PDA

View Full Version : Heathrow Airport 'may not cope during Olympics'


PAXboy
11th Apr 2012, 21:03
No? Really?? That's a shocker! :rolleyes:

BBC News - London 2012: Heathrow Airport 'may not cope during Olympics' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17682524)

Culture Select Committee chairman John Whittingdale said not enough thought seemed to have been given to ways of coping with long queues at immigration. He said the UK Border Agency had suggested it had insufficient money to open all of its passport stations.
Lucky they thought of all those things when they planned it. :ugh:

Spitoon
11th Apr 2012, 21:15
If queues at Immigration are the only failings at Heathrow I imagine they'll have surpassed the expectations of anyone who travels frequently and has seen how things can be done!Mr Whittingdale continued: "While visiting tourists will understand that the Olympics is a busy time, if the wait (at immigration) is in excess of an hour it may deter tourists from returning.FWIW, I would call an hour's wait little short of disgraceful! Doesn't any of the Air Passenger Duty find its way into funding government-required services like.....Immigration?

jabird
11th Apr 2012, 22:08
Doesn't any of the Air Passenger Duty find its way into funding government-required services like.....Immigration?

Between that and the PSC you would have thought so, but knowing the accountants it doesn't work that way, especially as both are payable on the outbound leg. If more people are getting routings that mean outbound to London but then train or loco to CDG or AMS for a return home that avoids LH APD, maybe there is a short fall?

Rollingthunder
12th Apr 2012, 02:43
Is an airport of idiocy. What is it now 50 pounds to get out of? That's 25 pounds to get in.... spent 1 1/2 hours standing in line once... won't be going anywhere near anything called Olly.

ExXB
12th Apr 2012, 08:09
They really need to fine tune the immigration clearance at large UK airports. Today there is an EU/EFTA queue and an "Everyone Else" queue.

The everyone else queue should be divided into 'those needing visas' and 'those not needing visas'. In my case I am a Swiss resident with a Canadian Passport married (almost 20 years) to a British national. In other words of little, if any, risk of overstaying and who would probably be given leave to reside if I ever asked for it.

I often get stuck behind a flock of ex-USSR call girls, the large non-English speaking families, or a bunch of people who don't know how to fill out a landing card. I rarely take a minute at the desk, after waiting for up to an hour.

I would be willing to preregister (and even pay a fee) for speedy-clearance (tm).

deep_south
12th Apr 2012, 10:26
I thought that Heathrow was pretty much running at full capacity pretty much all the time, so where will the "additional" throughput of passengers come from? Is this just the regular scare-mongering, or is there really going to be a problem....

davidjohnson6
12th Apr 2012, 10:44
The Olympics are from late July to early August when half the UK is on annual holiday anyway.
Yes, Heathrow and much of London's infrstructure will be put under strain, but it's really just 3 weeks of peak activity. People will grumble and moan, but they will all know it's a short term one-off thing, be a bit more tolerant than usual and that everything will largely return to normal by late August.

Heathrow's see far worse when snow has been dumped on runways just before Xmas in recent years and swathes of flights have been cancelled. People will cope.

ExXB
12th Apr 2012, 12:21
Larger capacity aeroplanes. For example SQ is going to A380s for all of their 3 daily flights. I would imagine that a number of European airlines are going to be substituting some wide-bodies for their regular flights.

In addition a lot more visitors, from visa required countries, are going to be coming increasing the average dwell time significantly.

While I recommend avoiding Heathrow at the best of times, these will not be the best of times. You would be insane to enter the UK here. Try Bristol, or Southampton, or the Orkneys.

LondonPax
12th Apr 2012, 12:43
This is a fairly big political issue in the UK right now, so I suspect they wil throw everything they have at it to avoid negative stories and pictures of big queues during the Olympics.

Then once the Olympic visitors have gone home we will be back to the usual mess and nothing will change except that it will continue to get worse. Heathrow is a disgrace.

OFSO
12th Apr 2012, 13:17
I thought that Heathrow was pretty much running at full capacity pretty much all the time

In fact most of the infrastructure of the UK - internal transport, utilities, health, welfare - is running at full capacity and the slightest little thing throws it all into chaos. And the Olympics isn't slight nor little.....

rgsaero
12th Apr 2012, 17:46
davidjohnson6 -

Well, it may just be for three weeks for you, but for the majority of people who live and work in London it's for a very great deal longer! Include the paralympics for a start!

