intended to switch to a different vertical mode during the climb that would have allowed the aircraft to accelerate in accordance with a programmed speed schedule. However, they overlooked that selection and unintentionally continued to climb in Level Change mode.

As the aircraft continued to climb at a constant Mach number, the airspeed slowly reduced. The crew did not detect the reducing airspeed until the aircraft was approaching the minimum manoeuvre speed at about FL 350. In responding to the low speed condition and attempting to accelerate, the crew reduced the aircraft pitch attitude to the point that the aircraft entered a shallow descent. Soon after, the crew was able to establish an accelerated climb to the intended cruising level. 

The investigation is continuing with a focus on the human factors issues associated with auto‑flight system mode awareness. It is expected to be completed in November 2013.

There are some questions to be answered, which the inquiry will no doubt pursue.

How could both pilots be distracted for so long as to miss the error? Cross checking of such matters is supposed to be integral to the safe management of airliners.  Errors aren’t supposed to go unnoticed from sea level to 35,000 feet.

The work load on short flights like Launceston-Melbourne is high.

But what made a routinely busy and demanding flight into one in which both pilots made a fundamental error which then persisted to a point where the jet had to put into a shallow dive to recover the situation?

Once the answer is known to that question, how then will Virgin Australia make sure it doesn’t happen again?  And what, if anything, should the other 737 operator, Qantas, learn from the incident?

Such questions and answers and solutions are what air safety investigations are all about.

This is one to follow with interest.

Micro flight for a major concept, Boeing's X-48B: Wikipedia Commons

When I was a kid, in the late 40s and early 50s, the postman would monthly deliver magazines like Popular Mechanics and the National Geographic to a house along a dirt road in the Blue Mountains.

And while the rare aircraft that flew overhead were the likes of Tiger Moths, DC-3s and Skymasters, inside the magazines there were the shapes of ‘soon to come’ future of the airliners of tomorrow, including the Mantra Ray shaped blended wing body designs, or BWBs as termed today.

The BWB haunts the future now as it did then, but looking at the latest Boeing innovations video on the tiny flying testbed model, the X-48B, there is a flicker of optimism rather than cycnicism to be had that this ‘shape of things to come’ may actually arrive.

There are two reasons for this. One is scale. The BWB would be projects of the past were almost always argued as airliners that could be built and flying within 5-10 years, entering service carrying hundreds of people incredibly long distances, and in the glorious 50s, with the spacious style that has been eradicted from modern flight by bean counters. Most of them were gee whiz stories like those we see for 20 passengers SST’s today, concepts without richly funded backers, or deep technical basis.

This time a manufacturer of scale, to wit Boeing, is not saying anything like that. It is using a very sophisticated flying model to work out the finer points. Once it is satisfied on the technical issues it can build something of scale, assuming Boeing hangs on to the skills and finds the necessary managerial intelligence to manage such a project. Then we might get a BWB airliner or freighter.

Or the idea might get ‘stolen’, since the laws of aerodynamics can’t be patented, although refinements and exploits can be.

The second  cause for optimism is that Bob Liebeck is running the team of 12 or so engineers responsible for the X-48B.  Liebeck is highly respected in US aerospace circles.

BWB designs have inherent challenges as well as promises. The tendency for pressure vessels to ovalise means that the cavity within the blended wing doesn’t lend itself to pressurisation throughout, and the passenger cabins will run deep within the BWB spine in tubular structures just like today’s conventionally winged airliners.

People will have to be seated close to centreline of the BWB to avoid excessive angular moments during turbulence or heading changes. Evacuation in the event of a survivable crash will be an even tougher design test than today, since instead of being seat atop fuel tanks, cabins may in effect be inside them.

But the efficiency dividends inherent in BWB designs are a reason why the risks and technical barriers need to be addressed. The ‘ancient’ shape of things to come may indeed reshape everyday aviation.

Which is pretty stupid given Apple’s gradual retreat from sensible user interface design and any successful attempt at quality control given the generally disappointing experiences some of us are having by going directly from OS 10.6.8 to OS 10.8.3, but I digress.

But that’s what happened this morning when Melbourne Airport made its draft development plan which features a third 3000 metre runway accessible, or for the Mac challenged, inaccessible, for public review and comment.

Melbourne Airport should have road tested the Master Plan 2033 site on every popular, if not universally loved, combination of operating system.

