PDA

View Full Version : Is South Africa really ready


CXtreme
7th Jul 2010, 20:57
I have friends from here ( Germany) who could not make the game as the airport could not handle the traffic. Unacceptable

Doodlebug
7th Jul 2010, 21:49
Pre 1994, when South Africa was a first-world country that had built the atom-bomb, pioneered heart-transplants, had one of the world's finest military forces, was at the forefront of research in many fields, had universities on a par with those in the rest of the world, had a functioning infrastructure, etc, etc, etc ad infinitum, it would have been ready.

Or am I not allowed to say that :rolleyes:

MafiMushkallah
8th Jul 2010, 04:01
On the face of it the German team did not pitch up to the game either - wonder what their excuse is :ouch:

Habari
8th Jul 2010, 05:32
Doodlebug,

I don't think you are allowed to say that, but just to let you know there are many thousands of us out here who think you are right!!!!!

cavortingcheetah
8th Jul 2010, 07:13
No question about that Doodlebug.
I'll blow my stolen Vuvuhorn to that. It is, by their own admission on CNN, the greatest tradition that the oppressed indigents have as a relic of their own contribution to their culture.
I am not sure that indigent is the correct word here, but I use it in the context of a singular of the indigenous which, considering that the original Vuvuzela came from a Koodoo horn, is probably a lot of mouldy old decayed bull.

Capetonian
8th Jul 2010, 07:35
Or am I not allowed to say that

As far as I know there is no law against stating the truth, particularly when it's blatantly obvious and when about 50 million people would agree with you.

cavortingcheetah
8th Jul 2010, 08:25
I think the cautionary note was more in anticipation of the vox moderati rather than the vox populi. The one does not necessarily, for a whole raft of reasons, not necessarily agree with the other.

chileno 777
8th Jul 2010, 14:46
DOODLEBUG

It’s true that actual South Africa does not qualify for the first world stage and a lot must still be done. But regarding your statement of pre 1994 can only say that a country who praises itself of belonging to the 1st world MUST distribute its benefits to ALL their citizens without any kind of discrimination. Unfortunately all the developments that you mentioned existing in South Africa before 1994 were only allowed to the whites and let the 85 % of the population OUT. Without any doubt a nation who accepts this does not belong to the first world rating of any kind.

JetPark
8th Jul 2010, 14:58
Well said Chileno 777 - there is nothing 1st world about a non-democratic country. Whilst there is little doubt that we have a long way to go, we must not forget that we are a 16 year old democracy and there are those so-called first world countries that have 1,000 year old democracies that haven't always got it right either! I know, I have lived in them! Now.......back to flying :rolleyes:

Capetonian
8th Jul 2010, 15:22
Democracy has done a lot of good for sub-Saharan Africa, hasn't it? The transformation of Rhodesia into democratic Zimbabwe is a perfect example, and one which South Africa seems to be following in some regards.

flux
8th Jul 2010, 15:30
Did not realise things were so fairly distributed in Angola! :hmm:

Doodlebug
8th Jul 2010, 15:35
''...MUST distribute it's benefits to all it's citizens with no discrimination.."

The 1st world European country I reside in today distributes bugger-all to those too lazy to work.

Thank you for demonstrating so very succinctly the sense of entitlement that infests Africa whereever one goes, dooming it to underachieve forever.

maxrated
8th Jul 2010, 16:30
I have friends from here ( Germany) who could not make the game as the airport could not handle the traffic. Unacceptable

Buying a ticket on a plane that is planned to land a mere 2 hours before the start of the game you are coming to see seems unrealistically optimistic to me, even by 1st world standards. :=:=

Any intelligent person would have considered the " Africa" factor.

Proper planning prevents p1ss poor performance.

millertime
8th Jul 2010, 16:35
Lucky I am not a cynic, otherwise I would have thought that you are relieved that there were problems last night (in an otherwise impeccably run World Cup of which I think we can be justifiably proud), otherwise those wise predictions that you made with your mates over boerewors and beer that the SWC would be a huge flop would have been wrong. Now you can proudly say I told you so!

