Snow cancelations Heathrow

[vctenderness]

I am sitting in BCN at the moment due to return to LHR on Tuesday 15th on BA0485 13.15.

I have been reading a lot of speculation with regard to weather cancellations anyone with up to date info it would be appreciated.


I am the worlds unluckiest with snow as got stuck at LHR until 04.30 then off loaded until next day last year and lost a couple of days of holiday.


I am getting that feeling of dejavu!

[Musket90]

Weather forecast for LHR tomorrow looks OK with the odd sleet shower expected so you'd be very unlucky if your flight was cancelled.

[Evanelpus]

What a joke, a few cm's of snow and the worlds busiest international airport comes to a grinding halt.

I sometimes think we are a third world country, maybe we are, if so we should be asking for aid to ensure we can keep Heathrow open.;)

[DaveReidUK]

a few cm's of snow and the worlds busiest international airport comes to a grinding haltExcept that it hasn't. But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

[Evanelpus]

Obviousy my winking smiley face wasn't enough to show the ultimate irony of the post.

Doh! Promise to try harder next time:O

[wowzz]

I am far from being a BAA supporter, but I do have a little sympathy for them when it snows.
Because LHR is basically working at close to capacity, anything that reduces the number of aircraft movements [eg using a snow-plough] is bound to impact on flight schedules.
That is not to say that LHR should not have the right kit in place for when the weather turns chilly [!] but obviously whilst a runway is being swept, it cannot be operational.

[nivsy]

On Iberia metal down to madrid tomorrow evening - what do you guys think the odds are of clear taxi ways and runways at LHR then.....!!!!:uhoh:

[Suzeman]

On Iberia metal down to madrid tomorrow evening - what do you guys think the odds are of clear taxi ways and runways at LHR then.....!!!!

Get the LHR hotel booked now....:}

2013/01/17 18:18
TAF EGLL 171706Z 1718/1824 10004KT 9999 SCT040 PROB30
TEMPO 1718/1722 8000
BECMG 1807/1810 4000 -SN BKN005 PROB40
TEMPO 1810/1818 1000 SN BKN002

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Should be OK. Forecasting 3-4cm between 1000 Fri & 0800 Sat with low risk of more than that.

Trick is, Mother Nature will decide where she wants to dump the snow and how long she wants to snow for. If the front stalls to the West, then just sleet &/or freezing fog. If it stalls overhead EGLL then it'll be more.

To be fair to BAA, you can't be certain how much snow there'll be and if airlines don't plan properly (de-icing, cancellations due reduced capacity etc) then it'll go bad very quickly.

Let's hope they've got a good plan (& good people to execute it).

[118.70]

How did it go ?

17:40 IB3171 MADRID CANCELLED Terminal five

18:40 IB3167 MADRID CANCELLED Terminal five
18:40 IB3177 MADRID DELAYED 19:54 Terminal

20:15 IB3173 MADRID DELAYED 21:00 Terminal five

[Ioniser]

Afternoon and evening MAN - LHR s were cancelled.

[Mr Mac]

Ioniser
And they wonder why we do not use LHR, your post says it all , London airport and London airways.:ugh:

[kazzie]

Cancelations were made in advance as we all knew the snow was coming therefore slot capacity reduced.. BETTER to cancel the flights in advance to minimise people traveling to the airport...

That being said LHR stayed open all day.. And kept the operation running even if reduced..

Flight cancelations WILL happen in bad weather.. That is just what comes to expect in this industry. LHR is not an individual here.

Well done LHR for staying open today! Unfortunately, those who are always quick to judge LHR for closing for a mm of snow are not here to comment today, Not here or over at the blue side.So ill say it..

Well done LHR.

[bannercounty]

Your comments make no sense whatsoever. LHR practically shutdown. Have a look at the amount of cancellations. An airport is not deemed "open" if flights such as the huge number of long and short haul that had to be cancelled. Would you go into to your local and ask for a pint only to receive a half and accept it along with paying for a full one? A small drop of snow and its chaos is a zero excuse.

[DaveReidUK]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not customary for aircraft to land or takeoff if it involves leapfrogging over snowploughs on the runway.

Ergo it follows that if the runways (and exits, and taxiways, and stands) have to be cleared of snow (and it was snowing pretty well continuously yesterday) then capacity will be reduced while snow clearance is taking place, plus of course the effect that poor visibility has on the movement rate even after the runways have been periodically cleared.

I can't think of any airport that encounters snow to which the above doesn't also apply to a greater or lesser degree. To expect continuously falling snow not to affect an airport's operations is completely unrealistic.

[2Planks]

No it didn't 400 flights were cancelled out of about 1300 - so it was more open than closed!

[crewmeal]

When you think about it snow will not disappear by itself. Depending on the severity of it will depend on how long runways will be closed for. The other factor is visibility. Regardless of technology if it's snowing hard visibility will be reduced and the aircraft will divert. Any carrier will have its hands tied during inclement weather and the detail will be in the planning.

Having said that BA operations have to make the appropriate choice of which flights will go and which will won't. As kazzie says the airport stayed open all day which allowed some movements. Those that arrived and departed were lucky, but there is no guarantee on any flight movements be it short or long haul during bad weather.

Airlines are in the business of making money and not refunding it and BA will do all they can to move passengers to their destination.