Already large numbers of London businesses are being "encouraged" to get their employees to "work from home" for the duration - that will be really good for productivity! Recent news stories have highlighted the enormous disruption to businesses close to the "exclusion zone" which will effectively be shut down by the restrictions on access for the majority of normal trading hours. Many think they won't survive!

Add to that the fact that many central London businesses which depend on tourism have such a downturn in advance bookings for the summer that they are shutting down; include many London theatres in this.

I live in (outer) London, and I won't be going anywhere near my usual "haunts" for the duration, and taking my spending elsewhere. Hardly good for the "recovery"! And believe me, I'm not alone!

The problem with all this is that the politicos HAVE to talk it up. Men who ride tiger can never dismount. This ones going to bite them!

davidjohnson6
12th Apr 2012, 18:46
rgs - I live in zone 4 in London.
Because schools will be on holiday during the Olympics and Paralympics, many families may well be on the beach anyway. A lot of people who might normally have spent their annual holiday touring the UK will expect the Olympics to cause chaos and decide to go to a different country instead. Finally, I'm expecting that because of the Olympics, people will be a little more tolerant of transport snarl-ups, e.g. at Heathrow.
Fianlly, while the Paralympics involve the same level of logistics, I would expect that the Olympics will be the bigger draw to many of the crowds.

Maybe immigration at Heathrow takes an hour rather than 10 mins - this is not the end of the world
The point I'm trying to make, is that while Heathrow and London's infrastructure will be stressed, it'll cope - I'm not expecting any huge failures, and I think the story about Heathrow not coping is just a journalist trying to put together some words to make a story that attracts eyeballs.

As to whether the Olympics are *desirable* for the economy, that's a completely different subject !

wiggy
12th Apr 2012, 19:31
Maybe immigration at Heathrow takes an hour rather than 10 mins

I admire your optimism David but this week has seen, at times, two hour plus queues to get through immigration at one of the Heathrow Terminals ( and the source for that information is personal observation by myself and colleagues - and before you ask the obvious question I emphasise that non of us is UK Border Agency Staff)). I can't see any reason for the situation improving this side of July unless more Border staff are put in place on the right desks at the right time of day. The situation hasn't been helped by the brilliant :sad: timing of the phasing out the IRIS system, which has forced more UK passport holders into going through manual processing. So, no, sadly, I don't think this is

just a journalist trying to put together some words to make a story that attracts eyeballs.

Tableview
12th Apr 2012, 19:43
unless more Border staff are put in place on the right desks at the right time of day,
Where will they get them from? How, where, and by whom will they be trained in time? What security clearance will they get.

Given that the Home Office has a great track record in employing illegal aliens, I do not expect that standards will be very high. I can see this as heralding a wave of illegal immigrants who will take advantage of the pressure under which the UKBA staff will find themselves, and that's without even taking into account athletes and spectators who enter the country legally and overstay and disappear into the cesspit.

wiggy
12th Apr 2012, 19:48
Tableview

Fair questions, whilst not a fan of the newspaper it was the first relevant and vaguely accurate link that came to hand:

UK Border Agency expects to axe 5,000 jobs | UK news | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/09/uk-border-agency-axe-jobs)

Article written in 2010......

PAXboy
12th Apr 2012, 23:32
They will doubtless have planned to schedule staff in from other airports (GLA/EDI/BRS/etc) and have hotels booked. So LHR won't be the only place with longer queues. Just a guess but there is nowhere else to get them. Some mgmt will go on the desks too.

By the way, it's not just the Paralympics that extend the date on, it's the arrival of all the officials, contestants, medical, support and govt hangers on from dozens of countries arrives in an increasing stream, that brings the date forward too. It's not just 'three weeks'.

jabird
13th Apr 2012, 01:05
By the way, it's not just the Paralympics that extend the date on, it's the arrival of all the officials, contestants, medical, support and govt hangers on from dozens of countries arrives in an increasing stream, that brings the date forward too. It's not just 'three weeks'.

For Paralympics, multiply number of contestants by x, reduce spectators by y - not sure what the actual factor is, but it is a different loading compared to the main event due to all the different categories.

