Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Estonia puts the UK back on to the naughty list from tomorrow, with quarantine required for those arriving from the UK. Latvia and Lithuania did the same thing over the last week
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 23rd Aug 2020 at 09:58.
June passenger figures per CAA:
Heathrow 350,425 down 99%
Luton 63,457 down 96%
Stansted 59,192 down 98%
Aberdeen 42,525 down 84%
Manchester 39,924 down 99%
Gatwick 28,910 down 99%
Edinburgh 19,050 down 99%
Belfast Int. 14,896 down 98%
Birmingham 13,594 down 99%
Glasgow 11,476 down 99%
Blackpool 1,463 up 1% (the only increase)
Heathrow 350,425 down 99%
Luton 63,457 down 96%
Stansted 59,192 down 98%
Aberdeen 42,525 down 84%
Manchester 39,924 down 99%
Gatwick 28,910 down 99%
Edinburgh 19,050 down 99%
Belfast Int. 14,896 down 98%
Birmingham 13,594 down 99%
Glasgow 11,476 down 99%
Blackpool 1,463 up 1% (the only increase)
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether we think another Government would have saved us X number of deaths or done Y better or faster is quite immaterial, I’d prefer for those on here supporting or defending the Government explaining to me how ‘awarding’ millions and millions of £ worth of untendered contracts to friends and acquaintances is appropriate behaviour? Especially as a number of said contracts relate to PPE, track and trace etc which have been unfit to use or which have failed, and for which the recipients of such awards have no or little experience in the relevant fields.
Thread Starter
Thousands dead, Economy destroyed, zero trust in public services and a Govt full of propoganda. Hell if a fiction writer wrote that a UK Govt could do this and asked man in the street they would be called mad.
You will find that many counties had and still do have major problems with nursing homes. It was not just an English problem like you are implying. Closer to home Scotland had major problems.
As you say Joe Public is indeed the cause of the pandemic. This government was slow to react but there would have been no appetite for a New Zealand approach which contained the virus by shutting itself off from the rest of the world.
As Hitchens in the Mail asks "How many people of the millions forced to destroy holidays and return home have been tested positive for Covid-19"...................... don't expect an answer from Govt but still it was happy to get revenge on anybody who ignored them.
Croatian Govt had a ready response to Slovenia and Austria who threatened to shut borders it seems, "screw what is left of our tourist industry and we will auto quanantine anybody going on wintersports in Slovenia and Austria", seems to have worked as well.
UK Govt still has no policy just reaction after reaction and anybody questions it gets labelled with "willing to see people die" while those who did it get off in the media.
Thread Starter
Whether we think another Government would have saved us X number of deaths or done Y better or faster is quite immaterial, I’d prefer for those on here supporting or defending the Government explaining to me how ‘awarding’ millions and millions of £ worth of untendered contracts to friends and acquaintances is appropriate behaviour? Especially as a number of said contracts relate to PPE, track and trace etc which have been unfit to use or which have failed, and for which the recipients of such awards have no or little experience in the relevant fields.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was merely stating the actual position. I was not being in any way polemical and am not in general a supporter of the SNP. Of course our general health is poorer, but most independent observers outside the UK have said that Scotland has managed the pandemic better than Westminster.
So now we're reduced to partisan party-political bickering. How depressing.
To my knowledge, none of the main party leaders at the last General Election were medical doctors (Johnson / Corbyn / Swinson / Sturgeon). None had any obvious experience in handling a pandemic.
In the early days, we relied simply on the best medical advice available at the time - from the familiar academic figures who appeared in the government's TV briefings which ran for several weeks. My understanding is that this same team of experts would have been the advisers to UK politicians comprising whichever government was in office, so presumably the exact same advice would have been presented to whichever politicians were in charge. And which PM with a non-medical background would have been fool enough to second-guess their recommendations? It is easy to forget that all the main political parties were fully onboard with the measures introduced in those crucial first three months (or longer) of the crisis. They would most certainly have made the same big calls on the medical response. Economic measures may well have differed of course - that is open for debate. But the response to containing the virus itself enjoyed general cross-party political support.