[Richard Taylor]

To be fair to the airport (because it happens at them all in the UK) you can invest in all the equipment you like for intensive snow clearing ops, but if the snow continues to fall & fills in the area just cleared behind the snow crews, there isn't much you can do...other than keep going & do it again!

And - as much as I hate to say it - it really is the wrong type of snow! Much wetter & heavier than the drier, powdery stuff you get on the continent. Therefore longer & harder to clear, having to get rid of the slush as well as the snow on top.

Just my 2cm-worth! :}

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Sky News reporting that if a "plane" has been deiced it has to fly within twenty minutes.

Oh really?

[mathers_wales_uk]

Almost every large airport will have a ontingency plan during adverse weather such as fog, snow and weather etc.

The plan is that airlines will have to cut X% of their movements between a said time in advance.

This would take into consideration the reduction in the flow of departing/arriving aircraft and any other factors.

This will ensure the safe operation of aircraft around the airfield based on the conditions. And in the case of snow it would provide the opportunity for snow clearing vehicles to operate during ground movements.

It is a case of damage limitation i'm affraid and we all seen the complaints when an airport closes especially the larger ones. The airports did not close however some flight disruption is always going to happen during these conditions especially when the airport is almost running at capacity.

[MAN777]

We had very little settling snow in Manchester (feel a little left out actually, the kids were anticipating a sledging session !)

How did yesterdays snow compare with the snow event which caused the shutdowns in previous years, was it different ?

Was the snow plan different this year ?

Public perceptions through media reporting really interests me, having watched the TV yesterday I think LHR's image came out unscathed as there was a big play on the new equipment doing its job, delays were actually caused by flow control implemented for runway clearance and visibility problems.

Well done BAA (or whatever you are called these days)

[dpconlan2011]

Having read lots of feeds from yesterday, it seems that many passengers were held in aircraft on the tarmac for several hours waiting to depart (one particular BA flight encurring horrendous 6 hr sit-in.) The reasons given were mainly due to waiting on de-icing machines, then slots. I have since found out that aircraft need to be de-iced every 30 mins whilst on ground, is this true? Surely if you know that the weather will be bad, the airline will make arrangements for more de-icers to be deployed, or was this the responsibility of BAA?
Perhaps shockingly, there were also tweets on passengers arriving who had to wait up to 2hrs before being allowed to leave the plane. (stands full apparently) Obviously these planes had to park up somewhere for a bit? Did BAA not think to send some of their buses to pick these people up?
My point is, even with the cancellations, they seemed wholly unprepared. Could they not have cancelled more flights? Could they not have diverted some to other airports? And why a 6 hr wait on a plane?

[Heathrow Harry]

It's disgraceful - the Met office have been forecasting this for over a week and yet no-one seems to have done anything

And don't tell me there is a Snow Plan - it 's the same every year it snows at LHR

[wiggy]

I have since found out that aircraft need to be de-iced every 30 mins whilst on ground, is this true?

No, the exact answer depends on lots of things: in no particular order type of deicing fluid being used, air temperature and the type and rate of precipitation. FWIW looking at LHR yesterday, the precipitation at it's worse (early PM) and the fluid being used by some of the rigs you could need deicing once an hour. Later in the evening when the snow eased up you could be talking about easily having a couple of hours between being sprayed couple of hours. there are lots of nice tables :uhoh: on the aircraft covering this but ultimately it's the commanders decision as to whether the wings are "clean" or not.

Perhaps shockingly, there were also tweets on passengers arriving who had to wait up to 2hrs before being allowed to leave the plane. (stands full apparently) Obviously these planes had to park up somewhere for a bit? Did BAA not think to send some of their buses to pick these people up?

Lack of space - Departing aircraft were being held on gates awaiting their turn to de-ice - which meant at some terminals there was simply physically no room to put inbound flights. There were also problems with some/many of the gates being unavailable until they were cleared. Buses were used for inbound flights late in the day.

And why a 6 hr wait on a plane?
Inbound - See my comment above.
Outbound - you need to be in a position to go the minute you get a slot at the de-icing spot. It would be nice to tell the passengers - "stay in the terminal we'll come and get you as soon as we know our de-icing slot" - but slots for deicing were sometimes being given at fairly short notice - so you needed to be ready to move at short notice otherwise you'd go to the back of the queue.

Not pleasant I'd agree, but it's the old story of how much are you/I/the BAA prepared to pay to provide the resources?

.

[Fairdealfrank]

It reinforces the need for a third and fourth rwy. Without these, LHR is operating at 99% capacity, so quite honestly, what can be expected in case of adverse weather conditions?

As for investment in Canadian or Scandinavian levels of snow clearing equipment, can it be justified for a few days of heavy snow in just 3-4 bad winters every 25 years? Is it a good use of money that could maybe be used for other infrastructure improvements on the airport?

It's the same argument for the roads and the railways.

[fergusd]

I was stuck on a plane on Friday morning for > 2 hours waiting to get off. There was a whopping 5-10mm of snow on the ground at most. The catalog of excuses provided via the flight crew was comical and the flight crew, although professional throughout, were clearly of the same view. LHR's operations team should be sacked on the spot.

LHR is a national joke and disgrace. You can make all the excuses you like (and boy do you like to make them from this thread) but they are just that, excuses. LHR is an amateur operation and the current operators do not deserve the right to operate it.

Pathetic, incompetent, unprepared, unable, useless.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

You are obviously holding back your opinion on how to do it properly?