Apple encourages users to adopted Preview rather than Adobe’s Acrobat Reader software to display PDF documents, as does Adobe by default with its constant dire warnings of security risks for its software, which now appears to be in an almost constant state of alert and calls to upgrade.

But is it too much to ask Apple to deliver what it says Preview is supposed to do, and for large, adult, experienced organisations like Melbourne Airport to check out the operational integrity of material it posts?

My family, relations, and colleagues in Melbourne love to bag Tullamarine Airport. But which Sydney would swop for its own airport if it could,  since Tullamarine has a functional future, a real plan for growth, is easier to use despite the odd hiccup, and has a competitor that might, in conjunction with greater Melbourne’s growth, give it a real fright and curb its scope to behave like a monopoly essential service provider.

The 787 was showing a wide range of minor but for airlines, costly ‘bugs’, but overall, the issues were comparable to and occasionally only a little worse than than for the first year of service of the Boeing 777.

Whether or not the comments made in a Qantas media statement about its first 787 for Jetstar this morning were over the top, however, remains to be seen.

With the unfortunate heading ‘Final parts fall into place for Jetstar’s first 787′  the news is that as previously reported it is likley to be delivered late in September, making it only a month later than Qantas was expecting before the lithium-ion battery problems occurred in a JAL and ANA 787 in January. “Come together” is much better than “fall.”

In its statement Qantas says:

Melbourne-made components for Jetstar Airway’s first Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner will shortly be shipped to the United States, as the final assembly of aircraft number 123 commences.

Qantas Group CEO Alan Joyce and Jetstar Group CEO Jayne Hrdlicka were today joined by Senior Vice President, Asia Pacific & India Sales, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Dinesh Keskar, President, Boeing Australia and South Pacific, Ian Thomas and Managing Director Boeing Aerostructures Australia, John Duddy.

Boeing Aerostructures Australia produces the moveable trailing edge components of the 787’s trademark swept wings. The trailing edge is key to the aircraft’s aerodynamics and helps increase lift capacity during take-off and landing.

Inspecting the parts prior to shipment, Mr Joyce said the delivery of Group’s first 787 marked another step in Jetstar’s development and the constant renewal of the Qantas Group’s fleet.

“The Qantas Group fleet is now the youngest it has been in 20 years and the addition of these ultra fuel efficient 787s will help us deliver an even better standard of travel,” said Mr Joyce.

“What Boeing has achieved with the design of this aircraft, in terms of comfort and economics, is absolutely game-changing for both passengers and airlines. There’s no doubt that it will be worth the wait.

“We are investing more than $100 million in infrastructure to support the Dreamliner including training facilities for our pilots and cabin crew, as well as equipment to maintain the aircraft – plus the jobs needed to support this infrastructure.”

Jetstar Group CEO Jayne Hrdlicka said Jetstar’s first 787 is due to arrive in Australia at the end of September 2013 with a further two aircraft joining the fleet by the end of the year.

“Jetstar will be the first airline in Australia and New Zealand, and the first low cost carrier in Asia Pacific, to operate the Boeing 787. Our customers are going to love it,” Ms Hrdlicka said.

“The Dreamliners will operate to destinations like Honolulu, Phuket and Tokyo which are currently serviced by our A330 aircraft, and will deliver a quieter cabin, better air quality and larger windows.

Given compensation now in the vicinity of $400 million for 787 delays from Boeing, Qantas has very good reason for be thrilled with the Dreamliners, with the $125 million booked in the 1HFY13 results to 31 December likely preventing the group filing either a minor statutory loss or an even more reduced net profit for the period.

Jetstar has not said when it will launch 787 services, or confirmed the route from inaugural route Singapore, where it will base a fleet of 14 787-8s.

However the references to Australia and New Zealand in that above statement suggest Singapore-Melbourne and Singapore-Auckland may be the first two routes.

Genius at work as Melbourne Airport goes DRAFT

It requires a determined embrace of stupidity in communications  for a major Australian airport, in this case Melbourne’s, to issue a very good draft development plan for public comment and hide critical text and graphics behind gigantic words DRAFT on its website.

The summary press release is free of this idiocy, but being a press release, light on details too.

Melbourne Airport has today released its preliminary draft Master Plan for the future development of the airport for public comment.

 The 2013 draft Master Plan sets out the vision for the development of the airport over the next 20 years to cater for the 64 million passengers who are forecast to come through the airport each year by 2033 (compared to 29 million this year).