Even with a peak loading during the 100m final, London should still be able to cope, as many cities far smaller have held the Olympics in the past. At it's busiest, what effect is 100k on a system that handles 3m+ people per day - surely the loading problems are the pinch-points around the event locations and key junctions.

I believe the govt is claiming hs2 will also result in an extra 100k or so visitors to London each day - but only around 2% extra load on the tube (network wide). Simples!

Tableview
13th Apr 2012, 05:28
They will doubtless have planned to schedule staff in from other airports (GLA/EDI/BRS/etc) ........ So LHR won't be the only place with longer queues. ........... Some mgmt will go on the desks too.
Two things worry me about this. The fact that the chaos will be nationwide means that the potential for illegal entries is increased, and as for management going on the desks, they're the bunch of bozos that caused all the problems previously and are probably less competent than the workers.

Much as I dislike the Israelis, I have enormous respect for the way they do things, and I'd get Mossad to do it. It would be done with surgical precision and not the least worry about upsetting people on grounds of political incorrectness.

radeng
13th Apr 2012, 09:56
Having waited for 65 minutes at Chicago with only 2 immigration desks manned for aliens, Heathrow cannot claim to be the worst. But London and its airports during the Olympic money wasting farce are to be avoided at all costs.

PAXboy
13th Apr 2012, 10:45
'Here, Here' Radeng. If I had the time and money, I would leave the country for two months and stay in the smallest atoll possible. I won't start on the subject of the stupidity of the Olympics, because I'll never stop. The one thing it is not about is sport. :ugh:

jabird
13th Apr 2012, 15:34
Much as I dislike the Israelis, I have enormous respect for the way they do things, and I'd get Mossad to do it. It would be done with surgical precision and not the least worry about upsetting people on grounds of political incorrectness.

TV - maybe, but isn't the purpose of Mossad to stop the "undesirables" from getting on the a/c in the first place? Too late by the time you get to immigration, surely? I understand the Dutch also have a no nonsense attitude to immigration.

Rollingthunder
14th Apr 2012, 02:51
They've turned off the fountains in Trafalgar Square, so I'm not going. (most fountains in this world re-cycle their water but apparently Thames Water prefers to bill)

Donkey497
15th Apr 2012, 20:49
Heathrow Airport 'may not cope during Olympics:eek::eek::eek:

How Sad, Too Bad, Never Mind.:ooh::ooh:

I am actually hoping that a complete meltdown occurs and lasts for several weeks, as it will take something of this extreme magnitude to MAYBE make our Lords & Masters realise that supporting & encouraging a single mega-hub in the bottom right hand corner of the country while the rest is left to wither on the vine is a truly stupid idea.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Despite the dogma - every thing & every person DOES NOT have to transit London.

radeng
15th Apr 2012, 21:06
I would like to see that every time the EU queue exceeds 10 minutes, the Home Secretary and the top two levels of the Border Agency get a public flogging.

But I am a liberal......

davidjohnson6
15th Apr 2012, 21:44
Donkey - it is certainly a shame that there are not more commercial passenger flights from the UK regions. Were airlines to ask for slots at any of these airports, it is likely that they would be given a positive response. I imagine also that the people running route development at many of these airports would be only too happy to help set up new routes. I imagine that when, for example, Azerbaijan Air began talking to ABZ management, they were given strong encouragement.

The only thing missing from the current status quo is airlines who actively want to fly to/from the UK regions rather than London and sufficient passengers willing to pay enough in airfares to let said airlines make a profit.

infrequentflyer789
15th Apr 2012, 23:53
Despite the dogma - every thing & every person DOES NOT have to transit London.

Unfortunately it's still the same UKBA outside of London.

Waited over 1hr coming into MAN this weekend, and could write for that long on the systemic and mangement failings viewed from that queue. Nothing to do with job losses or funding cuts - both staff and expensive technology investement were clearly badly managed for coping with peak (holiday season) load.

The 1hr+ wait was in the native / EU queue of course, the Johnny Foreigner queue was observed at about 5 mins max.

You could easily conclude that UKBA's aim is to admit foreigners as easily as possible while making it so miserable for UK citizens to return that they don't bother, but I'd go with Hanlons razor against that. If UKBA ever invite you for a drink I wouldn't bother going, even if the venue is a brewery...

radeng
16th Apr 2012, 08:23
The UKBA staff are as hacked off as the travellers by it all. They brought back newly retired people over Easter and paid them more, despite the denials by UKBA manager on the radio.

