BA Lisbon - Incompetence that is almost funny

[BBDO]

So I was flying back from Lisbon to London on BA on Thursday evening. The flight was delayed so we were called to the gate about 2 hours late. There was quite a long queue so I joined the end, had my boarding pass run through the machine and walked downstairs to get on the last bus to the aircraft with about 20 or so other passengers. We then waited and waited (assuming that there was another passenger(s) still to come) when all of a sudden one of my fellow passengers noticed that our aircraft over the other side of the airfield was pushing back. We then watched in disbelief as it taxied out and took off. We couldn't get back into the terminal and our bus driver was trying in vain to get someone on the radio. So another night in Lisbon as it was the last flight and eventually arrived back in London about 15 hours late.
How on earth did this happen? Surely the pilot would not be happy to learn that a) he was missing 20 passengers and b) that some of them had checked in luggage.

Anyone ever come across this before?

[Hand Solo]

a) I doubt it, but assuming they knew then if it's a choice of leaving 20 passengers or missing the slot and having to cancel the flight you have to go with the lesser of the two evils.

b) Just 'cos it's checked in doesn't mean its on the aircraft. Doesn't mean there were any bags on the aircraft. Sometimes it happens during disruption. If unaccompanied bags did travel then thats a very serious failure of a number of security systems and should be reported to BA.

[Final 3 Greens]

BBDO

Were you made aware of the denied boarding compensation under the new EU rules?

If your flight was =<1500kms, then you are due 250 euros (as well as hotac and food), if >1500kms then you are in for 400 euros. I suspect that it will be the latter, but do not have route distances to hand.

Not that that makes a wasted night in a hotel any more enjoyable.

[BBDO]

Thanks for the info. According to the BA website the journey is 986 miles which according to Google is 1586 kilometres. But as you say, I probably would have taken a night at home with the family over the cash!

I feel fairly certain that the onboard crew weren't aware they were missing passengers. As far as they were concerned everyone had got to the gate (which I suppose was true). I haven't seen onboard crew doing headcounts recently so I guess the assumption is that if the boarding card has been read by the machine then they are on the aircraft. Sadly not true in my case.

[tom de luxe]

No headcount? C'mon, give me a break. Also, whatever happened to the "thumbs-up" from the gate sup to cabin crew once all PAX had boarded the plane?

[qwertyuiop]

Tom,

Rarely do crews do a head count. They are told "all on board" by the agent and go. I bet this was a mistake.

I have been called back to stand in the past to collect pax that were suppose to be on board.

[tom de luxe]

I know airports where most cabin crew do make the headcount (nowhere near home of course), and I also know airlines where cabin crew will always make the headcount, but then their planes are yellow and blue inside and their pax may sit where they choose to ;)

Back to the story: If cabin crew got the "thumbs up" ("all on board") from the ground agent than fine. But apparently at LIS the ground agent does not physically follow the last passenger to the aircraft (i.e. last person down the jetbridge / last person stepping off the last bus). This really helps if you do not want to leave peple behind.

[Avman]

Well, I seriously believe that leaving 20 or so pax behind constitutes gross negligence. Contributing to this is the alleged fact that head counts are no longer made. BBDO, do us all a favour and get yourself a good lawyer and sue BA. It's got to be a winner. And then there's the security aspect regarding the bags. I very much expect that they were on board. What a shambles - and this was BA!

[MarkD]

If unboarded pax had luggage aboard then it will be an interview without tea and biscuits for someone surely!

We were held at YOW 10 days ago to chuck off the bags of an unboarded pax. 20 pax bag sets is pretty serious, especially since the bags aren't loaded in the order you board the bus so the chances of all 20 pax bags not being aboard is slight.

There is also the issue of weight calculations - 20 pax and hand luggage would be in the two tonne range!

[PAXboy]

BBDO As a possible clue as to whether your bags went on the expected flight: When you arrived in the UK the next day, were your bags on the carousel as normal - or where they waiting for you on a couple of barrows? Maybe some other indication that you could note for your letter, did you keep the bag tags? They would have dates on them.