 Specifically, the 2013 draft Master Plan includes:

 ·         A proposed new runway to meet capacity demands. With the existing two-runway system expected to reach capacity around the end of the decade, Melbourne Airport has proposed a new east-west runway as its third runway. The new runway will be located 2km to the south of the existing east-west runway and will be 3km in length.

·         Long-term road solution. An elevated loop road built above the existing road network is proposed to cater for more vehicles and reduce travel time as the number of passengers using the airport grows. The loop road will be constructed in stages over several years, with the first stage expected to begin in 2015.
·         Environment Strategy.  The Environment Strategy addresses the key environmental issues associated with the airport’s operations and proposed actions by the airport to address them and protect and improve the environment.
·         Ground transport. The draft Master Plan includes details of initiatives to facilitate the movement of people to and from the airport, including a proposed airport rail link and upgrades to roads and transport connections.
·         Airport safeguarding.  The Master Plan sets out the importance of state and local planning policies and controls to land-use and development around the airport, to protect communities that surround the airport.

Despite this, Melbourne’s clear intention of making its comparatively small airport work as efficiently as possible does contrast favourably with Sydney Airport’s insistence that its half Melbourne sized airport will not need a third 3000 metre runway (anywhere in the Sydney basin)  to cater with the Asia Century and its opportunities until 2049, if its chairman Max Moore Wilton is to be believed.

At least the Melbourne plan shows that up. Sydney Airport would have us believe that no second airport in the Sydney basin is needed. Melbourne Airport, even with less traffic than Sydney at this stage, and even with a second airport at Avalon , recognises the need to handle more jets, even with the advantage of curfew free operations.

Once it gets over this lunacy of hiding the details of the new Melbourne master plan behind great big daft DRAFT lettering, everyone will be able to access and consider its brilliant attributes.

Lucid communication, Melbourne Airport style

Found on the internet. The aftermath of an aviation atrocity

The internet hangs onto information with a tenacity that some physicists have argued may be a function of ‘black hole’ event horizons.

One such ‘ghost’ is a photo album recording the memorial constructed from stones, broken mirrors and wreckage from the crash site of UTA flight 772,  a DC-10, which was destroyed by a Libyan terrorist bomb on 19 September 1989 on a flight from Brazzaville in the Republic of the Congo to Paris CDG, murdering all 170 people on board.

It seems fair to say that the pain caused to the families and friends of those who died has outlived whatever the perpetrators of this crime sought to achieve.

But the desert is now understood to covered over most of the stonework, while its outlines remain visible from altitude when the sun is low, in a sky crossed by very few airliners even today.

Poor quality file pix of dual liveried BA-SQ Concorde

One of the frequent comments in discussions about the Qantas-Emirates partnership is the ‘invisibility’ of the Qantas brand for those who get punted on to Emirates airliners to Europe out of Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth, the capitals abandoned by the Australian flag carrier in favor of code shared reservations.

These are passengers who, if they agree to be passed off, are now flown in airliners that don’t look like Qantas on the outside, are nothing like Qantas on the inside, and only have a QF designator on the boarding pass and itinerary print-out in place of the previous ‘real’ Qantas experience.

Perhaps part of the solution is the dual liveried jet, like the British Airways Concordes that flew painted as Singapore Airlines on their port side and BA on their starboard side.

That service operated between Singapore and London via Bahrain between 1977-1980, more as a trophy route than anything else, as detours to avoid Malaysia and India air space restrictions saw it fly around Sri Lanka and take about 4.5 hours for the flight, compromising payload and saving only two hours over a more direct subsonic flight.

Meaning the dual livery worked, but not the economics of supersonic flight at the end of Concorde’s operational tether.

However an Emirates A380 painted in Qantas livery on one side wouldn’t face such problems. And if the split paint job was applied to Emirates 777s we could at last see the big Boeing twin jet in Qantas colours.

Rob Sharp, CEO of Tiger Australia, supplied photo

Shares in Singapore Airlines fell 4.54% in a rout on the Singapore Stock Exchange today after its fourth quarter operating losses widened and the company issued a gloomy outlook for its current financial year to 31 March 2014.

By contrast Tiger Airways Holdings, in which it holds a 32% stake, reported a strong profitable turnaround in its 4Q to 31 March this year result, even though its Australian division remained in loss in the period but saw improved sales and yields.