It is easy to criticise issues sourcing PPE, ventilators, surgical gowns etc at short notice. But these were items suddenly in unprecedented demand on a global scale with some countries adopting unscrupulous measures to obtain supplies. Such as diverting cargos intended for other countries and halting exports overnight. Anger towards ministers charged with addressing these shortages were not a UK problem in isolation: criticism over this was the norm in many countries. Governments generally are on a hiding-to-nothing in a crisis of this sort. Mistakes are seized upon by bitter critics; things done well overlooked. Here in the UK, the country didn't run out of ventilators (despite media insistence that this was likely). The hospitals DID cope (despite media hysteria that they would be overwhelmed). The government did deliver the Nightingale Hospitals within a remarkably brief timeline - an amazing feat. It is simply fortunate that the Nightingales were never required on the scale initially envisaged ... or maybe ministers actually deserve some credit for that outcome?
Yes, there were some PPE supply issues, but don't forget that vast quantities of the items required were successfully sourced. The shortfall was at the margins. And much of the hysteria surrounding PPE shortages was exacerbated by a damning BBC Panorama documentary which has since been the subject of an investigation. It was allegedly infiltrated by a hard-left activist group who played a role in putting forward selected staff for interview. According to reports, "all five of the doctors and nurses Panorama chose to interview were longstanding Labour Party activists or supporters." This information "was not shared with viewers". You can google lots more info on this topic and the left-wing backgrounds of the NHS staff selected for interview on that programme if you wish. But when laying into one party in particular over PPE supply constraints, we must check that we are using real facts - not agenda-driven propaganda - as our frame of reference.
Note that this post is a reminder to seek out the facts and maintain balance. It is not an endorsement of one political party over another, though I do find it distasteful that some seize upon the C-19 crisis to push for party-political advantage.
FWIW, my own views on the UK government performance is mixed. I'd suggest that Health Secretary Matt Hancock has performed generally as well as anybody could have in the situation he faced. In contrast, Rishi Sunak has completely abandoned the airline industry from the start ... I suspect he prioritises personal eco-extremist sympathies over helping the aviation sector. No doubt he will one day pitch for the leadership based upon his impeccable green credentials. Rest assured, I'll be lobbying for the guy to be cast onto the backbenches for the remainder of his career. He has been a disaster.
The reality is that some ministers have done well, some badly. Across all political parties. And in governments globally. In the UK, Boris Johnson's style is to act as a figurehead who delegates the real work at the 'coalface'. This is why we have seen some ministers and their departments perform exceptionally well whilst others have floundered. Those who have done well / badly are of the same party allegiance. Perhaps Johnson could assume a more proactive role in cases where departments appear to be working at odds with each other: Priti Patel at the Home Office urging mindless blanket quarantine; Grant Shapps at Transport lobbying for sensibly-applied safe travel corridors. It is pretty clear it wasn't him applying these mad new quarantine directives at afew hours notice.
We in the aviation industry need to pull together in pursuit of a balanced science-led approach to overcoming C-19 medically, whilst lobbying for robust financial support for the most heavily-impacted sectors to see them through the crisis. We users of this site all recognise the extent of aviation industry jobs on the line resulting from the relative absence of government support during this crisis. We must not allow a free pass to individual ministers with secret admiration for the extremist 'Extinction Rebellion' agenda to devastate this industry in the name of battling against (essential-to-life) Carbon.
To my knowledge, none of the main party leaders at the last General Election were medical doctors (Johnson / Corbyn / Swinson / Sturgeon). None had any obvious experience in handling a pandemic.
In the early days, we relied simply on the best medical advice available at the time - from the familiar academic figures who appeared in the government's TV briefings which ran for several weeks. My understanding is that this same team of experts would have been the advisers to UK politicians comprising whichever government was in office, so presumably the exact same advice would have been presented to whichever politicians were in charge. And which PM with a non-medical background would have been fool enough to second-guess their recommendations? It is easy to forget that all the main political parties were fully onboard with the measures introduced in those crucial first three months (or longer) of the crisis. They would most certainly have made the same big calls on the medical response. Economic measures may well have differed of course - that is open for debate. But the response to containing the virus itself enjoyed general cross-party political support.
It is easy to criticise issues sourcing PPE, ventilators, surgical gowns etc at short notice. But these were items suddenly in unprecedented demand on a global scale with some countries adopting unscrupulous measures to obtain supplies. Such as diverting cargos intended for other countries and halting exports overnight. Anger towards ministers charged with addressing these shortages were not a UK problem in isolation: criticism over this was the norm in many countries. Governments generally are on a hiding-to-nothing in a crisis of this sort. Mistakes are seized upon by bitter critics; things done well overlooked. Here in the UK, the country didn't run out of ventilators (despite media insistence that this was likely). The hospitals DID cope (despite media hysteria that they would be overwhelmed). The government did deliver the Nightingale Hospitals within a remarkably brief timeline - an amazing feat. It is simply fortunate that the Nightingales were never required on the scale initially envisaged ... or maybe ministers actually deserve some credit for that outcome?