[LYKA]

IN-2012/181: UK Winter Runway Assessment Trial 2012/2013 Trial | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=5278)

LHR not in this so it's "back to black" I guess?

[Omnipresent]

Public perceptions through media reporting really interests me, having watched the TV yesterday I think LHR's image came out unscathed as there was a big play on the new equipment doing its job, delays were actually caused by flow control implemented for runway clearance and visibility problems.

Interestingly, the transport reporter for the BBC who was reporting on the snow delays at LHR and LGW a couple of years ago now works for BAA's PR department.

[Ringwayman]

LHR disruption statement for 20th Jan (http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2013/01/19/42868/heathrow-braces-for-show-disruption-statement.html)

20% reduction in schedule
2cm to 6cm forecast snow with periodic low visibility throughout the day

[DaveReidUK]

Interesting, the transport reporter for the BBC who was reporting on the snow delays at LHR and LGW a couple of years ago now works for BAA's PR department. "I ensure we are always on the front foot with media by anticipating and preparing for events, steering coverage and getting our points of view across. I brief and train spokespeople, generate pro-active, positive news flow and influence the strategic communications objectives of the world's busiest international airport."

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Hey fergusd, clearly you have in-depth knowledge of the operation at LHR in order to identify who was to blame. Please share.

Which airline were you flying on Friday?

[Tableview]

I have just arrived Manchester on BA having connected through T5 at LHR. My original flight this morning into LGW was 5 hours delayed, I found this out yesterday evening but was not notified, despite BA having automated means to contact passengers in the event of flight disruptions by SMS or email - they had both forms of contact. Not only that, but I was not reaccommodated onto another connection.

The call centres in UK and Europe are closed outside office hours so I called the one in the USA. It took an hour to get to speak to someone, from which point things got better. The agent rebooked me on other flights via LHR, in fact the ones I originally wanted but didn't book as it was £200 more expensive, giving me a scheduled arrival only a couple of hours later than my original plan. A good result under the circumstances.

The MAN flight was delayed about an hour, and under the circumstances I think BA did remarkably well.

[2Planks]

And just for balance Geneva Cointrin has been closed for some hours today with diverted ac all over central Europe - so before we embark on national stereotypes it happens everywhere.

[compton3bravo]

I don´t know if anybody was watching Sky News earlier this evening when a director of the Airport Operators Association was being interviewed. What a shambles - no shirt, wearing a scruffy jumper and didn´t look old enough to vote! Praising Heathrow on how well they were coping and also telling everybody how well most of the other airports in the UK had coped (agree there). Stop moaning about Heathrow he said - I fear he may not be his job too long!

[Old Grouch]

Having operated to and worked at Heathrow extensively during the 2000s, I can tell you that it was a hotbed of ineptness, incompetence and inadequate preparation for anything non-standard, mainly displayed by the BAA/HAL and the ground handlers/their management. This does not include the ATC, of course. I see that it's still the same fun and games there.

Granted, the lack of capacity is a major issue, we're all aware of that, but there are also many more problems at all levels, e.g. lack of equipment and (competent) operators, and the ground handling generally being a shambles due to lack of staff. This is on an average day. :} The issue is that everybody is desperately trying to cut costs to the absolute minimum, with these results.

I remember spending more or less the whole day at LHR due to lack of de-icing, to the point of being in danger of running out of hours, when it should have been a quick hop there and back. It was a loop of waiting an hour+ for deicing, waiting an hour for start-up, the pushback team leaving us, a passenger wanting to get off, us needing de-icing again and waiting an hour for it, and... so on. With nobody from the ground handlers knowing what was going on.

It's about time that the issue of snow/deicing was taken seriously by the BAA/HAL, who need to admit that a proper, remote de-icing setup is required in order not to have the airport descend into chaos every time it snows for more than 15 minutes. It is ridiculous to have to spend six hours on an aeroplane, on the ground.

The service isn't there because nobody is prepared to pay for it. The consumer demands cheaper fares and does not care about the consequences (a few days' disruption). Far easier to write it off as 'the wrong type of snow', 'we don't get snow here often' etc, etc, than to admit the need to invest in a competent de-icing operation.

[DISCOKID]

instead of blocking stands waiting for de-icing, and then also having to de-ice planes more than once that still hand't moved, why doesn't BAA just de-ice planes on a taxiway once they are on the way to the runway.

That would free up stands and mean that planes would only be deiced when they were close to taking off.

It would also be a far more efficient use of de-icing personnel if you just had a permanent remote station they operated from

[Old Grouch]

why doesn't BAA just de-ice planes on a taxiway


Just to clarify, it isn't the BAA who does the de-icing, it's the ground handling companies or separate de-icing companies. Not including BA, of course, who do their own. :)

[Bigpants]

I thought Clarkson and co had solved this issue with the converted combine harvestor and flame thrower?

Agree with old grouch, did a few years at Heathrow and airport barely copes even on a good day. Throw in snow and the BAA and it falls apart.

[Old Grouch]

I thought Clarkson and co had solved this issue with the converted combine
harvestor and flame thrower?


Haha yes, 'The Dominator' as they called it. The flame thrower could be used to de-ice aircraft. :}:}:E

[22/04]

Are curfew hours defined in law.

Would seem an easy way to help would be to ease curfew in exceptional weather- is there anyway to do this?

