VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:40 am

With Korean Airlines having one of the worst air safety records and along with Mandarin/China Airlines of Taiwan, I was wondering who would fly on carriers such as these? It seems to me to be a case of having a death wish or living on the edge or maybe you just don't have any other option?

Safety Statistics! (1999)

Approx. 1,000 aircraft related incidents reported yearly.
10% indicate a high risk!
*WorldWide - 1 in 1 million (hull losses)

Western world - 3 in 10 million (hull losses)
Africa - 12 in 1 million (hull losses)
Asia - 1 in 1 million (hull losses)

I think the stats speak for themselves! If & when I fly I choose a carrier like: Ansett Australia, Qantas (although they are having a rough trot at present!), United, Air NZ, Cathay, British, KLM etc. I would always stay away from eastern bloc carriers, African (ex. SAA), Chinese, Taiwanese & Korean airlines.

What do you think?
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
RWally
Posts: 541
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 1999 10:28 am

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 9:06 am

I definetly wouldn't! I heard that Korean Air couldn't fly internationally for a year, is this true?
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 7:18 pm

RE: RWally,

No it's not quite true, the Korean government banned KAL from adding any new destinations for a year & they also had to trim back their domestic flights as well. Delta also pulled the plug on their code-share deal (through embarassment I think!), because everyone thinks KAL is so unsafe!

Regards
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
thai747
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 1999 1:23 pm

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 7:33 pm

Yep , I heard about not being able to add new destinations , my Korean friends in my school fly Thai or Singapore Airlines ( direct ) to Korea .. while my Taiwanese friend fly EVA.. I heard the prime minister of Taiwan also flies EVA !!!  
 
n949wp
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2000 3:45 pm

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 7:43 pm

Looks like Korean and China Airlines have a lot to do with boosting the average loss figures for the Asian region. I recall at least 10 hull losses (maybe more?) between the two of them over the past decade alone. So it works out to an average of one crash per year from either of them!!

Oh, by the way, if you are superstitious, consider this: several of China Airlines' fatal crashes over the past 20 years or so occurred on Feb. 16.

Just a thought!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Guest

Id Fly Em For Sure!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 7:44 pm

......Kidding!

I heard that at one stage they had lost there licence to fly into America because the US government didnt want to put there people at risk. And after that freighter crash at stansted, there was speculation that they would lose it again.
Does this have any truth
 
Guest

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 10:32 pm

Its a pity to know many of those beautiful KAL FAs have perished in the crashes
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Thu Feb 10, 2000 11:31 pm

All my cutlery is airline stuff, someone gave me a few sets of KAL. An airline friend saw them in the drawer and expressed surprise: "I didn't think anyone had ever lived to collect the full set!"

There are quite a few families that have lost more than one immediate relative in seperate KAL crashes (one flight attendant who died in the 007 shootdown was survived by her bro who was killed at Guam...there are a couple of other examples of this).

BTW, I'm back.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
B777
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 9:52 am

Reply To VH-BZF

Thu Feb 10, 2000 11:33 pm

Korean Air and China Airlines have a lot of work to do if they ever want to gain public confidences again (especially KAL). I have to agree with you that I would not choose these two airlines if I had a choice. However, it is not right to lay blames on other airlines (such as UNI AIR and Air China), who have fairly good safety records and service. Futhermore, keep in mind that the hull losses could be due to other factors such as weather or hijacking. Just my two cents

Regards

James
 
Mason
Posts: 636
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 1999 12:01 am

I Have, And I Would!

Fri Feb 11, 2000 6:32 am

I know many people on this forum enjoy degrading KAL, and despite the stats, I enjoy KAL! Everyone seems to favor SIA or CX, but I have had better flights on KAL than those two! Even though I usually fly CX to HKG, I would not hesitate to fly KAL!
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: Reply To VH-BZF

Fri Feb 11, 2000 7:31 am

I don't feel that I am degrading KAL or CAL, however just stating the cold hard facts. You can't ignore their implorable safety record.
I should also say that EVA airlines of Taiwan as far as I know has a fairly good safety record, although isn't UNI Air in the EVA stable? I thought UNI Air had one of their MD90's crash or destroyed last year in Taipei????
And yes in relation to Air China, they do have a good safety record, however other airlines in China do not.
I still say, stick with the 'devil you know' and stay away from the dodgey airlines like KAL, CAL & even Asiana (remember Anchorage)!
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
Guest

RE: Id Fly Em For Sure!