The sale of 60% of Tiger Airways Australia to Virgin Australia, 19.9% owned by Singapore Airlines, isn’t expected to be completed until mid July, making today’s developments a report about the diverging fortunes of full service and low fare Singapore carriers that may be relevant to the differing trajectories of these types of airlines in this market.

The misfortunes of Singapore Airlines are reported succinctly by Bloomberg here. They contrast to some weak mind rubbish being run by News.com which dresses them up as ‘good’ and appears to be written straight off the Singapore Airlines press release that preceded the SGX debacle.

(Question. Why would we pay News titles to subscribe to rehashed media releases when Bloomberg provides a balanced well research story for free?)

Turning to Tiger, the SGX filing shows that the consolidated activities of Singapore, Australia, Indonesia and Philippines carriers made an operating profit of $SG 12.7 million for the last quarter of its 31 March 2013 financial year, which mightn’t seem like much, but compared well to a combined operating loss of $ 17.2 million in the corresponding quarter of FY12. (All figures in Singapore dollars).

Singapore was the only profitable Tiger operation in the quarter, making $21.5 million in the three months, compared to a corresponding loss of $6.7 million in 2012. Tiger Australia narrowed its last quarter losses to $15.1 million in 4QFY13 from a corresponding $17.7 million in 4QFY12. However the really interesting figure in the Australian results was an 82% growth in revenue on an increase of 77.5% in traffic.

This shows how crippled Tiger Australia was by limitations imposed by CASA on its sectors and thus fleet utilisations following the airline’s decision to ignore Australian air safety rules and its grounding and supervised return to service.

There is a bigger set of questions hovering over the differing fortunes revealed by Singapore Airlines and Tiger today, concerning where the money in airlines is to be made these days.

The answer appears to be that it is the low cost, low fare and, often, high fee tight pack shorter haul carriers that make the profits. If this persists as an answer it will have the effect of growing market share at the expense of full service carriers, encouraging them to also reduce the quality of their product in order to curb the costs of serving a shrinking demand base of gradually declining relevance.

It’s an issue that might be on the management mind in Virgin Australia as it refines its intentions and goals for Tiger Australia.

In the meantime, and seemingly undeterred by the changes affecting it, Singapore Airlines will reveal new seat and cabin products early in July for introduction on part of its fleet from later this year.  This will, if the history of Singapore Airlines innovations continues, be a problem for competitors like Qantas and Emirates as it chases their higher yielding customers.

What congestion? Good until 2049! A Paul Sadler photo courtesy AirServices

Well, that has to be the best news for a new airport in the Sydney basin for years.

Sydney Airport chairman, Max Moore Wilton, has given Fairfax Media the definitive commitment not to put SACL’s hand up to exercise its first right of refusal to build a second Sydney Airport at Badgerys Creek when the NSW and Federal governments jointly decide they must go ahead with a project vital to the continued economic health of the city and its state.

It’s a white elephant, it’s a waste of billions of dollars, and not even the two airlines who are Sydney Airport’s biggest (and unhappiest) customers Qantas and Virgin Australia know what they are talking about when they support it if we are to conclude that the chairman’s damnation of the proposed airport means SACL will never participate in such a folly.

Terrific stuff Mr Moore Wilton. This means the risk of more disgraceful price gouging at Sydney Airport going unchallenged by a Sydney West Airport held captive by the current airport through the, let’s guess, harmonisation of charges is gone.You’ve relinquished your right to extend your airport monopoly ownership over all of Sydney.

Sydney can now look forward to an independent, competitive, and for much of the metropolitan area, more convenient airport.

Thank you for getting out of the way of keeping Sydney the great gateway to Australia.

On the negative side a lower AUD drives fuel costs higher, very quickly for motorists, and very decisively for airlines subject to whatever benefits they may claw back through currency as well as fuel hedges.

At a revenue level a continued and deepening drop in the AUD will also kill the outbound boom in travel to the US and Europe including the UK,  which is a particularly serious issue for Qantas, for its major international competitors in this market, and for travel agents.

The consequences of prolonged AUD weakness cannot be overstated for the Australian pursuit of good value discretionary travel abroad.

Nor will the ‘more competitive’ Australian exchange rate see a rebound in inbound tourism replacing one for one a collapse in outbound demand.