If the residents of west London and their MPs are so hyped up that they can't tolerate more night movements on a few bad weather nights then they are very selfish indeed.

Or may be they should be incentivised by a passenger lobby like the one Luton Borough Council takes from each pax using LTN, spent locally. Does LHR do anytihng for its local communities?

[Old Grouch]

There is a certain number of movements allowed during the night-ban hours on a per-airline basis, such as a normal late-running flight. It's basically a quota system. There's more info on the net about this, unfortunately, I haven't got my paperwork to hand anymore to give you a direct reference. Just as I write this at 23:47, there's an A/C on final approach to LHR, above my house.

The curfew can be, and has been waived for operational circumstances, at the discretion of the BAA/HAL. The problem is getting the ground staff to work through the night - they aren't rostered to do so, and as I said, the ground handlers are generally understaffed anyway, on a normal day. There wouldn't also be a readily-available supply of crew, either.

[BAladdy]

20% reduction in schedule
2cm to 6cm forecast snow with periodic low visibility throughout the day
A number of flights on several different airlines have already been cancelled for Sunday. As expected the the vast majority of these cancellation are too flight to shorthaul destinations. Below are a list of the shorthaul flights that have been cancelled so far for tomorrow

06:00 OS0458 Vienna
06:40 AF1381 Paris CDG
06:45 AZ0201 Rome
06:50 BA0332 Paris Orly
07:00 LX0359 Geneva
07:15 AF1081 Paris CDG
07:35 BA0964 Hamburg
08:10 LH0925 Frankfurt
08:55 LX0355 Geneva
09:05 BA0306 Paris CDG
11:00 BA0728 Geneva
11:05 EI0157 Dublin
11:35 VY7297 Bilbao
11:45 BA1440 Edinburgh
12:20 BA0632 Athens
12:25 LX0319 Zurich
12:30 BA0464 Madrid
12:40 BA0560 Rome
12:40 LH3399 Berlin
12:50 AF3672 Paris CDG
13:00 BA0314 Paris CDG
13:10 BA1394 Manchester
13:05 BA0716 Zurich
13:10 LH2475 Munich
13:20 BA0732 Geneva
13:40 BA0566 Milan Malpensa
13:40 LH0907 Frankfurt
14:00 BA0818 Copenhagen
14:05 BA0480 Barcelona
14:05 BA0780 Stockholm
14:15 BA0460 Madrid
14:25 BA1448 Edinburgh
14:40 BA0446 Amsterdam
14:40 BA0704 Vienna
14:50 BA0856 Prague
15:00 BA0542 Bologna
15:00 BA0568 Milan Linate
15:05 BA1486 Glasgow
15:10 BA1446 Edinburgh
15:10 BA0910 Frankfurt
15:10 EI0385 Shannon
15:15 BA0498 Alicante
15:15 BA0966 Hamburg
15:25 BA0398 Brussels
15:25 BA0502 Lisbon
15:35 BA0718 Zurich
15:40 BA0960 Munich
15:45 BA0746 Stavanger
15:50 BA1452 Edinburgh
15:50 BA0792 Gothenburg
15:50 BA0588 Milan Linate

16:00 BA0986 Berlin
16:00 BA0920 Stuttgart
16:10 BA0546 Rome
16:10 BA1334 Newcastle
16:15 BA0912 Frankfurt
16:15 BA0742 Geneva
16:20 BA0336 Paris Orly
16:30 BA0440 Amsterdam
16:35 BA1488 Glasgow
16:40 BA0820 Copenhagen
16:40 BA0782 Stockholm
16:55 BA0768 Oslo
17:00 BA0760 Bergen
17:00 SK0506 Copenhagen
17:05 KL1002 Amsterdam
17:10 LX0349 Geneva
17:20 BA0956 Munich
17:25 BA0708 Zurich
17:25 BA1454 Edinburgh
17:30 BA1314 Aberdeen
17:30 KL1026 Amsterdam
17:35 BA0884 Bucharest
17:40 BA0404 Brussels
17:45 BA0580 Milan Malpensa
17:45 EI0173 Dublin
17:50 BA1420 Belfast City
17:55 SK0528 Stockholm
18:00 BA0442 Amsterdam
18:00 AF2581 Paris CDG
18:05 EI0723 Cork
18:05 LH3385 Dusseldorf
18:10 KL1024 Amsterdam
18:15 BA1316 Aberdeen
18:25 BA1336 Newcastle
18:30 BA1458 Edinburgh
18:35 TP0357 Lisbon
18:50 AZ7899 Milan Linate
18:50 LH0917 Frankfurt
19:05 BA1498 Glasgow
19:15 BA1456 Edinburgh
19:45 EI0037 Belfast City
19:55 BA1404 Manchester
19:50 BA0544 Bologna
22:30 TK1984 Istanbul

Further cancellations are highly likely during the course of Sunday

[BAladdy]

A small number of departing longhaul flights have also been cancelled for tomorrow. With further cancellation likely

09:30 DL623 Boston
11:00 BA185 Newark
11:30 BA113 New York
12:35 AA139 New York
12:35 UA009 Newark
12:45 BA107 Dubai
12:50 DL006 New York
14:25 BA173 New York
14:55 BA205 Miami
15:15 AA105 New York
15:25 UA959 Chicago
16:20 UA925 Washington
16:30 EK030 Dubai
22:05 CX254 Hong Kong

[west lakes]

And just for balance Geneva Cointrin has been closed for some hours today with diverted ac all over central Europe - so before we embark on national stereotypes it happens everywhere. And Charles De Gaulle & Orly (Paris) are notifying of a 40% reduction!