Fri Feb 11, 2000 11:11 am

The facts:
KAL lost their status as a carrier able to fly US government flights. IE transport officials and troops to US airbases, Embassies, etc. They were given their approval to carry US gov charter flights earlier this year. Go to airwise.com they have a story in the Korean Airlines section about them getting reinstated.
 
Guest

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 1:38 am

I have flown over 25,000 miles with China Airlines in the past 15 months, and in April I will use them again for a return journey Amsterdam - Bangkok. OK, so they might have had safety related incidents in the past, but when you consider the amount of journeys operated by the company the chances of disaster are still very small. Many people on these postings seem to take great delight in criticising CAL, but they should also note that CAL has received safety accreditations from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and the European Joint Aviation Authorities. They also have an ISO-9002 certification. In Taiwan they have the National Laboratory accreditation certificate. Another point to consider is that CAL are contracted by many international airlines to perform A-, B-, C-, and D- class repairs on their planes, and have the capabilities to maintain 85 different types of aircraft.
I have no qualms about using China Airlines, but their reputation will always be tarnished whilst certain people keep thinking it is "cool" to lampoon them.
 
Guest

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 2:25 am

The Canadian government has threatened to ban Korean Air from ever flying into Canada(it flies into YVR and YYZ) if Korean Air doesn't improve itself or doesn't cooperate with safety inspectors.

Does the US have any threats to do something like this for scheduled passenger flights? I wouldn't be surprised.
 
jrlander
Posts: 1025
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 1999 3:47 am

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 3:44 am

I have flown KAL. In 1991, I flew them to Korea to attend the World Scouting Jamboree. They had wonderful service, and the flights were quite comfortable. With Delta and Air France helping them, I would have no fear of flying them again.

 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 11:32 am

Whilst the mainly mentioned airlines in my original post (KAL & CAL) will always have their supporters, the stats speak for themselves. Pointed to these stats & major reasons for the related incidents are not just maintenance problems (although according to Flight Intl - the latest mishap for Korean Cargo at Penang was a trailing edge flap that came off on appraoch and whacked a hole in the rear of the fuselage & the Stansted crash has been blamed on a faulty horizon?? gauge in the cockpit). These asian airlines employ alot of ex military (mainly retired air force) pilots, who whilst may have been great fighter pilots in their heyday, find the transition to major commercial jet flying very difficult. Also the training that these airlines have in place has also been attacked by the US FAA & airlines like Delta for being outdated. They lack modern day techniques such as CRM (crew resource management) which test have shown vastly improve cockpit communication & therefore reduce the risk of accidents.

I am just pointing out the facts - not airline bashing! Besides I quite like the KAL livery, not their saftey record!
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
pandora
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 7:32 am

About Taiwanese Carriers

Sat Feb 12, 2000 6:23 pm

Not all Taiwanses carreis are bad.

Goog carriers are:

FAT
EVA


but not China Airlines
 
Guest

Read The Korean Air Safety Audit Online

Sat Feb 12, 2000 6:40 pm

Here is a link where you can read the famous (infamous?) Korean Air saftey audit that was conducted of 747 "Classic" operations in 1998.

http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/aviation/korean_audit.htm

I strongly advise you read it, even though it's a long document, it's chilling and some of what goes on is amazing. I can't believe countries like the UK and the USA still allow this airline to fly it's passengers or fly through it's airspace. Especially given that KAL 747s have crashed in each country killing all on board (Guam and London-Standsted) These are not minor incidents!

(The link was provided by Lufthansa747 in a previous post, so I can't take any credir for it)

Regards
James
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE: My Final Word On This Post!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 9:09 pm

All I can say is 'Safety First' (An Ansett Australia corporate goal), should be adopted by every airline, in every facet of their operation! From the ramp to the cabin & cockpit - peoples lives depend on it!

Thanks for your contributions!
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
Airbus A3XX
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 5:12 pm

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sat Feb 12, 2000 9:34 pm

Also a good Taiwanese airline: TransAsia Airlines
Regarding the incident of UNI Air MD-90, it is most likely caused by the bringing of prohibited items onto the flight. So that's nothing deal with the airline
 
TCA256
Posts: 695
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 3:59 am

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sun Feb 13, 2000 2:46 am

VH-BZF, please write about things you know and leave
it alone about things you totally ignore !! Have you ever
flown or know about SAA ??? I think their safety rate
and aircraft maintenance can easily compete with
all Western standards !! ok I can agree that I wouldn't
fly with ex-USSR local companies but have you ever
flown with LOT (polish airlines) before writing such
post ?? I think that the Qualiflyer group wouldn't allow
"flying coffins" to join the alliance if your words were true about Eastern European airlines...!! That's the
same about Taiwanese airlines...ok some are pretty
bad but not all of them: you should remember that EVA
Air is a very reliable company !! Saying for example that
taiwanese companies are bad because one company
among others is bad...it's totally nonsense !!
 