[BBDO]

I was one of the lucky ones who was flying hand baggage only so at least I didn't have the trauma of having to track my luggage down.

[apaddyinuk]

WOW....as an employee of BA all I can say is OOPS!!!!
Talk about a gross error!
Perhaps the people you should be pointing the finger at however is the handling agent in Lisbon. I can assure you that if the crew where aware that the pax were still standing on a bus that the plane would have gone nowhere! Id be surprised if BA were not already screaming down the phone to lisbon over this!!!

[Final 3 Greens]

Perhaps the people you should be pointing the finger at however is the handling agent in Lisbon Nonsense - the prime contractor (BA) is ultimately responsible.

[Farmer 1]

Quote:

Perhaps the people you should be pointing the finger at however is the handling agent in Lisbon

Nonsense - it's the bloke - sorry, person - sitting up front, left hand side, who's ultimately responsible.

[Avman]

Whereas the actions of the handling agent may have contributed, the CC should have known the number of pax expected and should have confirmed this with a simple head count. Period. If head counts are no longer BA policy (is that really true though?), I guess that in light of this little fiasco they will have to review that policy.

[sixmilehighclub]

I can only imagine that the gate staff advised the dispatcher on the plane that all passengers had been processed through boarding. The dispatcher assumes this meant all were on board and advised the crew of this, so doors were closed. The breakdown in communication must have happened when you all boarded the bus. Headcounts only take place if there is a discrepancy between number checked in to number gone through the boarding gate, so the groundstaff would have had matching figures.

Nonsense - it's the bloke - sorry, person - sitting up front, left hand side, who's ultimately responsible.

Except the Captain is usually busy at this stage and relies on the dispatcher to advise boarding is completed, then the crew to advise doors are closing . What do you really expect the captain to do a headcount themselves???

If head counts are no longer BA policy (is that really true though?),

Yes it is, you try headcounting 300+ passengers on larger aircraft playing musical chairs and darting in and out of toilets!

[Farmer 1]

Sixmilehighclub.

No, I do not expect the captain to do the headcount himself. He delegates the task to someone else, but he cannot delegate the responsibility. If he took off unaware of the fact that a busload of passengers had been left behind, some with checked-in baggage on the aircraft, I imagine soon after his arrival he would be severely spoken at.

I've seen headcounts done on large aircraft, with Swiss and Air France flying from Third World countries - musical chairs, toilets and all. It can take the crew several trips up and down the cabin before they are satisfied the numbers are correct. Frustrating it is, but full marks to them.

[apaddyinuk]

Iv now worked for 6 major carriers and currently with BA and all I can say is I have never been asked to do a headcount and this is 10 years in the industry!!!! It just doesnt happen anymore! Perhaps it should but it doesnt and I dont think the airlines are to blame for this one!

[Final 3 Greens]

apaddyintheuk

I dont think the airlines are to blame for this one! The handling agent is a contractor for the airline and the airline assigns responsibility to the agent for the services that they provide.

However, the airline cannot assign their accountability under the contract with their passenger, so any screw ups by the agent are ultimately screw ups by the airline.

Of course, the airline can seek redress for any failure to execute the contract to agreed service levels.

Maybe what you really meant is that the cabin crew are not accountable? I would have far more sympathy for that point of view.

[redfred]

unless its changed from when i came back from LIS at euro2004 its BA staff who are at the gate not handling agents

[WHBM]

Iv now worked for 6 major carriers and currently with BA and all I can say is I have never been asked to do a headcount and this is 10 years in the industry!!!! It just doesnt happen anymore!
There are plenty of carriers around who do a headcount on every flight. Both Easy and Ryanair seem to always do them. The cabin crew are issued with special little handclickers to do the count.

[bealine]

As a BA ground employee, the only time we have ever head-counted is when we suspect we may have a discrepancy!

Unfortunately, with coaching operations, the margin for error does exist and, at Gatwick, we are careful to always adivise the dispatcher at the aircraft side exactly how many coaches we sent out!