This is because the major sources of inbound tourism to Australia are broke, or crippled.  Even if the AUD were to plunge more sharply, British tourism to Australia is unlikely to return to the boisterous days of drunken English cricket tourists or beach bogans lurching around public places chanting ‘three dollars to the pound’.

Those lager louts are now unemployed, and the really obnoxious ones, from the banking and financial services sectors, are ‘from’ those sectors, and living off savings or working in other industries, in so far as the UK actually makes anything anymore.

A cheap Ryanair or easyJet or Wizz flight to Spain, Portugal, Italy or Hungary is a powerful competitor to a long range holiday to Australia, even if the Pound ends up buying two Australian dollars later this year.

Similarly the Abenomics miracle in Japan, which is steeply and conscientiously lowering the value of the Yen much more sharply than the recent decline of the AUD, is while good for spurring the Japan economy, also good for making overseas holidays for the Japanese market even more expensive.

However in time a lower Australian dollar will greatly improve or restore the attractiveness of longer range inbound tourism to this country, subject to the scale of economic recovery in the US, Europe and Japan in particular.

On the positive side, despite higher fuel, a lower Australian dollar should improve domestic travel activity by benefiting the national economy by restoring prosperity to those most influenced by the health of exporting industries, and to a degree, what is left of manufacturing in this country.

Resources, agriculture, manufacturing and financial services sectors will all benefit from a lower Australian dollar, and they in turn drive travel for business purposes.

The Australian airlines will have to weather the more immediate negatives of a lower AUD to benefit from the longer term improvements it will bring, making this yet another challenge on top of their self-inflicted wounds from capacity wars.

However if the AUD were to fall closer to 90 cents US many of the adverse cost comparisons that analysts like to make comparing Qantas to the cheaper labor costs of major rivals in Asia would begin to evaporate.

Qantas and Virgin Australia run very productive and cost efficient enterprises which are made to look ordinary when measured in USD comparisons distorted by an overvalued AUD.   But if, for example, the AUD was at parity with the Singapore dollar, or the exchange rate for the Hong Kong dollar was to come back from as high of close to 8:1 to something like the 5.5: 1 ratio that prevailed around the start of the century, both airlines today would look much better.

Any claimed advantages for offshore maintenance of Australian aircraft will also come under pressure as they become more costly in terms of a fallen AUD.

However the Australian carriers would lose current advantages they would have in reequipping with newer technology jets at near record high exchange rates with the USD or the Euro.

A falling Australian dollar is good for the country, less good for its airlines.

Further comments have been disabled

There is no such guidance from Qantas.  Which is not to say it won’t as a group remain in profit or fall into loss.

But in the six months to 31 December the Qantas group would have on various sober estimates have been in small loss without the taking into account of  $125 million in compensation from Boeing for Dreamliner delays.

In the current and rapidly closing last half of this financial year Qantas and Virgin have lacerated themselves with a classic fail strategy of engaging in a capacity war which is only just starting to show signs of lessening, because each carrier has sent plenty of signals via the media in recent weeks that ‘enough is enough’.

Yesterday Virgin Australia shareholders returned the favour by sending its management their own ‘enough is enough’ message by dumping the stock. Even though they were given what purports to be certainty that the enterprise will end the full year in profit.

The savage truth about Virgin Australia is that the airline itself pointed to a $50 million screw up in handling the switch to a new computer reservations and revenue leveraging system by giving away a huge slice of its business to Qantas by cutting out flights during the IT upgrade.

The most elegant summary of this inelegant miscalculation is in this article by Adele Ferguson in today’s Fairfax Media.

Virgin boss John Borghetti blamed the profit downgrade on a softening in demand in the fourth quarter and the introduction of the Sabre reservation system in the third quarter, which is believed to have cost the airline $50 million in lost revenue.

The $50 million came from a decision to reduce schedules by 15 per cent to take pressure off the new reservation system and avoid any chaos or customer disruptions as staff learned the new reservation system.

The decision to scale back services was a big price to pay because in effect it handed $50 million to Qantas on a platter. The hope was that the $50 million blip would be recovered in the fourth quarter, giving the airline a similar earnings profile as 2012.

Instead, demand softened and Borghetti had no option but to downgrade its earnings, something its rival Qantas seems to have done without making an official statement to the Australian Stock Exchange.

The 17 per cent fall in Virgin’s share price seems like a massive overreaction, particularly given the company’s yields are rising, which suggests its strategy to encroach on Qantas’ lucrative corporate and government accounts is working.

