10 cm snow in London. BA collapses, BAA does too

The problem with this thread and other similar ones is that a poster claims "Due to circumstances beyond their control, operator X didn't do certain things within their control". The response is "Operator X can't do anything about circumstances beyond their control!" and ignores the bit about "Operator X doing things within their control".

The thead continues with the two parties discussing the two different issues until the parties get bored...

Attention to detail is the key. I said busiest, international airport.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_airports_by_international_passenger_traffic

Nope. My argument is that you need to get a sense of proportion. You were caught up in serious disruption caused by heavy snow. Hundreds of thousands of people were affected by it. I'm afraid it is naive to think that in such circumstances you can simply pick up a phone and get rebooked. First, because thousands of people are doing likewise, second because in circumstances of mass cancellations, no-one knows which flights are going to operate.

This will be my last response because, as effseeoh comments, "...the parties get bored"

Yes, attention to detail.
Aircraft movements are the issue, not whether they are domestic or international. The issue is departures and arrivals. In any event I clearly did make teh distinction. If you wish to discuss LHR you should at least do your homework on actual LHR issues rather than polemics, because there are areas, as I mentioned, in which they have done outstanding work.

Next, it was not "heavy" snow. It was 10cm. I am naive? Please look at the relative performance in customer service terms at other larger volume airports. They all are confused but none quite manage the consistent disarray of BAA/BA. Do you think there should be a different, lower standard for BA/BAA than exists in the rest fo the world?

That will leave me with the last word then.

LHR's place at the top of the table as busiest international airport in the world is measured by passenger volume. In times of disruption, as I'm sure you will agree, there is quite a difference between 10 cancelled A380s and 10 cancelled CRJs.

But let's use your table - measuring aircraft movements and see what that really tells us.

1. ATL - 775,218 movements; 5 runways = 155,043 movements per runway
2. ORD - 739,400 movements; 7 runways = 105,629 movements per runway
3. DFW - 542,133 movements; 7 runways = 77,448 movements per runway
4. DEN - 529,870 movements; 6 runways = 88,312 movements per runway
5. LAX - 504,652 movements; 4 runways = 126,163 movements per runway

12. LHR - 404,153 movements; 2 runways = 202,076 movements per runway

I think that demonstrates, on any meaningful measure, LHR is the busiest airport in the world with the busiest runways.

It was a dump of snow in a short period, which then froze. I was here.

Your sample size for "consistent disarray" appears to be n=1 (or allowing for your reading about the meltdown in December 2010, n=2). I don't think a career as an actuary is your thing.

No, but I think that passengers have to realise when things become exceptional. Cancellation of 50% of BA's flights at LHR is exceptional, I believe.

I believe you are.

Sorry, I just canot resist this response

No, but I think that passengers have to realise when things become exceptional. Cancellation of 50% of BA's flights at LHR is exceptional, I believe.

[/quote]
I believe you are.[/quote]

Just for fun I forwarded your last comments to a CEO of a major airline who has been a client for some time. He responded in seconds and was laughing. Not very many people consider me to be naive on this subject.

As for selective facts, or adequate analysis, that cannot be done in a thread such as this one. All the same, assuming a lack of competence on the part of someone who disagrees with you is a quite dangerous error. There are people on BB's who know a great deal more than we might assume, and others who have experiences rather more than we might imagine. We do need to be cautious with disdain.

I apologize for my failure to avoid another post. I just was not prepared for anything quite so entertaining as you "actuarial" and "naive" comments. Oddly on this very trip my client commented on my cynicism and insistence on documented proof for assertions made. That made your comment even funnier.

Thanks for the humor.

Jolly good. I much prefer condescension to any form of analysis or rebuttal; it indicates who has the better of the facts. Happy travels, but I'd avoid LHR when snow is forecast.

Im bored

Pers. Comm... LHR Ops staff (i.e. the guys responsible for doing the snow clearance). The conversation was in the context of they had done so little snow clearance that a large part of the Ops department had never done it and the older staff were concerned by this because of the inexperience of much of the department. And the timeline posted above would tie in directly with when I had that conversation, since it would be around 2000-ish, when I was doing some training of said staff.

