No, we’re not as close to midnight as we have been in the past. We’re too interconnected for single sparks to start a conflagration these days.

Ukraine/Crimea: well settle down into Russian control over Crimea, whether de factor or de jure (doesn’t matter). Russia will not invade/annex eastern Ukraine. Lots of hot air, but in the end even sanctions against Russia will either not proceed or will be feeble. Nobody is prepared to put their neck on the line, because Russia already has huge influence in the region anyway. Ukraine – as a country – suffers, but the place had decades to sort itself out and it didn’t. Just mired itself in corruption and economic decline, and hence became less relevant and less influential as a part of the economic community.

EU weakness to the Russian bear: won’t change, as there is no political appetite in Euroland to face economic or geopolitical realities and hence reduce dependence on Russia. We’ve all seen Euro elites spend the last 5 years sticking their heads in the sand over the GFC. The only thing in Europe to make the Russians feel wary will – again – be the US, and – again – the Europeans will display total schizophrenia about that, by knowing it’s keeping them safe but at the same time decrying perceived Yankee imperialism/cultural inferiority.

North Korea: will not attack the South or launch rogue attacks on Japan etc. Will continue to be a thorn in the region’s side. Geopolitical reality is that actual attacks on SK/Japan will cause Pyongyang to be turned into rubble by Uncle Sam. China knows this and would not react beyond rhetoric.

Chinese aggression: will stay but the rhetoric will be toned down somewhat as the new regime settles in. Japan will continue its military build up and will continue to p*ss off the rest of the region by refusing to talk about WW2 atrocities.

Middle East uprisings/civil wars: baddie vs baddie. Can’t see major Western interventions happening unless the one free, democratic country in the region (Israel) is threatened. Increasing US annoyance at the Gulf countries feeling scared about Iran but not tackling it themselves.

Terrorism: will not start WW3.

Failed states like Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen: any conflict will be seen a la Middle East uprisings, i.e. baddie vs baddie so why intervene. Issue of Pakistani nukes only issue, but one area I could see concerted and direct action by major powers.

– Fleet. Short haul fleet planning has been very good, and the decision in the early 2000s to take on a large number of B738’s at good prices (post 9/11 downturn) was a good one. The B763’s had a part to play as well, and they did it well on short haul, although I question if they needed quite so many for east coast runs. I would have dedicated them to SYD/MEL to PER with only a handful of SYD/MEL/BNE routings.

The B763 was not the best choice for regional or long haul. Put simply it lacked the cargo capacity that competitors could exploit and cost very nearly as much to operate as the A330. It was the best choice only until the improved A333 became available.

The B744 was a tough choice. The airline was much criticized for being “anti 777” but to be fair, the 772 was simply a downgauge too far from the 744. They could have added a few 772ER’s but the majority of the B744 fleet would have needed to stay. Maybe the 77W could have made a big difference, but by that time the A380/787 strategy had been put into place. And it was the right choice, too. Just very unfortunate that both manufacturers mucked up.

– Brand. The split Qantas/Jetstar brand makes a lot of sense. It has also been implemented well. OK we do have ongoing disputes as to the extent of QF cross subsidizing JQ, but ultimately it’s all the same group and I’m not concerned with these internal issues. The group lost its way with the Asian (especially HK and Japan) expansion. That was unnecessary and burnt a fair bit of cash.

– Workforce. Too much of it! Too many clock watchers. Some good people, but really not a lean operation for the 21st century.

No, we’re not as close to midnight as we have been in the past. We’re too interconnected for single sparks to start a conflagration these days.

Ukraine/Crimea: well settle down into Russian control over Crimea, whether de factor or de jure (doesn’t matter). Russia will not invade/annex eastern Ukraine. Lots of hot air, but in the end even sanctions against Russia will either not proceed or will be feeble. Nobody is prepared to put their neck on the line, because Russia already has huge influence in the region anyway. Ukraine – as a country – suffers, but the place had decades to sort itself out and it didn’t. Just mired itself in corruption and economic decline, and hence became less relevant and less influential as a part of the economic community.

EU weakness to the Russian bear: won’t change, as there is no political appetite in Euroland to face economic or geopolitical realities and hence reduce dependence on Russia. We’ve all seen Euro elites spend the last 5 years sticking their heads in the sand over the GFC. The only thing in Europe to make the Russians feel wary will – again – be the US, and – again – the Europeans will display total schizophrenia about that, by knowing it’s keeping them safe but at the same time decrying perceived Yankee imperialism/cultural inferiority.

North Korea: will not attack the South or launch rogue attacks on Japan etc. Will continue to be a thorn in the region’s side. Geopolitical reality is that actual attacks on SK/Japan will cause Pyongyang to be turned into rubble by Uncle Sam. China knows this and would not react beyond rhetoric.

Chinese aggression: will stay but the rhetoric will be toned down somewhat as the new regime settles in. Japan will continue its military build up and will continue to p*ss off the rest of the region by refusing to talk about WW2 atrocities.

Middle East uprisings/civil wars: baddie vs baddie. Can’t see major Western interventions happening unless the one free, democratic country in the region (Israel) is threatened. Increasing US annoyance at the Gulf countries feeling scared about Iran but not tackling it themselves.

Terrorism: will not start WW3.

Failed states like Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen: any conflict will be seen a la Middle East uprisings, i.e. baddie vs baddie so why intervene. Issue of Pakistani nukes only issue, but one area I could see concerted and direct action by major powers.

HMRC is run by evil people.

I believe the Prime Minster has phoned the banks and read the riot act to them…told the greedy b*stards to pull their heads in and show more sympathy

Now now. Calm down and go and hug some whales.

You could equally point the finger at either the bank or the insurance company, I’m curious why the bank gets all the flack? Equally also, fixed rate mortgages usually carry these penalties and it’s a risk you take with them as a consumer.

Having said that, my logic tells me “tough luck” and my heart indeed does sympathise.

I live fairly close to an affected town, Wandong. I know people who’ve lost their house and it all feels terribly close to home. Actually, visiting there made me feel more sad and more poignant than when I visited Hiroshima a few years ago. So, I share the emotion and the feelings as a human, but please lets react and go forth rationally as logical people.

International

Yes, I meant international connections.

Going Europe->Canada/South America for instance, the US government doesn’t like it.

Going Australia->Canada/South America the US government also doesn’t like.

Yet the revenue loss may be significant. I just don’t see why a potential source of revenue is DELIBERATELY turned off? India is the same. I just don’t get it.

I’m still not sure I get it.

If, for the sake of argument, DHL takes 2 days to send a letter from Aus to the UK, how long would be a reasonable time for the postal system to do it?

4 days? 5?

Surely not twice that?

As the Senior Cabin Crew member said to me (he is a friend) he had reported the issue to the Captain, the Captain reported the issue and they were told to continue with the flight (which by the way had already been delayed by 4 hours) by their OPS department. I can’t confirm if the engineers were informed, but, locally FR don’t have any of their own at EGHH (they use an external company).

I thought the Captain was the responsible person? If it was unsafe/in breach of regs to fly without offloading pax, why did the Capt not offload pax??

Surely this is a case where Ops need to be in the loop, but the actual discretion lies with the Capt.