But seeing as I am not a cynic I would never believe that of you, and understand that you really feel sorry for the approx 400 people out of 91000 that missed the game and that you are not jumping for joy saying " I told you so"

Can't wait for the Final it is going to be great

chileno 777
8th Jul 2010, 22:44
Did not realise things were so fairly distributed in Angola!


What a stupid comment and basic comparison. By the way I am not from Angola and in case that you did not realize it...I have never said that Angola (or Chile) is/are a First World country.:ugh:

Goldfish Jack
8th Jul 2010, 22:56
Maxrated hit the nail on the head

For a game of this stature anywhere in the world only a village idiot would arrive at an airport 2 hours before the game and then try and get to the stadium - what about the queues at the stadium as well?

PPPPPP

chileno 777
8th Jul 2010, 23:02
The 1st world European country I reside in today distributes bugger-all to those too lazy to work.



So you are saying that it would be better idea to start to discriminate because there are too many lazy people :yuk: (it sounds slightly fascist to me)



Note: sorry but will not reply anymore regarding this matter since the discussion has gone totally out of aviation

CXtreme
9th Jul 2010, 06:02
So now it is the money paying supporters fault? I lot of money was paid to FIFA approved travel agents and my friends also confirmed that they would be booked on FIFA approved airlines. How is this their fault?

unstable load
9th Jul 2010, 06:35
I lot of money was paid to FIFA approved travel agents and my friends also confirmed that they would be booked on FIFA approved airlines. How is this their fault?

Clearly it isn't their fault. Why not blame the moron that booked them to arrive 2 hours before the flight?:confused: How can it possibly be South Africa's fault that some idiot did not think to anticipate delays at an event of that size? Hell, it's a 20 minute plus drive to the stadium on a good day.

cavortingcheetah
9th Jul 2010, 06:39
This becomes absurd, as does much else in life of course. Now the aviation community has 'FIFA approved airlines'? The wannabies out there had better start changing their swotting style. Soon the multiple ATPL examination choices might be more geared towards establishing your knowledge of the color of Renaldo's facial hair or Vicky baby's hemline length!
South Africa has done a jolly good job on the whole. As a Saffer sceptic, I have to take my scrambled eggy hat off to the men at the centre of the spider's web.
The Olympics next? Well, who knows, but that must be the end game in many of the minds of the cash conscious. I don't think patriotism comes into sport any more, after all, look at the British football team, a fragmented mob of individual barbarians attempting to present a unified front in the face of a coach whose linguistic skills are as limitied as his apparent abilities.
Well done SA.
As for the congestion at the airport ramps, the solution or balm to the soul is simple enough. Thirty minutes park time either side of slot and thereafter or therebefore $10k a minute and design some large wheel clamps as well!

747TDR
9th Jul 2010, 08:53
Perhaps if more people did some research into the matter they would find that the disruptions were caused by foreign-registered VIP a/c who refused to vacate King Shaka Intl (FALE) and fly to the old Durban Intl (FADN) where there was enough parking space. This was the plan and would've gone smoothly had all parties involved co-operated thoroughly.

There was more than enough planning for it, but there is only a certain amount of things you can do about stubborn pilots who do not want to move their aicraft. Most of these were light jets taking up jetways that were "reserved" for incoming scheduled traffic.

It has nothing to do with South Africa being a 3rd World Country. Maybe all of our critics should also research some of the facilities (namely airports and stadiums) that are obviously not third world quality. This will surely silence you like the rest of the critics!

Selfloader
9th Jul 2010, 09:10
747: what utter rubbish. Who in their right mind is going to fly a multimilion-dollar aircraft to an airfield that has no traffic control, no fire service, no handling infrastructure, no security and no fuel. And what about insurance? What if something happened to one of those aircraft. Do you think their insurace wld have paid out? And as for the minister of transport sueing them - even more rubbish. It was a balls-up finish and klaar!