Why did you call it a 'joke'? All I"m doing is recounting a conversation I had about snow at LHR. Was there any need to be so rude? Why are you taking this so personally? I don't see any reason to automatically assume the information I posted was incorrect.

The Saint wasn't quite right. But LHR is the busiest two runway airport in the world. Just as (IIRC) LGW has been at times the busiest single runway airport in the world. It's easier to do snow clearance if you have several runways operating at once.

Every airport listed above LHR has more than two runways available.

Thanks for that. True, every word. One major question is: what must happen to get more runway and ground capacity for London?

A new airport. Somewhere.

Currently, either a new government or the donors to the current government to want a third runway for LHR more than the Tory voters of the Shires don't want it (or the Tory voters in the Shires to realise they can't keep complaining about delays due to snow while saying they don't want a 3rd runway).

Ah but this is one of the features of Europe. As PJ O'Rourke once wrote: “dopey little countries”, “pokey borders”, “itty-bitty” languages and “Lilliputian” drinks measures. The mosaic of countries made the visitor feel claustrophobic: “You can’t swing a cat without sending it through customs,” he complained.

Consequently, we cant expand cities and infrastructure willy-nilly or we ruin the fabric of our countryside. Hence green belts and draconian planning - remember how long it took to get agreement to build T5?! AMD , FRA and MAD the exceptions here...

FRA was not an easy job either, IIRC. MAD is now a delightful place, spacious and open, easy to navigate. FRA is great in some spots but it still retains the old gates, some used for long haul, so the new MAD is still a better arrangement, and teh publ;ic transport is convenient and easy too. Going from T5 to T4 at LHR demonstrates the forced compromises.

I recall my first trip to LHR when they had, IIRC, six runways (I checked to ensure my memory was correct). It is sad that the extensions and facilities were not improved in the 1950's. Now there simply are no acceptable options unless someone blinks. No one has blinked for rather a long time...

oh believe me, this is a much better place than FT. i forgot, i do not have some stupid make believe status dolled out by some staffer...guess that makes me incapable of doing math and a ranter...

oh well. sue me.

To sue you, I'd have to understand what you are talking about.

Exactly. The problem, at root, is cultural.

It's amusing but also pathetic when the customary BA apologists make their knee-jerk assumption that those who criticize BA and its service know nothing about it, don't experience it. etc.

In their superior minds, their experience trumps others. BA can do no wrong.

But we know that ours lives side-by-side with theirs. Nobody with any knowledge is criticizing BA's approach to flight safety. And BA no doubt has - very occasionally, and to a select, chosen few who worship at the Dilbertian temples - delivered good service.

But that doesn't include a multitude of people who would discuss their bad experiences with the airline, but are shouted down, censored or otherwise prevented from detailing their criticisms and comparing them with how other carriers have handled similar events better.

Even the relatively few BA apologists on here are trying to do the same to jbc. When this happens, it's time for the honeybadger. 1:25-1:35.

The distinction is important because the attitude of BA apologists illustrates the cultural traits that make it impossible for BA to deliver good service.

jbc, ah you speak of the L-1011...an excellent machine in whose jumpseat the shark rode on numerous occasions. Ah that was back when BA actually was a good airline.

What BA - British society as a whole - needs to improve is its philosophy. This begins with acceptance and facilitation of open discussion, which will include criticism as well as praise, sincere acknowledgment of failings, and a will to improve. With this, anything is possible. Without it, BA is the imperial hangover. Let's not forget, it was "Imperial Airways." It still wants to be, although there's no place in the world for this concept now, except in the minds of the Colonel Blimps who patronize BA and attempt to insulate its closed-minded Dilbertian management from larger realities.

We remember another example of this classic British "leadership" recently.... BP's Tony "Churchill" on the beaches, "We will never surrender" etc. [To what? Their own idiocy? The will of the people? The law of the US? All of the above?] Face it, he'd be an ideal candidate for the next out-of-touch, Dilbertian CEO of BA. His presentation to the Board begins with "Whats this about commotion at the Terraces? F^^^^ Johnny Foreigner, they can't talk English anyway, etc. Why are they even here on our planes and our soil? As for that shark, apply the child molester policy to his next flight with BA, deny him boarding for his critique, prevent him talking with other BA pax at the T5 Galleries, get the apologist tame mods to suppress all criticisms of LHR and our service... why are there so many problems here, why can't people just do as I tell them and swallow the jingoistic propaganda... aargh!"

