T5 - Transport Select Committee Hearing 7-May-2008
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Waterworld
Age: 63
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all working perfectly now
So we're told all is hunky in T5 now, so how on earth can the delayed moves (at mamouth expense by WW's on admission yesterday) be justified? That's because the word on th street is that all is not well in the bowls of T5....... watch this space
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you describe BigBatMan is appalling.
The standard in aviation is that Accidents DO NOT happen.
Absolute safety is supposed to be planned into EVERY operation, not reliant on pilot's eyeball's looking out over some unplanned clutter.
These pilot's aren't driving Cessna's into some strange farmer's strip, but you make it sound like it, complete with description of the strange farmers.
The standard in aviation is that Accidents DO NOT happen.
Absolute safety is supposed to be planned into EVERY operation, not reliant on pilot's eyeball's looking out over some unplanned clutter.
These pilot's aren't driving Cessna's into some strange farmer's strip, but you make it sound like it, complete with description of the strange farmers.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Waterworld
Age: 63
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fingerprinting
No mention of this particular climb down on fingerprinting the passengers. The biggest collection of biometric data in world, as if you don't need another excuse to avoid T5
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly, I think not Yarpy, although I've only caught bits of the whole 150 or so minutes
I too had expected aborted fingerprinting to get a mention. The closest I saw them get to it was when WW was asked about the lack of staff familiarisation on the day and he said he thought it was a problem that the testing days were unfortunately (inevitably) conducted in an unfinished facility. At that point I thought he might go on to say that the late withdrawal of the fingerprinting system had meant that the procedural plans for checkin were torn up and had to be rewritten, but he didn't AFAIK.
I too had expected aborted fingerprinting to get a mention. The closest I saw them get to it was when WW was asked about the lack of staff familiarisation on the day and he said he thought it was a problem that the testing days were unfortunately (inevitably) conducted in an unfinished facility. At that point I thought he might go on to say that the late withdrawal of the fingerprinting system had meant that the procedural plans for checkin were torn up and had to be rewritten, but he didn't AFAIK.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SOUTHEAST ENGLAND (SOMEWHERE)
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are very right slip and turn the standard in aviation is accidents SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN, but i was talking about the reality in aviation which is THEY DO HAPPEN.
Accidents should never happen in our industry,
and i do NOT think that it should be up to the pilot's to look out over some unplanned clutter dumped on stand by people in a rush or with out care.
What i said is that the stands are full of dumped miss placed equipment, the dispatchers never turn up on time the reasons i cant confirm and when they do, they do not stay at the guildance emergency stop button until the aircraft is parked which is reconmended
and with these set of problems things go wrong, whether a accident of just 10minutes wasted and a few miss connected passengers
i said accidents and i agree that was wrong they are not accidents but incidents due to things not being done how they should.
Its not fair on the flight crew who have done their best to get a flight in on time to be stopped at the last 70m by a problem like this.
I dont recall saying anything about it being anything like being cessnas in fields.
Cheers Big
Accidents should never happen in our industry,
and i do NOT think that it should be up to the pilot's to look out over some unplanned clutter dumped on stand by people in a rush or with out care.
What i said is that the stands are full of dumped miss placed equipment, the dispatchers never turn up on time the reasons i cant confirm and when they do, they do not stay at the guildance emergency stop button until the aircraft is parked which is reconmended
and with these set of problems things go wrong, whether a accident of just 10minutes wasted and a few miss connected passengers
i said accidents and i agree that was wrong they are not accidents but incidents due to things not being done how they should.
Its not fair on the flight crew who have done their best to get a flight in on time to be stopped at the last 70m by a problem like this.
I dont recall saying anything about it being anything like being cessnas in fields.
Cheers Big
Last edited by BIGBATMAN; 8th May 2008 at 13:38.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stockport
Age: 84
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stand Guidance Lights - re post #11
The problem with stand guidance lights was still there last week. BA1337 from MAN arrived more or less on time, then had to wait for the stand to become vacant, then had to wait several minutes - long enough for the Captain to decide it was appropriate to tell us SLF what the delay was about - for someone to turn up and turn the lights on.
Are the lights so expensive to run that they have to be turned off when not immediately required, or do different aircraft types require different lights.
Are the lights so expensive to run that they have to be turned off when not immediately required, or do different aircraft types require different lights.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Waterworld
Age: 63
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Milkround
did Diaryground get all the cream? Looks like the BA IT dept were up late 'again'. I think you;ll find as the poster intimates that the BA IT department had a little more to do with this fiasco than is currently public knowledge at this time. Indeed check out the T5 thread elsewhere on PPRUNE with one BA IT expert lauding that 'all their parts were working perfectly'. Me and others think not MR IT>
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SOUTHEAST ENGLAND (SOMEWHERE)
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way the guildance works is as follows:-
1) Aircraft i/b is allocated a stand, this is done by BA in T5 and there are loads of reasons they allocate a certain stand for each aircraft, again they quite often change them or de allocate for a host of reasons.