However, a couple of years ago, we did happen to "forget" a wheelchair passenger, much to our disgust, because the dispatcher was only told how many coaches to expect - we forgot to mention the mini-bus! However, as said wheelchair passenger had no checked baggage, there was no security issue.

In your situation, I would be very surprised if the bags had actually been loaded on to the aircraft as I can say that the aeroplane would definitely have been returned from airborne had that been the case!

One thing you can rest asured about is that BA staff will always follow procedures to the letter when something goes wrong!

[CargoOne]

Recently KLM staff at AMS being providing an assistance to old lady on a wheelchair delivered her to the wrong gate for a boarding to the aircraft flying to completly different destination! Mistake was discovered by handling agent at this destination and this was a fun :E

[pulse1]

I would be very surprised if the bags had actually been loaded on to the aircraft

Bealine,

Excuse my ignorance but how would they have known who was actually on the coach? Surely it would have taken longer to extract the baggage than to ferry out the last passengers?

[Final 3 Greens]

That raises an interesting point. Unless, by coincidence, all the remaining pax were hand baggage only, like BBDO, then it is quite likely that the aircraft departed with luggage from pax who were not aboard. And as the previous post suggests, would FD or CC know??

On the other hand, if the pax were on the coach and thus, logically speaking, "boarded" does this raise an issue in reality? Normally, there is only a problem when the pax no shows at the gate, thus triggering the concern.

Also, I wonder if anyone informed the captain? If so, could he (or the company at base) decide that there was no security risk, since the pax were only prevented from boarding by the "miscommunication"

The cost of an airborne return would be horrific, under the circumstances, I wonder if a dispensation is possible - any comments/thoughts Bealine?

[Bumz_Rush]

The question still remains WHY and HOW did the aircraft depart without passengers who had been thru the boarding procedure, the boarding cards read by the gate staff, and gate computer.

Also the loaded bags, that were on aircraft without their owners.

I assume that the LMC was completed by the flight deck crew, so they must have been aware of the incorrect load and balance.

Did any of the loaded passengers notice that friends or family were no on aircraft.

Answers please.....Bumz

[Final 3 Greens]

I assume that the LMC was completed by the flight deck crew, so they must have been aware of the incorrect load and balance. How, without a headcount?

I would think that the effect of 20 pax missing (1500kg at nominal pax weight) on trim/performance would have been slight, although I am not an airline pilot, so maybe a 320 driver could either confirm or correct this thinking.

As to how and why, I could quite easily imagine a miscommuniction, crew think all on board, bus told to hold short of a taxi way for traffic, conversation with ATC on a different frequency or in Portuguese or even bus holds short due to a non radio apron procedure - aircraft shuts doors is cleared to pushbakc, voila. They were 2 hours late and would be keen to go.... not excusing the end result, but I could visualise it happening.

[Avman]

Sixmilehighclub,

Both carriers I regularly fly with do headcounts. As for large airliners with fairly full loads, the crew generally count the empty seats. Obviously, head counts should be made when all pax are seated. I have even heard the announcement (I think it was in the USA), "please take your seats as the cabin crew will now be making a head count". I appreciate that you may be in the business (so am I), but don't assume that all airlines follow the same procedures as yours.

[Bumz_Rush]

In this situation the actual weight is not critical, the load sheet is a legal document, and when signed and acepted by the captain, becomes the basis for the aircrafts performance.

What would be the situation if the reversed, and the aircraft was 1500kgs over weight...not a lot for an airliner but believe me the captain would ensure that he complied with the company and regulatory requirements.

I was almost bumped when a Monarch 757 was 200kgs over weight.....It happens....especially on the golf vacation runs....

The dispatcher, in the case of a remote parked aircraft would normally have radio contact with the aircraft and be given the load.....The CC might just have noticed the big gap in the seating plan, remember they do have a pax list( for the expected payload.)

Bumz

[Final 3 Greens]

The CC might just have noticed the big gap in the seating plan Time pressure is a mind killer, focus on task at hand, not bigger picture.