No te olvides de ... machacar es una expresión británica.

Ver el tejón de miel.

Bravo RTS. I must have your latest poetic contribution printed onto parchment and framed. Better still, if any one can recommend a good repro company in the EH1 area that prints onto bog roll, I take 200 cases

Well that's the super-short version. As you know, some more complete explorations of these hypotheses were offered over at BA before censorship. Amusingly enough.... just prior to being censored there, I received some PMs asking whether I had authored other works on this subject. For instance, among others:

"Greetings, couldn't help but admire your prose style in the recent whining about BA thread. Your points were eloquently expressed and put me in mind of a mid point between Vidal and Safire.
So on the offchance - do you write commercially? And if so can you provide an ISBN/ISSN so I can check out what you do for payment as opposed to fun? TIA"

From such encouragement is the counter-cultural discourse flourish. To the discomfiture of the numerous regressive individuals and institutions that are pathologically unable to tolerate free speech.

I haven't had time for this so far, what with my ongoing work commitments to increasing stakeholder dialog between citizens and more or less recalcitrant institutions. But when I do publish it, the various excerpts from the BA board will prove most amusing to the readership.

Now, you, for example, could have a starring role in the cultural analysis. Under a nom-de-plume of course. Think about that. You can help me choose your nom-de-plume, or I'll just assign it.

Zebedee.
Guy Fawkes.
ColinMarshall

The Saint needs one too. But I'll take suggestions by PM for him, from other members here at MP.

Muahahaha!

Wait. Help I am going to have to book BA in the near future. SOF-LON on Star is twice the cost and more than twice the time. Hellllpppp.....please, spare me the irop.

Splendid! Do let us know when a publisher snaps you up. As for me, no non-de-plume is required. I've already been annointed the title of Dilbertine stooge. A badge I wear with supreme honour

My upcoming trip next week I have booked on KLM, an object of derision itself, but I do so like the delft houses, and once arriving at AMS I invariably leave soon to proceed to my ultimate destination. It would have been AF, but I am not terribly optimistic about the strike affair.

Otherwise thank you RTS, The Saint and others. Keep up your polemics, con and pro respectively. I never expected to say it but RTS is more objective than are the defenders.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Keep taking the pills.

Nothing wrong with the Blue Demons. They provide workmanlike business class service, usually efficient transit at AMS, and even their peccadillos are amusing. Ask a question, hear the response.. "Het is niet moegelijk"....etc.

As for objectivity, nobody even has to read the BA-related content to know that the shark's position is more objective than the apologist one.

The very fact that the censorious ones are - and have been - part of a censorious regime, whether as censors, or abetters of the regime who seek selective silencing by using RBP tactics, universally delegitimates their statements. They are puzzled, bewildered even, when this is called out by neutral observers who have nothing at stake.

But this result is an inevitable consequence of being a party to censorship. Once tarred in this way, the suspicion clings to every statement that the apologists make. It also means that the narrowness and partiality of their viewpoints is always emphasized.

Now, the BA board is a particularly intense vortex of this behavior. But it's not just confined to the BA board. The same attitude is pervasive among cultural and political institutions. I have a lot of experience in confronting this problem, with varying degrees of success. But it's interesting how much can be accomplished simply by refusing to be browbeaten and ensuring that, if you stand for free speech, you actually do so. This is why I defend even those who insult me against censorship. The BA and DL mods themselves even know this, because they've received my PMs about silencing various viewpoints and individuals with whom I have no common ground.

If they had more open minds and more confidence in an objective stance, they would refuse to partake in censorious activities. But they don't. It shows.

Modern social media allows us the opportunity to probe the veracity of censorious regimes from other perspectives. It is very valuable because it makes such conduct increasingly untenable.

I am counting the days for the "ignore poster" functionality to be easily available on this board.

It will become an eminently more enjoyable place once this is possible.