What is so annoying is the denial by the politicians of any real problem and the refusal to bring to book those at the top level who are responsible.

Chuchinchow
16th Apr 2012, 08:25
Much as I dislike the Israelis, I have enormous respect for the way they do things, and I'd get Mossad to do it. It would be done with surgical precision and not the least worry about upsetting people on grounds of political incorrectness.

I hear they are none too fond of you either, Capetonian - sorry:Tableview. (I checked your file for you and both names came up.)

Tableview
16th Apr 2012, 08:55
I hear they are none too fond of you either
I can't say I'm too worried. I have no plans to go there any time soon, or ever. It's around number 200 (out of 196) the list of countries I don't wish to visit.

Haven't a clue
16th Apr 2012, 09:09
Of course they could revert to splitting the EU queue back into two as it used to be - one for us Brits and one for the rest of the EU. And revert to a quick visual check of a Brit's passport, rather than the time consuming scan into the machine process. After all they have access to the passenger manifests and should be able to use their computers to identify anyone of interest. And if they still need to scan why not adopt the supermarket approach and place several scanners in the queue lines for us to do that job for them. Anyone the computer flags as of interest in each line would be flagged on their screen... It's basic system engineering really.

But I suspect the mighty EU would get upset at the unequal treatment of it's citizens (Shengen is of course a treaty so that's all right). And the politicos (who no doubt manage to avoid the pain of UKBA queues) wouldn't appreciate the possibility of a member of the press reporting success in passing through immigration on a grandma's passport.

But the British travelling public, and certainly those of us who travel often, but be delighted.

ExXB
16th Apr 2012, 15:52
Haven't a clue. Do you really want to go into the 'others' line when you travel to the EU/EEA? As an 'other' national I would suggest that you don't.

infrequentflyer789 Why didn't you join the 'other's queue when it was down to 5 mins or so. My British wife has often joined me there when that queue was shorter, which is almost always the case at BRS.

Haven't a clue
16th Apr 2012, 16:16
ExXB Interesting point - you are predicting retaliation.

My travel is usually long haul. Most of my destinations offer premium passengers a "priority" service or, in the case of my most frequent destination, a frequent visitor card and finger print based clearance through electronic gates. Of course these are all destinations to the east of Europe...

My EU travel last year was Spain - PMI - where the non Shengan arrivals were dumped in a corridor and you couldn't work out which was "Others" until you got to the end of the (admittedly short) queue but it didn't matter as there were no jobsworths sending you back; and Finland where I had a pleasantly brief encounter with a facial recognition machine. Not enough experience, I'm afraid, to understand what it might be like to be an "Other".

infrequentflyer789
16th Apr 2012, 17:44
infrequentflyer789 Why didn't you join the 'other's queue when it was down to 5 mins or so. My British wife has often joined me there when that queue was shorter, which is almost always the case at BRS.

Admit it did cross my mind. You've got a legit reason travelling together, whereas I suspect we'd have been sent back by a jobsworth at the end of it (marshalling the queue being a more important role than processing people to prevent the queue in the first place).

I sometimes argue with the jobsworths but mostly at airports I sit back and take it, particularly when travelling with kids who may copy you later and may not appreciate the difference between arguing with immigration on the way back in and arguing with security on the way out.:(

[ perrennial cold-sweat question - do you explain to the kids why not to make jokes/comments about bombs in security line, in the knowledge that that may lead them to try it just to see if dad was right... or do you say nothing and hope they don't decide to try it unprompted ]

PAXboy
22nd Apr 2012, 16:11
Thought I'd add this link in here, rather than yet another thread:

BBC News - London 2012: Air traffic chief speaks of challenge (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17804783)

ExXB
22nd Apr 2012, 17:12
Admit it did cross my mind. You've got a legit reason travelling together, whereas I suspect we'd have been sent back by a jobsworth at the end of it (marshalling the queue being a more important role than processing people to prevent the queue in the first place).

In CH the two queues are; EU/EEA/CH/diplomats and All passports. This implies than any of the first can go to the second. I honestly can't remember if there is equivalent signing at UK airports, or if says all 'other' passports. I'll have a closer look next time.