Yes, there were some PPE supply issues, but don't forget that vast quantities of the items required were successfully sourced. The shortfall was at the margins. And much of the hysteria surrounding PPE shortages was exacerbated by a damning BBC Panorama documentary which has since been the subject of an investigation. It was allegedly infiltrated by a hard-left activist group who played a role in putting forward selected staff for interview. According to reports, "all five of the doctors and nurses Panorama chose to interview were longstanding Labour Party activists or supporters." This information "was not shared with viewers". You can google lots more info on this topic and the left-wing backgrounds of the NHS staff selected for interview on that programme if you wish. But when laying into one party in particular over PPE supply constraints, we must check that we are using real facts - not agenda-driven propaganda - as our frame of reference.
Note that this post is a reminder to seek out the facts and maintain balance. It is not an endorsement of one political party over another, though I do find it distasteful that some seize upon the C-19 crisis to push for party-political advantage.
FWIW, my own views on the UK government performance is mixed. I'd suggest that Health Secretary Matt Hancock has performed generally as well as anybody could have in the situation he faced. In contrast, Rishi Sunak has completely abandoned the airline industry from the start ... I suspect he prioritises personal eco-extremist sympathies over helping the aviation sector. No doubt he will one day pitch for the leadership based upon his impeccable green credentials. Rest assured, I'll be lobbying for the guy to be cast onto the backbenches for the remainder of his career. He has been a disaster.
The reality is that some ministers have done well, some badly. Across all political parties. And in governments globally. In the UK, Boris Johnson's style is to act as a figurehead who delegates the real work at the 'coalface'. This is why we have seen some ministers and their departments perform exceptionally well whilst others have floundered. Those who have done well / badly are of the same party allegiance. Perhaps Johnson could assume a more proactive role in cases where departments appear to be working at odds with each other: Priti Patel at the Home Office urging mindless blanket quarantine; Grant Shapps at Transport lobbying for sensibly-applied safe travel corridors. It is pretty clear it wasn't him applying these mad new quarantine directives at afew hours notice.
We in the aviation industry need to pull together in pursuit of a balanced science-led approach to overcoming C-19 medically, whilst lobbying for robust financial support for the most heavily-impacted sectors to see them through the crisis. We users of this site all recognise the extent of aviation industry jobs on the line resulting from the relative absence of government support during this crisis. We must not allow a free pass to individual ministers with secret admiration for the extremist 'Extinction Rebellion' agenda to devastate this industry in the name of battling against (essential-to-life) Carbon.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well written and balanced critique. Thanks.
Just heard on Sky News that a viable and working vaccine could be as late as winter 2021 (so thats end of 2021 leading into 2022). Another summer and 2 winters of Covid-19? Without special provisions, I struggle to see how even the major legacy carriers can survive this.
Just heard on Sky News that a viable and working vaccine could be as late as winter 2021 (so thats end of 2021 leading into 2022). Another summer and 2 winters of Covid-19? Without special provisions, I struggle to see how even the major legacy carriers can survive this.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or maybe, the virus will have weakened by then to the point that a vaccine is simply not needed. Some would say the the incresing infection rate, but curiously, not matched by an increasing mortality rate or even in increase in hospital admissions would suggest we're maybe near that point now !
A well-balanced contribution from Ozzy, above.
I have stood (unsuccessfully) at two general elections. If my party had won, or entered coalition, it is possible I may have found myself faced with some of these decisions. I am not a doctor, or epidemiologist, or mathematician. I would have had to consider the advice I was given, questioned it as effectively as possible, but then put my neck on the line, making decisions that would certainly mean life or death for lots of people.
I would have known that the scientists were themselves working at the cutting edge of knowledge, as this virus is new. Much of the information they gave me would have been contentious. I would have been presented with passionately-argued alternatives, often completely contradictory.
For this reason, I am more sympathetic with the politicians than most. All the armchair critics have the right to express their opinion, but it is the politicians who make these choices, and all we can hope is that they do so with the best of intentions.