Accueil-Passagers - Aéroports de Paris (http://www.aeroportsdeparis.fr/ADP/en-GB/Passagers/Home/)

Basil was closed for a number of hours on Thursday night from 5pm

[compton3bravo]

I bet Sybil was pleased!

[FR-]

Personally I think LHR has done a great job so far, credit where it's due.

fr-

[2Planks]

C3B............ :D:D

[Tay Cough]

instead of blocking stands waiting for de-icing, and then also having to de-ice planes more than once that still hand't moved, why doesn't BAA just de-ice planes on a taxiway once they are on the way to the runway.

That would free up stands and mean that planes would only be deiced when they were close to taking off.

It would also be a far more efficient use of de-icing personnel if you just had a permanent remote station they operated from


Not enough space. There are a couple of spots where BA carry out remote de-icing but they're not ideally located and often get blocked by traffic waiting to park in the central area.

[Mr A Tis]

It would be a lot quicker for all,if people flew to Manchester & went by surface to London. After all, London Airways wants us to do that the other way around the rest of the year.:)

[DaveReidUK]

There is a certain number of movements allowed during the night-ban hours on a per-airline basis, such as a normal late-running flight. It's basically a quota system. There's more info on the net about this, unfortunately, I haven't got my paperwork to hand anymore to give you a direct reference.The current limits for LHR are a maximum of 3250 movements during the "night quota period" (i.e. 2330-0600) over the IATA Summer season (an average of just under 16 per night), and 2550 over the Winter season. There is also a system of noise quota points designed to encourage the use of quieter aircraft.

The curfew can be, and has been waived for operational circumstances, at the discretion of the BAA/HAL.Exemptions can be granted (i.e. movements that don't count against the quota), subject to the (retrospective) approval of the DfT, to mitigate "delays likely to lead to serious congestion and delays resulting from widespread disruption of Air Traffic"

[118.70]

22/04 said :

Would seem an easy way to help would be to ease curfew in exceptional weather- is there anyway to do this? If the residents of west London and their MPs are so hyped up that they can't tolerate more night movements on a few bad weather nights then they are very selfish indeed."Operational Freedoms" were originally developed and intended to provide Heathrow with additional freedoms to be used in rare, occasional circumstances to ease the airport's difficulties at the cost of breaking the flight alternation conditions that give residents a half day of peace. Unfortunately, the experience of many is that the airport has chosen to set the bar to use these freedoms so low that they have been invoked on nearly all days for many hours rather than the 15 red days a year or the 50 orange days a year that the SEAT reports originally envisaged.

It takes two to tango !

[118.70]

Heathrow boss explains snow chaos :

Heathrow Boss Explains Snow Chaos - 20th Jan 2013 - YouTube

An improvement on December 2010 :

2010 18th December BBC News BAA spokesman Andrew Teacher discusses snow at Heathrow - YouTube

[DaveReidUK]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_T7zIJm7nk

Good to see the airport spokesperson has the facts at her fingertips:

We are going to be minimising disruption to passengers during the course of today, and we do expect 1000 flights to leave HeathrowThat's pretty good going - 50% more departures than on a normal, snow-free day.

[Old Grouch]

That's good. :}

Maybe she's referring to TTL movements, as opposed to departures?

[DaveReidUK]

Maybe she's referring to TTL movements, as opposed to departures? Indeed, I would hope that it's just a slip of the tongue, particularly as it seems the lady concerned isn't just a spokesperson but a BAA director, so hopefully ought to understand the difference between departures and movements. :O

[MAN777]

The appearance and behaviour of the spokesperson during interviews is critical, they can really damage the organisation reputation when its done badly. I personally think the image of BAA or Heathrow Ltd has improved massively in the 2 years between the 2 previous video clips. The lady comes across as sincere and likeable the fact she got some figures wrong would not have been noticed by 99.9% of the population and that is what matters.

[Old Grouch]

The appearance and behaviour of the spokesperson during interviews is
critical, they can really damage the organisation reputation when its done
badly.


I quite agree. She certainly 'talks the talk', but I personally got a distinct sense of 'spin' from her interview. That's understandable, as I'm sure that comes with the job. Lets see how the whole thing pans out for the PAX.

[spacedog]

BA now diverting arrivals due no spare stands. BA flights still on the ground waiting to depart 4 to 5 hours after STD. Other airlines operating out of Heathrow without he same problems BA are suffering with. The only people to blame are the BA management team within operations. Heathrow airport has done a great job in keeping the airport open. The problem BA is having, is that there are not enough de-icing rigs to complete the number of flights that they planned to operate, even with the reduced schedule.

I hope for the sake of BA that when the bad weather has finished ,the board look at who is responsible for the bad weather contingency plans. They need to made fully accountable. There are lots of questions their customers would like answers to. Then they should all be fired for incompetence.

[nivsy]

Well I never got down to Madrid on Friday (in response to earlier posts in this thread).
Indeed, thanks to a very nice girl on the BA Silver exec club line I was able to canx flight and rebook before the flight itself was actually pulled. I travel later this week (that is ok for me).