Ferguson also rattles the impending ‘boardroom from hell’ scenarios that have diverted Virgin watchers ever since the possibly too clever reorganisation of the airline into Virgin Australian Holdings to get around the traditional limitations on foreign investment in an Australian flag carrier offering both domestic and international services.

The current one is focused on Etihad, but be assured, anything is possible if Singapore Airlines, Air New Zealand and Etihad all lock horns.

Absent a decent Qlink 717 photo, here is a Q400 lost amid the big jets Source: Qantas

Something more than interesting is on the way in the battle for Canberra corporate and government accounts as QantasLink prepares a fleet of refurbished Boeing 717s to take on Virgin Australia’s Embraer 190s.

While the jet showdown has been on the cards for some time, Qantas is keeping the actual seating in the 717s secret for the time being.

Which undoubtedly fuels suspicion that it might emulate Virgin’s Über exclusive six seat business class E-190 cabin, arranged two seats by one over two rows, within the wider cabin of the 717.  Or it might not.

Plane Talking is trying to second guess smart people in both airlines, and three across premium business class seating in a 717 is definitely in the ‘nuclear option’ type of response, since it is obviously less efficient than the less comfortable four across premium seating encountered in 717s and their common fuselage with MD-80/90 series and original DC-9 jets which set the cabin width and height for the jet which was called the MD-95 before the reverse takeover in which Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas.

This is what QantasLink says today:

QantasLink will upgrade the interiors of five Boeing 717 aircraft to include Business Class and in-flight entertainment for all passengers.

QantasLink Executive Manager John Gissing said the additional five aircraft, which Qantas announced in January 2013, will be in addition to our existing fleet of 13 B717 aircraft operating across Australia.

“QantasLink will introduce a full Business experience on these aircraft, including market-leading seats, premium food and drinks and exceptional onboard service,” Mr Gissing said.

“We will also be providing individual in-flight entertainment for all customers – both Business and Economy – and are currently testing the latest technology.

“The continued investment in our fleet shows the commitment and confidence that we have in the Australian domestic market and regional Australia.”

Mr Gissing said QantasLink would be progressively introducing the five aircraft into service from late 2013, after the interior improvements are completed.

“The first aircraft will be used on Sydney-Canberra, Brisbane-Canberra and Melbourne-Canberra, with the B717 aircraft size and configuration ideally suited to these routes,” he said.

Cobham, which currently operates QantasLink’s fleet of Boeing 717 aircraft, will operate the five additional aircraft.

The amenity of the Virgin Australia E-190s is unmatched at present by any single aisle jet flying domestic routes in Australia. Even in economy there are wide seats four across, that is, no middle seats, and the seats are far more comfortable than the tight fit four across fittings in the competing turbo-props, the QantasLink Q400s and the Virgin Australia ATR 72s.

Canberra is going to be spoiled for choice.

A rare natural colour rendition of an Emirates A380 at altitude

While they will all be flown by the same A380, there will be four Emirates flights a day using the giant Airbus through Brisbane Airport from 2 October, a Dubai arrival and departure and an Auckland arrival and departure.

The confirmation of the date that had been widely anticipated by retail agents will bring Emirates A380 return flights between Australia and its Dubai hub to four each way each day, two each way from Sydney, and one each way from Brisbane and Melbourne.

There could also have been a daily Emirates A380 each way between Perth and Dubai from July, however the management of Perth airport continues to struggle to meet the expectations of airlines serving Australia’s resources capital at many levels.

The Emirates announcement also demonstrates how the Qantas-Emirates ‘giveaway’ or business partnership will work in the future. The growth will be provided by Emirates, flown on Emirates jets, and for the overwhelming benefit of Emirates’ owners.

Since the end of March when the giveaway took effect Qantas has ceased one stop flights between Brisbane and London (and shortly afterwards, Frankfurt) in favour of buying code-shared seats on Emirates jets.

This lowering of the Australian flag carrier’s presence on all but the Sydney and Melbourne routes to London has met with immense media and analyst enthusiasm, even though it means a smaller Qantas, and one that is no longer  an airline for all of Australia on the kangaroo routes.

It also assumes that what customers Qantas had kept in those markets would do their patriotic duty and fly on the Emirates services pretending they were Qantas jets, and make connections to cities other than London in Dubai.

