Originally Posted by
SecondDog
This just shows how the general view of it being a shambles is based on no knowledge of what was planned or what the scale of the let-down was.
That was the reason I suggested above that people are taking the problem out of context.
Trust me, the airport had scheduled enough lanes from early enough to manage the high volume of Sat morning departures. That these lanes were not available was the problem (and as has been made pretty clear already, this was from a contractor not being able to staff adequately to meet the requirement)
I realise the plain and simple nature of the problem is not quite juicy enough for some of you but there you have it.
Poorly worded on my part. My lanes comment was taken out of context and I was not referring to the airport not allowing enough lands to open but more general view had prehaps 4 been opened all along they would of not needed to eventually staff 6.
While the major problem lies with the contractor, the airport have a role to play as they were the ones who set the contract (Terms etc) and the ones who will get the brunt of the public's anger, airline pressue and reputation damage.