I believe the lounge and T5 generally was a nightmare on Friday so grateful I was able to not experience it.

How far away is Spring.................:*

Nivsy

[Helen49]

So is it a BA problem or an Airport Operator problem?

[spacedog]

BA have had 7 diverts so far. ATC will not allow any more BA aircraft into LHR as no available stands to park them on. BA unable to get their act together to depart aircraft. Not an airport operator problem, but an airline problem.

[DaveReidUK]

BA flights still on the ground waiting to depart 4 to 5 hours after STD. Other airlines operating out of Heathrow without he same problems BA are suffering with. On a normal day, a single BA aircraft may operate 4 rotations (8 flights) in and out of Heathrow.

When the LHR movement rate is drastically reduced, as it has been over the last few days, it's hardly surprising that BA is far more affected by the knock-on effect than non-based carriers.

[spacedog]

BA flights operating from terminals 1 and 3 seem to be operating similarl to the foreign operators out of the other terminals, slightly disrupted. not 4 or 5 hours delayed.It is primarily terminal 5 where the problem exists.

[Old Grouch]

How long are/were the inbound slot delays, airborne inbound delays and start up delays?

[StevieW]

Passengers spending 4-5 hours onboard aircraft before departing, not ideal when you've got a 10-11 hour flight ahead of you (which may or may not still go ahead). Is it a lack of de-icing equipment on BA's part?

[spacedog]

Just been on the BA website. tried to copy and paste the departures from 1500-2100 unable to do so. It clearly shows its a T5 problem flights from T1 and T3 are opertaing but disrupted. Also codeshare flight with partner airlines are also shown and the majority are operating. The BA275 Las Vegas is just xxxld unable to be de-iced STD 1540 pax on board. It is a disgrace BA should hang there heads in shame The managers in the airport centre /ops centre are not fit for purpose.

[Charley B]

BA 363 from Lyon was on the ground ages at Lyon,departed 19.00 uk time and promptly retd to Lyon after getting half way up France-poss another gate issue at LHR-a friend of ours is meant to be meeting these people when they eventually get to LHR-at the mo pax are still at Lyon(they were put of that flight as GVA to LCY was canx earlier today) Think they will bew glad to get home-hopefully it will take off again soon!

[west lakes]

Amsterdam Schipol now seeing major disruption due to snow with flights being cancelled owing to snow there!

[118.70]

Twitter has similar stories :

#Heathrow TOTAL meltdown. PATHETIC. Three hours on runway waiting for plane to be de-iced, then flight cancelled. @British_Airways
Now still waiting to get off plane after 3.5 hours, to join long queue in terminal to *perhaps* rebook a flight. Misery. #Heathrow


@British_Airways @BBCBreaking 5 1/2 hrs deicing at #Heathrow Just awful BA.

Well flown #yorkshireairlines tonight flew to heathrow with #ba but #snow prevented landing so now back at #leedsbradford!

[west lakes]

CDG & Orly cancelled 40% again tomorrow.

[Skipness One Echo]

The BA ground operation was never a well oiled machine to be fair. Is de-icing in house at T1 and T3? I think it will still be Menzies in T1 but I don't know about T3.

[vectisman]

I appreciate the situation is not Ideal but I do get the impression that certain organisations and individuals relish the idea of being able to attack the performance of BA. (At any time)
Heathrow is a very complex operation working at almost maximum capacity and in poor weather things are bound to be affected. Somehow I don't think airlines or the airport operator want there to be problems.
Airports all over Europe are now being affected by the weather. It happens!

V.

[Cloud1]

Its not the airlines or the airports in my eyes, its the country in general. We have no money, nothing to invest in proper equipment to handle this weather. Other countries manage because they have paid for it. Once the UK sorts themselves out and can invest in the airports it will hopefully be a different ball game in the future

[TURIN]

With respect, that is bull!
MAN has invested heavily and the equipment sits idle waiting for the heavy snow. LHR has also spent millions on new gear.

All of Europe is now suffering from weather related cancellations today and tomorrow.

It's not the people, the equipment or the organisation.

It's WEATHER!!!!:mad:

[Old Grouch]

I appreciate the situation is not Ideal

With the greatest respect, I would say that's putting it rather mildly. How many flights were CANX today? What was the average departure delay?

I, for one, am normally very satisfied with BA's performance, but it has to be said, Skipness One Echo is correct in saying that "The BA ground operation was never a well oiled machine to be fair". I am able to say that objectively after operating to/working at LHR (for quite a bit of time, alongside BA) for quite a few years.


Heathrow is a very complex operation working at almost maximum capacity

The issue of capacity is well known and appreciated by most who have any sort of understanding of airline/airport operations. It is understandable/acceptable that it would cause problems and challenges. What is not acceptable is the systematic and long-term FAILURE of the airport authority, ground handling companies and airlines to adapt to these problems and challenges by not investing in infrastructure, equipment and adequate personell establishment. It is simply naive to argue that this hasn't been the case. Had these failures not occured, the situation would not have deteriorated to such an extent. It is simply not acceptable to have a service failure of such magnitude as we have seen over the last few days at the UK's premier airport, an object of such high importance.


in poor weather things are bound to be affected


Well, things haven't just been 'affected', have they? I'd say that it's rather more than that.


MAN has invested heavily and the equipment sits idle waiting for the heavy
snow.