I have stood (unsuccessfully) at two general elections. If my party had won, or entered coalition, it is possible I may have found myself faced with some of these decisions. I am not a doctor, or epidemiologist, or mathematician. I would have had to consider the advice I was given, questioned it as effectively as possible, but then put my neck on the line, making decisions that would certainly mean life or death for lots of people.
I would have known that the scientists were themselves working at the cutting edge of knowledge, as this virus is new. Much of the information they gave me would have been contentious. I would have been presented with passionately-argued alternatives, often completely contradictory.
For this reason, I am more sympathetic with the politicians than most. All the armchair critics have the right to express their opinion, but it is the politicians who make these choices, and all we can hope is that they do so with the best of intentions.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a sad fact that this thread has become more of an outlet for Tory bashing by people that just want to make political points no doubt as they like an audience and it makes them feel better.
There are not many countries where the population of that country think their government has done a good job. I follow Spain in detail from Spanish media reports and from people living in that country. Spain had one of the world’s toughest lockdowns yet after just a couple of months of it ending the virus is out of control again and according to the press and the locals it is all the governments fault, as they opened up the economy and tourist industry too quickly. The fact that their own behaviour has paid a major part in the spread again has been lost on them.
The UK government was criticised here regarding the quarantine requirements for Spain introduced on July 28th and particularly the Islands as it was not selective but national. Other countries soon followed including Germany in local bans but I note that Germany is now blaming a rise in numbers there from returning tourists so has introduced quarantine requirements from the Mediterranean Islands.
This is worth a read for those that said the government acted too quickly.
https://www.dw.com/en/german-tourist...ays/a-54580330
There are not many countries where the population of that country think their government has done a good job. I follow Spain in detail from Spanish media reports and from people living in that country. Spain had one of the world’s toughest lockdowns yet after just a couple of months of it ending the virus is out of control again and according to the press and the locals it is all the governments fault, as they opened up the economy and tourist industry too quickly. The fact that their own behaviour has paid a major part in the spread again has been lost on them.
The UK government was criticised here regarding the quarantine requirements for Spain introduced on July 28th and particularly the Islands as it was not selective but national. Other countries soon followed including Germany in local bans but I note that Germany is now blaming a rise in numbers there from returning tourists so has introduced quarantine requirements from the Mediterranean Islands.
This is worth a read for those that said the government acted too quickly.
Some 30,000 German holidaymakers currently on the Spanish Balearic Islands face quarantine orders on their return. Mallorca, Menorca, and Ibiza have been added to Germany's list of coronavirus risk zones.
Last edited by LTNman; 24th Aug 2020 at 05:38.
The title of this thread is Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel - the performance or otherwise of the Govt in tackling the virus is a subject of many threads in Jet Blast.
In point of fact, in putting The Balearics on the risk list, Germans returning are required to take a Covid test, and those returning who are positive will have to quarantine until they receive a negative test to the best of my knowledge (the DW piece infers this too). Nothing wrong with that; in point of fact it's what the UK should have been / should be doing for months now, but isn't. The Italians are doing similar.
Of course the whole airport testing thing falls flat on it's face when positive results aren't being given to people, as has been the case in Bavaria.
Of course the whole airport testing thing falls flat on it's face when positive results aren't being given to people, as has been the case in Bavaria.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We in the aviation industry need to pull together in pursuit of a balanced science-led approach to overcoming C-19 medically, whilst lobbying for robust financial support for the most heavily-impacted sectors to see them through the crisis. We users of this site all recognise the extent of aviation industry jobs on the line resulting from the relative absence of government support during this crisis.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with this is the Coronavirus Impact on Air Travel IS political. From how it’s managed on a domestic level to how it’s administered cross-borders. Whether one voted blue, red, yellow, green or purple things have happened that objectively cannot be defended without knowingly being complicit and in terms of support for aviation specifically the current U.K. Government has a lot of questions to answer.
It's unlikely business travel will ever be the same; environmental pressures aren't going to go away, neither are pressures to cut costs, in fact the latter will likely be the greater driver of the two, and businesses have discovered through home working that many meetings can be done without physical face to face contact. Of course there will still be the need for business travel, but so many meetings can be adequately completed online through Teams, Zoom etc. When I say adequately, I mean that in an ideal world there is no substitute for face to face, and I dislike Teams meetings intensely, but you can't take away from the fact that each one is achieved at lower financial cost, lower cost in time, and low environmental cost.