In this situation the actual weight is not critical, the load sheet is a legal document, and when signed and acepted by the captain, becomes the basis for the aircrafts performance. Agreed, but the capt relies on No1 CC to advise boarding complete and cabin secure - doesn't actually take a butchers. How would s/he know the loadsheet was incorrect? Perhaps in your environemnt, it's easier to see the pcture, as you don't have 150 odd seats in the back?

Not trying to excuse the airline, just trying to understand what might have happened.

[Wannabe Flyboy]

There could also be an issue in the event of an emergancy.

If the passenger manifest has, say, 150 passengers on it and only 130 are on board then rescue crews may be looking for people who aren't there, endangering themselves.

[Farmer 1]

I can imagine a scenario: Top of climb, and all's well with the world, despite the late departure. Time to relax and take stock, and continue the conversation of a few minutes ago.

CA approaches the flight deck: "Excuse me, Captain, but we appear to be missing some passengers."

Captain: "What! How many?"

CA: "Well, about a busload, actually."

Captain: "What! Are you sure?"

CA: "I think so. It depends on the size of the bus, of course. Still, it could have been worse - we've got their bags on board."


No, I don't think it's funny, and no, I'm not laughing, or gloating. I work on rather different aircraft, but even so, there but for the Grace of God etc. The more you think about it, the bigger you realise the can of worms is, as Flyboy's post reminds us. Can you begin to imagine the size of the pit in the Captain's stomach when he realised?

[bealine]

Bealine,

Excuse my ignorance but how would they have known who was actually on the coach? Surely it would have taken longer to extract the baggage than to ferry out the last passengers?

If they use the same passenger reconciling system as the rest of BA, and the exact number of pax on the coach was known, then the computer would record the order in which pax were reconciled.

The time spent offloading bags would be enormous - providing the bags were loaded on to the aeroplane in the first place!

If the facts provided by the OP are 100% accurate, then there would be quite a few heads for the block - possibly even the captain's - if the aircraft was allowed to continue its journey with bags on board!

[Final 3 Greens]

Bealine

You know the rules at BA backwards and I'm not querying your view, but in practical terms where is the security problem?

The reconciliation of pax/bags dates back to Lockerbie, IIRC and for sound reasons - the terrorists managed to get a bag onto a flight without accompanying it.

In Lisbon, it sounds as if the circumstances were different - yes, bags MAY have gone on the aircraft without their owners, but only because the coach did not deliver the pax to the a/c before departure.

That in itself is a bit of an issue :} , but under the circumstances is there really such an issue about unreconciled bags? Ino ther words the owners of the bags intended to fly with them and did not due to highly unusual circumstances beyond their control.

The only scenario that I can imagine where there would be a practical danger would be a suicide bomber who had slipped through security screening, so whether s/he travelled or not, there is no diffrence in threat?

[Pax Vobiscum]

You beat me to it, F3G! Unaccompanied baggage is only a threat if a terrorist can somehow cause it to happen - the most obvious way to achieve this is to use a useful idiot on your behalf, hence it's important that the 'did you pack your own bag', 'has anyone asked you to carry an article for them' type of questions remain - but it seems unlikely that this could have occurred in the circumstances described above. And, of course, we now know that there are a sufficient number of head cases that would actually prefer to be accompanying their bomb.

Classic case of the generals fighting the war before last, IMHO!

[bealine]

From BA's stand point, it is absoloutely forbidden to carry pax baggage when they are not on the same flight or have not travelled on a previous flight!

I hear what you two are saying, FTG and PV, but how would the captain know that the coach had been left behind by accident and not because a terrorist had nobbled either the driver or the vehicle? (....and, of course, Osama and his not-so-merry-men wouldn't have any sympathetic airport employees who would assist in nobbling a coach or two, would they?)

In aviation, you can assume absolutely nothing, which is the reason BA interprets CAA and DeTR rulings and advisories to the letter!

[radeng]

bealine,

you said:

From BA's stand point, it is absoloutely forbidden to carry pax baggage when they are not on the same flight or have not travelled on a previous flight!