You perhaps could first of all apologise for being in the wrong queue and thank him/her profusely for allowing your transgression before they get a word in edgewise. And also promise never to post your experience on an aviation pilots forum. :ok:

WHBM
22nd Apr 2012, 18:25
I wonder why only the immigration queues are being emphasised.

Does anywhere else have such constant inbound holding, and has done for the past 20 years or more ?

Does anywhere else regularly have nobody sent to turn on the stand guidance so inbounds have to wait blocking the taxyway ? This is a Heathrow specialty as nowhere else have I come across it.

Does anywhere else have to rip all the electrical wiring out of the ceilings in the terminal every few months and then leave it untouched for weeks ?

Did anywhere else ban hotel buses from the airport, replace them with a paid-for service offered as a concession to a contractor, and then let the buses consistently have long gaps in their operation because the timetable took no account of any of the constant daily traffic congestion ?

Does any other major airport have their management focused on nothing other than siphoning huge amounts of cash out of the system to send to HQ in Spain, to meet interest payments on the ridiculously excessive amount they borrowed to buy the place in a fit of megalomania ?

Does any other country have a Secretary of State for Transport, responsible for aviation, who comes across as an overpromoted school leaver intern who doesn't know one end of an aircraft from the other ?

ExXB
22nd Apr 2012, 19:18
Have you ever noticed the number of staff just sitting around? Apparently waiting for their next task, but nevertheless just sitting there?

Have you ever noticed the convoluted path that you have to take from A to B and all of the expensive (and apparently no longer free of duty) shops on the way.

...

radeng
23rd Apr 2012, 15:56
As I have said before, BAA = Bloody Awful Airports

PAXboy
28th Apr 2012, 10:19
Of course, we don't have to wait for the Olympics to have problems at EGGL ... :hmm:
BBC News - Questions over queues at Heathrow Airport (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17876496)

Long queues at Heathrow Airport passport control on Friday evening have cleared overnight, BAA confirms.Note 'cleared overnight' !!

edi_local
28th Apr 2012, 10:49
I really don't understand why, whenever I enter an airport in the UK (BAA or not) they only ever have around half (or less) of the passport control desks open and ready. Why build so many and then not bother to use them? UKBA should be ashamed of the welcome they give to people in the UK. I know nowhere is perfect but I can't recall ever waiting more than around 30 minutes to enter any other country and that includes the USA.

Not used LHR to enter the UK for a while, but had waits of up to 45 minutes to one hour at LTN, EDI and LGW in the past year on numerous occasions. On one particular night, about a week before Christmas I remember landing at EDI from AMS and there being 2 immigration officers on duty. :ugh:

ericlday
28th Apr 2012, 12:12
Ever tried getting into the states via JFK....the LHR queues are nothing compared to those over the pond.

PAXboy
28th Apr 2012, 14:36
You'll be reassured to know that:
The UK Border Force says it is "fully prepared to manage busy periods" such as the Olympics despite criticism over recent delays at Heathrow Airport.Phew, that's a relief. I was worried that we Brits would make a hash of it. :p

BBC News - Heathrow queues: Border Force 'ready' for Olympics (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17880415)

Skipness One Echo
28th Apr 2012, 14:45
The UK Border Force has been cut to the quick, odd considering the Conservatives are keen to prevent mass immigraition. Only a moron could be shocked that chronic underfunding and not paying enough money in the right places means the end product is shabby.
I don't object to cuts in public spending but *in the right places* for goodness sake.

Tableview
28th Apr 2012, 16:01
Ever tried getting into the states via JFK....the LHR queues are nothing compared to those over the pond.

Yes, and I found it remarkably quick and stress free, despite all the negativity one hears. Certainly far better than LHR.

Piltdown Man
28th Apr 2012, 16:39
Consider this: Whenever you check in for a flight to the UK, your passport details are taken by the airline and whizzed to the UK by the marvellous world-wide interwebby thing. That means the UKBA will generally have had prior notice of your arrival for something like a minimum of two hours. Now, if I've got this right, they know who they've issued visas to, who's a national, who's entitled to be in Britain and more importantly, who's not. Special Branch can also match their list against the 'inbounds' and identify those of interest. So, all the UKBA have to do, is make sure the people who get off the flight are those who checked in. How hard can it be?

