Nigel
I trust you are referring to the ***** you then write, and not Ham Phisted?
Yet another example of playing the man and not addressing the question. It is not acceptable in civilised debate.
Would you care to quote an example of the ***** that I write? You will not find that personal attacks figure in any of my posts.
I think you're being very harsh on ham phisted
.
On the contrary, I could have followed NoD's example and been a lot harsher. NoD "suspects" they found something and that there would be all sorts of forensic investigation. (He admits he does not know) My own experience of witnessing incidents at LHR much more serious than this was that every effort was made to get the airport back in operation as soon as possible.
Nobody has attempted an authoritative answer to my original query. Did Heathrow commit so many appliances to this emergency that the required cover was reduced? If not, what was the reason for the delay?
Safety is crucial to us all. But causing massive disruption to passengers and airlines does not necessarily have to be a consequence and should worry any professional pilot.
What part did bureaucracy and fear of litigation play in the shambles?