Is that general? On a number of occasions when I've checked in early for a flight, I've had my bags arrive ahead of me - they came on an earlier flight which I didn't get. e.g. I check in at Arlanda for the last BA flight some 45 minutes before the earlier flight has left, bag gets on earlier flight. Doesn't always happen. Like the time at Nice when as the BA flight left, we saw our luggage sitting on the tarmac....... Still, BA are very good at delivering the bags to you on the few occasions things go wrong.

I take it 'earlier flight' doesn't mean 'earlier to same destination' thus covering the old saw about 'I'm going to New York: can you send this bag to Dallas and that one to Sydney?' 'No sir' 'Why not? you did last week'

[bealine]

radeng - tat is supposed to be a definite no - no!!! No bag is ever supposed to travel ahead of the passenger - period!

[Pax Vobiscum]

Although I've never had my bags arrive ahead of me (!), I've certainly had delayed baggage (not with BA) that has missed my flight and arrived (unaccompanied) on the next. From a security perspective, this is claimed not to be a problem, since I couldn't have 'known' my bags would miss the flight and so I would have 'expected' to be travelling with them. But what if I had a confederate working as a baggage handler??

This is all predicated on the assumption that no terrorist would ever travel on the same flight as their bomb - sadly, we now know this not to be the case.

[bealine]

........Of course, the side of this story I had overlooked is the fact that Lisbon is not a British Airways route - it is operated by GB Airways under a BA franchise agreement. It could well be that GB operates under different rules and, because they cater largely for the tourist market, don't consider unaccompanied baggage as the same threat that other carriers do!

[Groucho]

bealine - are you telling us that the BA timetable is wrong and that GB operate 757s to LIS - and that the BA 497 and BA503 are in fact the GB497 and 503?

Come on! You cannot avoid responsibility that easily!:*

[BBDO]

Just to clarify a few points:

1) The route is definitley a BA route not a GB route. They were BA aircraft, BA boarding passes, BA flight nos, BA staff etc etc

2) The actual aircraft type was believe it or not a 747. There are two flights to Heathrow from Lisbon in the evening. For whatever reason they decided to roll the two flights into one and flew over a BA 747 for the purpose. I know because I watched it depart without me!!

3) There were definitely unacompanied bags on board . I was talking to a family on the bus who were supposed to be connecting to Melbourne and were told that they would have to collect their luggage at Heathrow on arrival the next day as it wasn't coming back to Lisbon.

4) No response from BA yet. Sent a letter over a week ago.

5) I guess the simplest way to avoid this sort of thing would be for the gate supervisor to follow the last PAX out to the aircraft on the bus. Less time consuming than a head count?

[Globaliser]

bealine: Of course, the side of this story I had overlooked is the fact that Lisbon is not a British Airways route - it is operated by GB Airways under a BA franchise agreement.With respect, I don't think so.

All the flight numbers are mainline flight numbers, not in the GB franchise block.

Also (just to prove that kiddiestalkingaboutaircraft.net is useful for something) this is a block of random length of registrations of BA aircraft photographed at LIS: G-CPEM, G-EUUE, G-EUPX, G-BPEJ, G-CPES, G-BNWZ, G-EUUO, G-EUPA, G-EUPP, G-EUUE, G-BUSI, G-EUPX, G-CPES, G-CPEM, G-CPEN, G-BPEJ, G-BPEE, G-CPEM, G-EUPP, G-CPEL, G-EUPF, G-EUUG.

All of these are mainline aircraft, non?

BBDO: 2) The actual aircraft type was believe it or not a 747. There are two flights to Heathrow from Lisbon in the evening. For whatever reason they decided to roll the two flights into one and flew over a BA 747 for the purpose. I know because I watched it depart without me!!Ah, then, for that sense of deja vu, click here (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/894900/M/). :D

(Sorry, couldn\'t resist, seeing as the list was on my computer already.)

[Carnage Matey!]