Personally I think Wallies at the top of the UKBA haven't a clue what their job is all about. Additionally, they have no understanding of how technology can help them nor of how to design a system. They are also scared fartless of someone complaining about their human rights being breached. This results in pointless waiting in queues, systems which don't speak to each other, the ridiculous Landing Cards and hundreds of "Asylum" bludgers illegally landing in Britain each week.

As it runs at the moment, the system is a waste of cash and time.

PM

PS. You can stick the L*nd*n 2*12 event (I can't mention it by name, as that would be a criminal offence) where the sun doesn't shine. Any event that requires an Act to make the infringement of sponsorship deals a criminal offence can screw itself. This fiasco will be one of the most expensive job and business destroying events we've seen in Britain. I'll be truly glad when it's all over.

Shropshire Lad
28th Apr 2012, 19:02
I'm really surprised that this is news now. Every time I have arrived into Heathrow in the last three years I have had to wait at least two hours to get through immigration. Admittedly this is usually Terminal Three (I think the video here was Terminal 5?). Now Terminal Three is an awful terminal to get out of - apparently the shops are more important than having somewhere for the passengers to sit :ugh:. But returning has been an awful experience every single time.

Whilst waiting in the queue I could at least amuse myself by realising that it took me less time last year to fly from Ho Chi Minh city to Bangkok to get my connecting flight to Heathrow than it did to get from one end of Immigration to the other!

The other appalling situation is how people are treated - a lot of the time you watch as people who don't speak much English are introduced to the traditional English translation method whereby they are talked at in an ever increasing volume to aid comprehension and to assist them with completing their arrival forms. A truly awful introduction to the UK. I notice someone compared JFK with Heathrow - again exceptionally long queues there but my experience has always been that that is shorter than on the return trip to Heathrow.

I now try and avoid Heathrow as much as possible because of this.

1DC
28th Apr 2012, 19:20
Arrived at T3 about a month ago at about 1730 on a Monday and got through in about 5 minutes. Six months earlier about the same time at T4..
Hope I haven't put the evil eye on myself for next time!!

Shropshire Lad
28th Apr 2012, 20:09
You've done it now....!

Admittedly every time I come in it is early in the morning when most long haul flights come in. However you would think the Border Agency may have been able to pick up on that fact! And obviously plan accordingly. But I think that is where the problems are.

PAXboy
28th Apr 2012, 21:03
I'm really surprised that this is news now.It's only news to politicians, Shropshire Lad! And the media are being helpful, I would say, to highlight this. Of course, in September, it will all go back to normal.

I wasn't born cynical, I just live in Britain. :p

Shropshire Lad
28th Apr 2012, 21:20
I know. I'm just watching the news now and looking at the Terminal 5 video. That is nothing compared to what I've experienced in T3. It is good that the media are highlighting this. However I suspect that this is just further evidence that if you cut the cash then the service suffers. A "no sh**t sherlock" moment. Unfortunately as this appears to be the general direction of travel for the UK we shouldn't be surprised when this kind of thing becomes the norm for all public services in the next year.

mutt
28th Apr 2012, 21:55
I came through terminal 4 around 6pm on the 25th, the Immigration area was packed with queues going down the corridors, I was lucky enough to use the electronic entry which took less than 5 minutes, but anyone in the other nationals line was looking at a bleak couple of hours of standing around.

As this is low season, I will be extremely impressed to see how they cope during the Olympics.

Mutt

PAXboy
28th Apr 2012, 23:15
You know that the host nation gets to designate a new sport?

"Who can get through T3 border control the fastest?"

Judging will be by UK residents, from their sofa's with remote voting. That way - we get some X-factor style and call it. "Britain's Got Pax" :}

beamer
29th Apr 2012, 09:55
Compared to Miami, LHR is a breeze.................

ATNotts
29th Apr 2012, 10:11
Compared to Miami, LHR is a breeze.................

And compared to Frankfurt, Amsterdam and CDG? Why do we always have to compare ourselves to the Americans?

radeng
29th Apr 2012, 11:52
55 minutes at ORD. Two staff at a time when 3 744s and 2 777s arrive. Only 3 to deal with US citizens.

Your tax dollars at work.....

GrahamO
29th Apr 2012, 13:46
Every time I have arrived into Heathrow in the last three years I have had to wait at least two hours to get through immigration.