Guest

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Sun Feb 13, 2000 6:04 am

I couldnt agree more about not flying with Korean. Personally, I would rather walk on my knees through the Sahara rather than fly over it with them! I wonder how many lives they are responsible for ending?? It doesn't bear thinking about, does it?
 
thg
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 12:48 pm

Who Would Fly Cubana?

Sun Feb 13, 2000 7:16 am

Referring to airsafe.com, KE has an accident rate of 5.38, while AeroPeru has 16.7 and Cubana even 24.0 (more than 5 times as dangerous as Korean).
In the US only AirTran/ValueJet (5.88) seems to be less trustworthy than KE.
So, would you fly one of Cubana's antique DC-10, F-27 or IL-62 ?
 
kaitak
Posts: 8934
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Accident Rates Misleading?

Sun Feb 13, 2000 9:00 pm

I've always been a little bit skeptical about accident rates, largely because a small, but good airline, which is unlucky enough to have a crash can be tagged as unsafe. Lauda Air and Ethiopian Airlines are two very good airlines - small carriers which suffered losses in situations where they were not at fault. On the other hand, an airline like Asiana, which might do quite well because it has very few accidents - certainly not fatal ones, is hardly to be considered safer than Lauda (by some accounts, it's an accident waiting to happen.)

China Airlines, I think, is worthy of being given a second chance because it has taken many steps, long before the HKG incident, to improve its record. Personally, I think Korean Air is going to have more accident before it finally recognises the depth of its problem.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8934
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: WHO Would Fly Korean? - The Stats!

Mon Feb 14, 2000 12:58 am

By the way, did you know that there's no Korean equivalent of the phrase "the most dangerous part of a pilot's job is the drive to the airport".
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE:Post By TCA256

Mon Feb 14, 2000 5:31 am

Dear TCA256, this is just a discussion topic, so please don't take it so personally! Yes there are many other airlines with disgraceful safety records, however Korean has been in the headlines alot lately & if you care to read other responses in this post, most people share the same view as me. You, like anyone else are free to express a differing view, however you do yourself no justice by attacking people who express a view you may not agree with!
I happen to work with an airline & do a fair amount of reading on safety, also I deal with it on a daily basis, so I think I know what I am talking about! Yes I may have been a little harsh in saying all Taiwanese carriers are bad, and I do admit that EVA have a good safety record. As far as SAA, well I don't know what you are talking about there? I stated in my post that I would happily fly with SAA (the only African carrier I probably would fly with!).
I also stated in one of my further responses that the trouble with Korean and many other airlines with bad saftey records, can't be put down to one thing, it is usually a range of problems, not least of which is a lack of CRM. As stated before ALL airlines have a responsibility to the passengers they carry - Their goal should always be 'Safety First', in everything they do!

The number one reason for airline crashes - is controlled aircraft flown into terrain. Not maintenance or any other reason! Look at the stats now!

Regards - BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
 
VH-BZF
Topic Author
Posts: 738
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 1999 1:28 pm

RE:Post By TCA256

Mon Feb 14, 2000 5:33 am

Dear TCA256, this is just a discussion topic, so please don't take it so personally! Yes there are many other airlines with disgraceful safety records, however Korean has been in the headlines alot lately & if you care to read other responses in this post, most people share the same view as me. You, like anyone else are free to express a differing view, however you do yourself no justice by attacking people who express a view you may not agree with!
I happen to work with an airline & do a fair amount of reading on safety, also I deal with it on a daily basis, so I think I know what I am talking about! Yes I may have been a little harsh in saying all Taiwanese carriers are bad, and I do admit that EVA have a good safety record. As far as SAA, well I don't know what you are talking about there? I stated in my post that I would happily fly with SAA (the only African carrier I probably would fly with!).
I also stated in one of my further responses that the trouble with Korean and many other airlines with bad saftey records, can't be put down to one thing, it is usually a range of problems, not least of which is a lack of CRM. As stated before ALL airlines have a responsibility to the passengers they carry - Their goal should always be 'Safety First', in everything they do!

The number one reason for airline crashes - is controlled aircraft flown into terrain. Not maintenance or any other reason! Look at the stats now!

Regards - BZF
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Achtstein, aviationaware, B777LRF, B787register, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Emperorvalse, KarelXWB, MaxiAir, MrBren, Noshow, Scorpio, tvh, uta999 and 239 guests