Aaah things become clearer. If it was a 747 then that would explain why the crew didn't spot 20 passengers missing. It would take quite some incompetence to miss their absence on a 319, but on a 290 seat aircraft its a bit less obvious. Nonetheless, there would appear to have been a large ostrich up by the dispatcher on this one. The issue of security regarding the bags is a bit of a moot one as all the passengers intended to travel with their bags. I suppose for the conspiracy theorists that it's possible you could be working in cahoots with a baggage handler to place your bomb laden bag on board whilst you stay on the bus, but does anyone really think you could plan on the Lisbon scenario?

The Arlanda claim is rather more interesting and I would be interested to hear how radeng knows his bags went on an earlier flight as opposed to just being on the carousel very quickly on arrival. All bags have a bar code on their tag and are laser scanned before loading by a system which matches them to a travelling passenger. Before departure the baggage list is compared to the list of passengers who've passed through the boarding gate. ANY discrepancy between the two must be resolved before the aircraft gets airborne. This is a cornerstone of our system. If bags are regularly travelling on any earlier flight from Arlanda then this is a very serious issue, far more so than the Lisbon incident, and requires urgent investigation.

[WHBM]

Possibly we are now getting nearer to the reason (although not justification) for this, if a 747 had been substituted for two regular European aircraft. Although BA 747s are not unknown at Lisbon as stand-ins, it is typical that things more often go awry when staff are working in an unfamiliar way. It was probably the first time through there for all the crew, and first time doing a BA 747 for the dispatcher and their team. Add in two flights merged in to one, and possibly pax for the earlier one having been rebooked or made their own alternative arrangements, and you start to have all the elements for a cock-up.

I too don't see any security issue if the bags had just been mishandled as here. Flights don't return if it is found bags have been loaded onto the wrong aircraft. Pax EXPECTING to fly with bags is the security criteria.

[tom de luxe]

5) I guess the simplest way to avoid this sort of thing would be for the gate supervisor to follow the last PAX out to the aircraft on the bus. Less time consuming than a head count?
Spot on. SOP at quite a few airports out there, too.

[bealine]

Sorry - I stand corrected. When we had a LGW-LIS route in days gone by, that was operated by GB so I wrongly assumed LIS was still a GB station.

Yes, you're right. Whilst having a member of the gate team to ride out with the last bus would be ideal, staffing levels have been reduced to the extent that we can no longer afford that luxury.

However, if the situation is indeed as you described, then it is crystal clear that our ops management need to stamp down hard on those responsible!

[Pax Vobiscum]

All very well having a staff member accompany the last bus-load, but what if it's an intermediate bus that goes missing? It seems to me that a count of heads/empty seats is the only sure way to check.

[RevMan2]

Lufthansa at FRA has a nice way of countering MBS(Missing Bus Syndrome).
The driver of the last bus delivers the final passenger load information to the ops team at the aircraft on remote stands.
No load information means that you haven't got all your passengers on board.
Quite simple, really.

[radeng]

Carnage asked how I knew the bags were there before me. I knew it must have come on the earlier flight because the belt hadn't even started moving for BA783, I'd come straight through in about 5 minutes from leaving the plane, and yet the bag was in a pile up by the service desk. It happened twice, must have been about two years ago on occasions when BA781 was running late - I've commuted to ARN so often, BA784 out on Sunday, BA783 back on Friday that I've lost count...

It's also happened coming back from the US on American - that was a good few years ago, since I don't travel with them very much - BA are FAR superior!

My best record on lost bags is on United. 13 journeys, 10 of them leading to lost bags. But not a lost customer!

Not too sure why it's so much of a no-no, since a passenger has no guarantee that his bags will either precede him, accompany him, or follow him. So it's totally unpredictable. Rather like the argument that the chances of a bomb on the plane are low, so the chance of two bombs is even lower, so if you carry a bomb, there's a negligible chance you will be blown up.

I'll see what happens on BA783 this Friday...I expect the bags will accompany me.

[Bumz_Rush]

Many years ago in a distant galaxy, I remember a Concorde on the LIS run. Not operated by GB.

Promotional stunt, cunning way to interest pax, they substituted the conc on random sectors........great PR, never made that ride, i was parked at the mid point parking, and saw the bird arrive, too late to dig out box brownie.....

Bumz