2) The TRM is allocated to an aircraft the point in which this is done im not sure either first TRM available to the next aircraft or they get given a list of flights and they work through their list, im not sure on how this is done.
3) The TRM very rarely gets there on time, for whatever reason, short staff? late gate change? lack of transport?? time taken to sign of last flight?.
4) The TRM should inspect the stand and ensure the stand is empty for the aircraft. This isnt being done correctly due to the fact the TRM is late and in a rush, This process is important and i have had to stop aircraft from pulling on stand due to equipment that is parked wrong and could/will hit the aircraft and it wasnt picked up at time of pre guildance selection.
5) When the guildance is switched on it sweeps the stand for equipment on stand and then is ready to recieve the aircraft, this sweep only sweeps the area the aircraft will use. and not the complete stand. I guess it is programmed to do this because if it triggered at every piece of wrongly placed equipment within the stand it would never want to guilde the aircraft.
6) If when the guildance is doing this check and the aircraft is already on stand then the aircraft will trip the guildance because it will flag up as something on stand.
Pilots this is a message for you, if you arrive on stand and the guildance is a safedock system dont cross over the double white lines with the nose, this will normally cause a ID failure and the aids will not work waiting in a further wait for a marshaller which are probably racing around putting on other aircraft that are holding off. I find 1700-1900L worst breaks for TRMs i guess?
7) Also the guildance has to have the correct aircraft type. Quite often a TRM will put in the system B767-200 instead of B767-300 thinking it wont make a difference but it does the computer has a set of aircraft size parameters and a wrong type will fail the system.
8) The guildance is set to close down after every arrival this ensures. that
someone is present at the next arrival to ensure the stand is clear. if it is kept on an aircraft could push back and another come on to a stand and hit something.
This also needed because the aircraft type changes most times.
9) The guildance isnt expensive to power its just a safety reason that someone needs to be present everytime its used to reduce chances of incidents.
10) The problem has always been there and i guess will never go, Have a few more TRMs would help because they can get to stand earlier and ensure a safe arrival,
T1 was always very bad in the last couple of years and this has moved to T5. T4 was normally alot better for late TRMs.
I know i piped on abit about this but, Solving this problems helps with so many more. Late Arrival = late turn around = no stands = more delays. getting the door open quickly i would have thought will help a lot.
If your all still awake then well done.
Cheers big
1) Aircraft i/b is allocated a stand, this is done by BA in T5 and there are loads of reasons they allocate a certain stand for each aircraft, again they quite often change them or de allocate for a host of reasons.
2) The TRM is allocated to an aircraft the point in which this is done im not sure either first TRM available to the next aircraft or they get given a list of flights and they work through their list, im not sure on how this is done.
3) The TRM very rarely gets there on time, for whatever reason, short staff? late gate change? lack of transport?? time taken to sign of last flight?.
4) The TRM should inspect the stand and ensure the stand is empty for the aircraft. This isnt being done correctly due to the fact the TRM is late and in a rush, This process is important and i have had to stop aircraft from pulling on stand due to equipment that is parked wrong and could/will hit the aircraft and it wasnt picked up at time of pre guildance selection.
5) When the guildance is switched on it sweeps the stand for equipment on stand and then is ready to recieve the aircraft, this sweep only sweeps the area the aircraft will use. and not the complete stand. I guess it is programmed to do this because if it triggered at every piece of wrongly placed equipment within the stand it would never want to guilde the aircraft.
6) If when the guildance is doing this check and the aircraft is already on stand then the aircraft will trip the guildance because it will flag up as something on stand.
Pilots this is a message for you, if you arrive on stand and the guildance is a safedock system dont cross over the double white lines with the nose, this will normally cause a ID failure and the aids will not work waiting in a further wait for a marshaller which are probably racing around putting on other aircraft that are holding off. I find 1700-1900L worst breaks for TRMs i guess?
7) Also the guildance has to have the correct aircraft type. Quite often a TRM will put in the system B767-200 instead of B767-300 thinking it wont make a difference but it does the computer has a set of aircraft size parameters and a wrong type will fail the system.
8) The guildance is set to close down after every arrival this ensures. that
someone is present at the next arrival to ensure the stand is clear. if it is kept on an aircraft could push back and another come on to a stand and hit something.
This also needed because the aircraft type changes most times.
9) The guildance isnt expensive to power its just a safety reason that someone needs to be present everytime its used to reduce chances of incidents.
10) The problem has always been there and i guess will never go, Have a few more TRMs would help because they can get to stand earlier and ensure a safe arrival,
T1 was always very bad in the last couple of years and this has moved to T5. T4 was normally alot better for late TRMs.