So is it better not to prepare and then be caught out, causing widespread disruption? If so, can it then be argued that any procedure (in general) that is in place to deal with a detrimental event, should it happen, is not worth having?

[FlyboyUK]

Have to say I was amazed with the LHR experience last night (sunday) in the snow. Landed from BKK on time with no holding & was in the car 45 mins later:ok:

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "When the LHR movement rate is drastically reduced, as it has been over the last few days, it's hardly surprising that BA is far more affected by the knock-on effect than non-based carriers."

Exactly, pretty obvious really. If dear old BD was still around, expect they would have been similarly affected, as they too, had a large operation in/out of LHR.


Quote: "Amsterdam Schipol now seeing major disruption due to snow with flights being cancelled owing to snow there!"


Quote: "All of Europe is now suffering from weather related cancellations today and tomorrow.

It's not the people, the equipment or the organisation.

It's WEATHER!!!!"

Indeed, even Moscow has been affected, and that is a places used to bad winter weather as an annual event and thus properly geared up for it!

If LHR had the same amount of bad weather equipment as Moscow airports, for example, it would only be used say 3-4 years out of 25. Many would complain that the money should be spent on other infrastructure, possibly with some justification.


Quote: "The issue of capacity is well known and appreciated by most who have any sort of understanding of airline/airport operations. It is understandable/acceptable that it would cause problems and challenges. What is not acceptable is the systematic and long-term FAILURE of the airport authority, ground handling companies and airlines to adapt to these problems and challenges by not investing in infrastructure, equipment and adequate personell establishment. It is simply naive to argue that this hasn't been the case. Had these failures not occured, the situation would not have deteriorated to such an extent. It is simply not acceptable to have a service failure of such magnitude as we have seen over the last few days at the UK's premier airport, an object of such high importance."

Maybe, but when all is said and done, the fault lies fairly and squarely with successive governments who have refused to allow expansion at LHR.

Clearly with 4 rwys the problem would not be so severe: the airport would not be routinely operating at 99% capacity. Four rwys would give the extra resilience required: snow clearance on one rwy, three operating instead of just one.

The need to have more time between each movement than normal would also be less probematic if LHR had the four rwys that it needs and wasn't routinely operating at full capacity.

Even with 10% canx, LHR is still operating at 89% capacity, that is 15% or so more than CDG and FRA under normal circumstances! So in these weather conditions, what do you expect?

[Old Grouch]

I agree that the issue of capacity is a major one, of course; and I agree with the general meaning of your post. Naturally, bad weather will cause disruption. What I am saying, having operated to/worked at LHR and another major European airport, is that this disruption could be lessened (not eradicated, of course) by adequate investment in infrastructure, equipment, procedures and manpower, an investment that we're only seeing emerge in the last few years.

[Dannyboy39]

Don't know much about BA's operation - would I be right in thinking that the disruption has been overhyped slightly? The airline are only cancelling flights which have several rotations a day. For example, the major hubs in Europe and North America.

And where available, merging flights onto larger aircraft? I very much doubt the load factor would be huge, especially on some routes. I noticed a flight to Frankfurt yesterday was being operated by a B767 - I very much doubt an aircraft of that size would be operating that route in normal circumstances rather than an A320S aircraft. Obviously BA have flexibility in their aircraft unlike other airlines, some aircraft may be utilised when they were originally planned for down days.

Passengers are also given the option to rebook, so that'll free up some space. A lot of extra passengers will be catered for. They've also got their Oneworld and other codeshare partners to "help them out".

Or am I talking rubbish?! :mad:

In terms of Heathrow Airport itself, I'd be using this opportunity to lobby the government that cancellations would be mitigated somewhat if extra airport capacity was available! I heard someone on The One Show this evening saying that Munich had 1m of snow alongside the runway and there were no cancellations - they also have same capacity for half the passengers!

[Old Grouch]

I noticed a flight to Frankfurt yesterday was being operated by a B767 - I
very much doubt an aircraft of that size would be operating that route in normal circumstances rather than an A320S aircraft.


Just to focus on this one particular point, I think (it could have changed by now) some FRA flights are scheduled with 767 equipment, the same goes for ARN and some other European routes. I'm not saying that load consolidation didn't occur; just that some of those flights were probably scheduled.

[DaveReidUK]

I very much doubt an aircraft of that size would be operating that route in normal circumstances rather than an A320S aircraftThe BA902/903 rotation is almost always operated by a B763.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "Don't know much about BA's operation - would I be right in thinking that the disruption has been overhyped slightly? The airline are only cancelling flights which have several rotations a day. For example, the major hubs in Europe and North America.

And where available, merging flights onto larger aircraft? I very much doubt the load factor would be huge, especially on some routes. I noticed a flight to Frankfurt yesterday was being operated by a B767 - I very much doubt an aircraft of that size would be operating that route in normal circumstances rather than an A320S aircraft. Obviously BA have flexibility in their aircraft unlike other airlines, some aircraft may be utilised when they were originally planned for down days.

Passengers are also given the option to rebook, so that'll free up some space. A lot of extra passengers will be catered for. They've also got their Oneworld and other codeshare partners to "help them out".

Or am I talking rubbish?!"

No.

It makes sense to cancel some of the flights on high frequency routes rather than the once/day flights. The former tend to be short haul, the latter long haul.