This is part of the Emirates statement:

16 May 2013, Brisbane, Australia: Queenslanders will have the opportunity to experience the state of the art Airbus A380 aircraft for the first time with the announcement that Emirates will operate flights EK434 and EK435 between Auckland, Brisbane and Dubai on the new aircraft from 2 October 2013.

Adding the Airbus A380-800 to one of Emirates’ two daily Brisbane services will see an increase in capacity of 132 seats for sale per flight and 1,848 week, reinforcing Emirates’ commitment to Queensland passengers. The double-daily service is currently operated by Boeing 777-300ER aircraft, offering 354 seats.

“On the back of growing passenger demand on the route as well as demand for the aircraft, we will become the first airline to bring the state-of-the-art A380 to Brisbane, offering Queenslanders the chance to experience this revolutionary aircraft and the best service in the sky first-hand,” said Salem Obaidalla, Emirates Senior Vice President Commercial Operations, Far East and Australasia.

“The Auckland-Brisbane-Dubai route is a popular choice among business and leisure travellers alike and the new Emirates A380 service will be instrumental in helping Emirates meet this growing passenger demand as well as deliver considerable economic benefits through inbound seats and travel connections”, he continued.

“Australia represents an important market for Emirates and ranks in the top three countries on Emirates’ global network. Central to this relationship is the ongoing support for tourism and trade provided by adding larger capacity aircraft between our two countries, and a fourth A380 for Australia will further complement our partnership with Qantas,” Mr Obaidalla concluded.

Together with Qantas, from October a total of six daily A380 services will operate to Dubai, offering a seamless A380 experience through Dubai International Airport’s Concourse A, the world’s first purpose built A380 terminal, to 21 A380 serviced destinations on the network including London Heathrow, Manchester, Paris and Rome.

This appears to be a version of an official Boeing graphic of a 737-7 and Mt Rainier

Although the Boeing 737 MAX series has been on sale for some time, giant US low fare carrier Southwest has become the first airline to place on order for the MAX 7, the smallest of the family.

The new engine technology MAX 7 corresponds in capacity, but with improved range and fuel economy, to the current NG series 737-700.

Southwest is already designated the launch customer for the  737 MAX program but became the first airline to order the 737 MAX 7, when it converted 30 existing orders for Next-Generation 737s to the forthcoming higher technology version and will take deliveries of these jets from 2019, some two years after the MAX 8 enters service with other but later buyers of the new Boeing family.

With the MAX 7 conversions and exercised options for 737-800s, Southwest’s unfilled orders consist of 180 737 MAX aircraft and 137 Next-Generation 737s. The 737 MAX now has orders for 1,315 aircraft.

The major buyer for the 737 MAX family in the Asia-Pacific is Lion Air of Indonesia, currently notorious for water landing 737s, and distantly followed by Singapore Airlines’ SilkAir subsidiary and Virgin Australia.

However Qantas is considered a potential MAX buyer as it already has a substantial fleet of current technology 737-800s with 59 in service this month.

The captain then attempted a ‘go around’ from an altitude of only 20 feet,  moments before the flight hit the water within wading distance of the sea wall at the end of the runway, seriously injuring four of the 108 people on board the jet.

The National Transportation Safety Committee in Jakarta recommended Lion Air “review the policy and procedures regarding the risk associated with changeover of control at critical altitudes or critical time”.

It added the fast-growing airline should also “ensure the pilots are properly trained” on this subject.

In a Reuters report Lion Air’s co-founder Rusdi Kirana said he would respect the outcome of the investigation, but voiced dismay at the interim recommendations which were directed solely at the airline.

“If our pilots make mistakes we are not scared to admit it, but we are not happy just blaming the pilots without proof,” he said.

“It is important not to give people the impression that we don’t have proper procedures. We take safety seriously, we are a profitable airline and we are not going to limit our budget on training and maintenance.”

The interim report, which is available in English, is a model of no nonsense clarity and factual detail. It points to the decision of another flight that experienced the sudden onset of the rainy conditions on approach to Denpasar to go around shortly after Lion Air’s on-time but not-at-airport water landing.

The Indonesian report shames the ATSB’s efforts in relation to the ditching of an air ambulance near Norfolk Island in 2009, in which it issued a report which failed to reference grave deficiencies in the safety standards of operator Pel-Air at the time, or question the failed oversight of CASA, and loaded all the blame onto its pilot.

This social media image captures the immediate aftermath of Lion Air’s arrival at Denpasar on 13 April.