Strikes me as too easy to take pot shots at LHR mgmt and compare LHR to other airports but that doesn't progress the debate - merely gives spectators an opportunity to vent. I find it hard to believe that the mgmt wake up each morning planning to do a bad job so what is it about the place that sees this issue reoccur?
So for my own education I've had a quick trawl through t'net & found:
EuroControl report for Dec 2011 lists Top-5 airports by Avg daily ATM as:
1. LFPG (CDG) - 650
2. EGLL (LHR) - 620
3. EDDF (FRA) - 617
4. LEMD (MAD) - 523
5. EHAM (AMS) - 522
LHR - 2 parallel rwys; busiest by total pax number
CDG - 4 parallel rwys; 2nd busiest by pax numbers
FRA - 4 rwys (3 parallel); 3rd busiest by pax numbers
So LHR has more pax per ATM & more ATM per rwy than the others. If it's true that they operate at 99+% capacity, seems reasonable to me that any restriction in ATM (eg poor wx) will have disproportinate impact than at other airfields. I imagine airlines need to make early decisions on flow rates which would explain the ground holds in APAC.
Second aspect is rather than kick the can down the road (again), who's got the solution? I suspect it's much harder to solve than blame...
Reason's model keeps me thinking too - were there failures or violations?
How do you operate the 2nd busiest airport in Europe on 2 rwy's when bad weather is imminent? Mind you, last Snow Day they shut for 3 (4?) days so this strikes me as an improvement.
Stats, damn stats... do my head in...knew there was a reason I didn't become an accountant!