747TDR
9th Jul 2010, 10:18
:ugh:Phone ACSA yourself and find out what the plan was Selfloader! I'm merely repeating what was APPARENTLY a well-known fact.

Selfloader
9th Jul 2010, 12:05
"... but there is only a certain amount of things you can do about stubborn pilots who do not want to move their aicraft." - your words 747, and the basis of your argument. I repeat, what pilot in his right mind is going to park his boss's jet on an unserviced runway, and expect to keep his job. Didn't this occur to ACSA... or you?

Beta Light
9th Jul 2010, 15:33
CXt,
Welcome to Africa, there will be a hundred excuses on PPrune and in the newspaper. No one will take responsibility or be accountable. That is the story of Africa.
2 Hours should be enough on an organized tour, being bussed from the airport, organized parking and drop off at the stadium.

We can use anything from colonialists , T.I.A. or if all else fail we will just call you a racist.

Are you surprised the world has no respect for Africa?

millertime
10th Jul 2010, 06:46
Jeez guys it was 400 people over a 4 week period in what has been a magnificent World Cup. Sure it was a mess but in the bigger scheme of things,you cannot use this incident to judge the whole World Cup. By the way it seems as if the Government is taking public responsibility, apologising and offering compensation (not that it will make up for missing the game, but something nevertheless), they keep disappointing the doubters and doing things right. I am no big fan of African bureaucracy but give credit where credit is due (well done cavorting cheetah) sit back and enjoy the soccer. You'll probably enjoy it if you stop waiting for things to go wrong. Up the Dutch!

DaFly
10th Jul 2010, 10:21
As to the original question: was RSA prepared for the SWC?

Well, considering what has happened and specially what has not happened, it seems that South Africa was pretty much prepared. But looking at the inferior infrastructure, public transport and rather long distances to travel between venues (compared to Europe for example) I would think, that everything was operating closer to red line, than in many previous SWCs held in 'first world' countries. Durban was just an example as to how many factors were involved:

Foreign Travel Agents: no one with decent knowledge of RSA should have planned for any soccer fan to arrive on a flight scheduled to land 2 hours before the match. Even if bus shuttles were available, how are they supposed to make their way through a traffic jam.

ACSA: they should have made use of the space on the airport available (cargo apron). They should have realized, that 1 fuel bowser available wouldn't be able to cope. Expecting a 30 minute ground time for non scheduled flights is unreasonable, unless it has been in the notams, that fuel might not be available and inbound flights should have enough fuel to be able to relocate to another airport. It is also unreasonable to expect operators to fly into the old Durban airport, since it is closed for civil operations and insurances wouldn't cover any damages.

ATNS / slots: slots for landing should have only been issued, after an outbound flight plan was filed, as to indicate the planning & willingness of the operator to relocate the aircraft.

Air crews: those refusing to move are certainly to blame, too. If confronted with a notam stating the necessity to relocate to another airfield within a certain time, it is rather short sighted to THEN point out, that old Durban is unsuitable. As to the refueling situation, at least those with local knowledge should have expected problems and come prepared.

nugpot
10th Jul 2010, 11:43
Good summary DaFly

As to the refueling situation, at least those with local knowledge should have expected problems and come prepared.

Yeah, some did. There were at least 20 or so a/c at DIA.

ian16th
10th Jul 2010, 15:12
cavortingcheetah (http://www.pprune.org/members/45053-cavortingcheetah)

When you said:
the British football teamDo you realise just how many Scots, Irish and Welsh men and women you upset?

cavortingcheetah
10th Jul 2010, 16:09
ian16th.
I am not quite sure I understand that. Should I have referred to the team as the English team? I thought the Scotland team dropped by the braeside a while ago and had subsequently let it be known that they would support anyone who beat the English? As for the Irish and the Welsh I fear I had only thought of those two great nations as providers of steadfast locks in Rugby.
But in order to save you sticking pins images of cheetahs made from calcified porridge let me please say that I didn't mean to cause offence to any one other than the anonymous team sent down to South Africa to represent England.