With high freqency flights, at least pax can reach their destinations sometime the same day, even if it means using large equipment as flights are "combined", using 767s rather than 319s/320s/321s.

It's less disruptive than cancelling lower frequency long haul flights, which could mean capacity/overcrowding problems the next day, and aircraft on the wrong continent, etc..

Obviously load factors, particularly premium business load factors, also play a part in determining which flights are cancelled.

Weather conditions at the destination airports have to be considered, of course, which in the case of short haul flights, are likely to be similar.

Quote: "In terms of Heathrow Airport itself, I'd be using this opportunity to lobby the government that cancellations would be mitigated somewhat if extra airport capacity was available! I heard someone on The One Show this evening saying that Munich had 1m of snow alongside the runway and there were no cancellations - they also have same capacity for half the passengers!"

Exactly.

[hampshireandy]

They could have used 757s to combine flights, if they still had them, so what happens when the 767s go?? Cant imagine BA using 777s on short haul flights to cope with snow cancellations.

[Skipness One Echo]

The B777s are substituted on domestics at LGW a few time each year.

[Dannyboy39]

Is there any reason why you couldn't operate a spare B744 or two on some routes? The vast majority of routes BA operate on have an available runway which can take the aircraft size.

Obviously you wouldn't see the benefits, such as efficiencies, but its all about getting passengers to their destination, surely?

I understand in extreme circumstances charter airlines rent them out?

[hampshireandy]

Isnt the problem with BA and Heathrow in general the fact they operate too many flights? BA fly to Berlin Tegal 6 times per day, they fly to Milan MXP/LIN 9 times per day. Im sure some of those flights are far from full. Surely to avoid snow cancellations and to free up slots at LHR they can operate less flights but with larger aircraft?? Maybe 321s instead of 319s on some flights?

[wiggy]

Is there any reason why you couldn't operate a spare B744 or two on some routes?

Which spare 744's? Most/many days there aren't any spare aircraft to back up the Longhaul operation, let alone sub onto a shorthaul route.

Maybe 321s instead of 319s on some flights?

Same response.

The company will sometimes try the larger aircraft tactic if it can, I've done shorthaul routes on both the 777 and the 744, but most days you simply don't have spare aircraft sitting around.

[Tableview]

BA fly to Berlin Tegal 6 times per day, they fly to Milan MXP/LIN 9 times per day. Im sure some of those flights are far from full. Surely to avoid snow cancellations and to free up slots at LHR they can operate less flights but with larger aircraft?? Maybe 321s instead of 319s on some flights?

Several possibly incorrect assumptions here. You are assuming that 'some of those flights are far from full', but you don't know that. Yield is more important than being full, and on routes like that they need higher frequency to attract higher paying passengers who need the flexibility of several flights a day.

It's just possible that BA's Revenue Management people have been through this exercise and got their sums right!

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "They could have used 757s to combine flights, if they still had them, so what happens when the 767s go?? Cant imagine BA using 777s on short haul flights to cope with snow cancellations."

Why not, provided the destination airport can handle these, why not use any available large aircraft to clear the backlog. As they say: "any port in a storm".

Quote: "Isnt the problem with BA and Heathrow in general the fact they operate too many flights? BA fly to Berlin Tegal 6 times per day, they fly to Milan MXP/LIN 9 times per day. Im sure some of those flights are far from full. Surely to avoid snow cancellations and to free up slots at LHR they can operate less flights but with larger aircraft?? Maybe 321s instead of 319s on some flights?"

Not neccessarily, business demands high frequencies for the flexibility that they need. Moreover, some frequencies may be timed to allow transfers to longhaul flights, the "hub" function.

No disrespect, but the chances are, as mentioned by Tableview, that BA know what they're doing!

[hampshireandy]

I understand your points about frequency, to an extent, but in the case of Linate, there is a BA flight leaving LHR at 07.40 and another at 08.40 both using 319s! And BA moan about delays and limited slots. How about one flight at either time using a 767 or 777? And i know youre going to say they dont have any spare aircraft, so go buy some more Mr Walsh, maybe flog some 319s to help pay for them.

[wiggy]

How about one flight at either time using a 767 or 777? And i know youre going to say they dont have any spare aircraft, so go buy some more Mr Walsh, maybe flog some 319s to help pay for them.

Can't comment on the 767 economics but are you seriously saying you'd routinely use a 777 on a LHR-LIN (thinks the likes of fuel burn/turanround time/route costs/landing fees and a thousand and one other reasons .....:ugh:)

[Skipness One Echo]

Nice for whom ..the airline? ..the travelling public? or some some retro anorak
There's usually 4-5 heavies at the West base parked up for hours at a time but I accept if you call one into service at short notice you then have to find a replacement for it's next mission and so on.
How about one flight at either time using a 767 or 777? And i know youre going to say they dont have any spare aircraft, so go buy some more Mr Walsh, maybe flog some 319s to help pay for them.
What would you say if I told you this had been done? BA cut frequency and used larger aircraft from LHR. Moved all B737s out to LGW and deemed that from hence forth nothing smaller than a B757 would be on LHR short haul. It didn't work well, they realised that to remain competitive they had to maintain frequency which means flying when the customer wants to and not when you do. The trains would all run on time were it not for those annoying passengers.

[DaveReidUK]

"Why don't they use larger aircraft, less often?" is engraved on the headstone of many an amateur airline strategist who hasn't a clue about how competition on a route operates.