I know i piped on abit about this but, Solving this problems helps with so many more. Late Arrival = late turn around = no stands = more delays. getting the door open quickly i would have thought will help a lot.
If your all still awake then well done.
Cheers big
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: I know EXACTLY where I am..
Age: 54
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This may seem a bit harsh...
.. but I wonder:
If a little feller has to be at the stand to operate the lightswitch and then to check and double check, why can't they just give said little feller a set of ping-pong paddles and get him to manouver the plane on-stand by the simple expedient of waving his arms about?
Might have saved a quid or two?
OORW
If a little feller has to be at the stand to operate the lightswitch and then to check and double check, why can't they just give said little feller a set of ping-pong paddles and get him to manouver the plane on-stand by the simple expedient of waving his arms about?
Might have saved a quid or two?
OORW
Controversial, moi?
BIGBATMAN
With respect your posting highlights the ridiculous lengths we now have to go to in order to 'prevent accidents'. It used to be simple if the guidance was off we could self park. Then 'elf an' safety became involved. The result being that a) we cannot park without numerous unnecessary people and/or checks and b) the incidence of aeroplanes hitting anything while parking has in reality probably not changed one iota.
If aircraft hit obstructions on stands the cost to the airline would be such that if it happened too often ramp discipline would soon be improved and the problem would be solved. Assuming we have a problem in the first place, which 'elf an' safety would have us believe we do and most right thinking sensible individuals would dispute.
With respect your posting highlights the ridiculous lengths we now have to go to in order to 'prevent accidents'. It used to be simple if the guidance was off we could self park. Then 'elf an' safety became involved. The result being that a) we cannot park without numerous unnecessary people and/or checks and b) the incidence of aeroplanes hitting anything while parking has in reality probably not changed one iota.
If aircraft hit obstructions on stands the cost to the airline would be such that if it happened too often ramp discipline would soon be improved and the problem would be solved. Assuming we have a problem in the first place, which 'elf an' safety would have us believe we do and most right thinking sensible individuals would dispute.
Paxing All Over The World
If the occupants of Waterside are reading this thread, BIGBATMAN has just given them priceless information for free.
However, I know from 27 years in commercial (and some local govt) life in Britain that, when you tell a 'manager' about a problem and some ways to resolve it, the reply is usually along the lines of:
You will know other standard replies which include the shocked look on their face that confirms that they did NOT know what the problem was but pretends that they do and fobs you off.
What Waterside has yet to realise is the colossal damage done to the company by T5 and having their own staff speaking to the media (such as here) to tell the truth. It means that BA have used up all the last reserves of patience and desire to help their employer. The company may be said to be emotionally bankrupt for their staff no longer feel anything towards the company other than the hope to find another good job before it gets bought out.
M.MOUSE is also correct. The decision to use automation to (supposedly) eliminate human failings has been a very successful ploy of technology salesman in the past 20 years. But it creates a vicious circle with the few remaining humans in the system. This problem has been discussed in the BA Mgmt thread.
However, I know from 27 years in commercial (and some local govt) life in Britain that, when you tell a 'manager' about a problem and some ways to resolve it, the reply is usually along the lines of:
- We know about this and are developing a solution
- We do not think that this is a problem as our statistics show that all key time demarcations are being met
You will know other standard replies which include the shocked look on their face that confirms that they did NOT know what the problem was but pretends that they do and fobs you off.
What Waterside has yet to realise is the colossal damage done to the company by T5 and having their own staff speaking to the media (such as here) to tell the truth. It means that BA have used up all the last reserves of patience and desire to help their employer. The company may be said to be emotionally bankrupt for their staff no longer feel anything towards the company other than the hope to find another good job before it gets bought out.
M.MOUSE is also correct. The decision to use automation to (supposedly) eliminate human failings has been a very successful ploy of technology salesman in the past 20 years. But it creates a vicious circle with the few remaining humans in the system. This problem has been discussed in the BA Mgmt thread.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Leicester
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent post BIGBATMAN 
So they (BAA/BA) have bought into the technology and are not allowing it to be used to its best advantage.
But the technology is (apparently) capable of automatically scanning for obstacles? And there are still 4 Mk1 eyeballs in the cockpit.
The Safegate can be remotely programmed, so why not let the person allocating a/c to stand pre-program it, thereby removing the need for the TRM to manually enter the data?
So they (BAA/BA) have bought into the technology and are not allowing it to be used to its best advantage.
The TRM should inspect the stand and ensure the stand is empty for the aircraft.
Quite often a TRM will put in the system B767-200 instead of B767-300 thinking it wont make a difference but it does the computer has a set of aircraft size parameters and a wrong type will fail the system.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW BBM, what technology are they using to 'sweep' the stands for obstructions? I used to worry about on/off switches on Weather Radar - are your reproductive and other bits being swept now all day everyday by something that equally well 'sees' into every corner or have they fitted every movable-apron-nonorganic with some kind of passive transponder?