Far be it for me to question the validity of your assertions, but ....... was that once or twice you flew then ?

Okay, its a while since I did lots of long haul, but either you're someone who needs to be checked thoroughly, you're the statistical tail of the probability curve or your memory is faulty.

rethymnon
29th Apr 2012, 16:31
1. if it is bad now, what would it be like with a third runway?

2.i agree we should not compare with the USA. they have a reputation of under-funding public facilities eg their post office. it has been said that infrastructure in the USA suffers from the contrast of 'private affluence, public squalor'.

Shropshire Lad
29th Apr 2012, 17:39
Far be it for me to question the validity of your assertions, but ....... was that once or twice you flew then ?

Okay, its a while since I did lots of long haul, but either you're someone who needs to be checked thoroughly, you're the statistical tail of the probability curve or your memory is faulty.

It is quite a few times - can't quite remember exactly how many. Had it been once or twice i would put it down to chance, however it's every single time. I'm not claiming that this will be everyone's experience and to be fair it has always been long haul. However I have spoken with others who have had a similar experiences (again long haul and bizarrely more often than not T3). I was making no claims to statistical probability, however the number of times it has occurred to me seems to suggest that it happens quite regularly.

I wouldn't think that they would know I was someone who needs to be checked thoroughly as the line usually stretches from the desks to the entrance door of the immigration hall. Clearly they don't know who you are when you enter and I generally get from the red line at the desk to past the desks in around 30 seconds! Suggests to me that the bulk of the wait is getting to the desk!

The main reason, I guess, is that there is that period of time in the morning when a lot of long hauls come into the airport depositing a huge number of people at the same time. Probably at some point the Border Agency might notice this and perhaps consider scheduling an appropriate number of staff to cover this period. Who knows??

PAXboy
30th Apr 2012, 10:14
This is amusing:
Heathrow airport told to stop giving out leaflets over delays - Home News - UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/heathrow-airport-told-to-stop-giving-out-leaflets-over-delays-7696837.html)
Heathrow airport has been ordered by the Border Force to stop handing out leaflets to passengers acknowledging the “very long delays” at immigration. Amid increasing anger at the length of queues for travellers arriving at border control, airport operator BAA has tried to defuse tensions with a leaflet apologising for the problems. It said people arriving in the country “deserved a warmer welcome” and explained how to complain to the Home Office.

But Marc Owen, director of UK Border Agency operations at Heathrow, has told BAA that the leaflets are “inappropriate” and that ministers would take “a very dim view”.

In an email obtained by The Daily Telegraph, he said: “The leaflet... is both inflammatory and likely to increase tensions in arrivals halls especially in the current atmosphere. “It is inappropriate in that it is not for you to display how to complain on our behalf.

“Please refrain from handing out (the leaflets) or I will escalate (the matter) with ministers who are likely to take a very dim view. I know there are copies in the hall and your troops are ready with them.”

Mr Owen also told BAA to prevent passengers taking pictures in the arrivals hall. Pictures of lengthy queues have been posted on Twitter by frustrated people.
So, let's not allow people to take pictures and don't encourage them to complain - and everything will be all right ...

For once, I side with BAA who are trying to ensure they don't get the blame that belongs to the Border Agency, i.e. the Home Office.

radeng
30th Apr 2012, 10:32
I feel sorry for the poor staff who man the desks. At the same time, I'd like to see a public flogging for the UKBA head and the Home Secretary for allowing this state of affairs to happen.

ExXB
30th Apr 2012, 11:05
Arrived BRS late afternoon Friday on a flight from GVA. After the very long walk from gate 1 (including three flights of stairs) arrived in the immigration hall. The two queues were labeled: "EU/EEA passports" and "All passports". Many non-ff Swiss passengers headed for the "All passport line". Both queues quite long (to the stairway). Halfway along the queues were then labeled "EU/EEA/Swiss passports" and "All non-EU/EEA" passports (Yes this confused the normally bright Swiss). So almost everyone in my queue was trying to get into the other queue giving rise to moans and groans in both queues. Once past this point I got straight to an agent and out. Waited for my British wife for about 10 minutes.

There was a ground agent (not Border Control) sitting on a high chair at the end of the queue pointing to the agent that was free. Is it really better to employ a person for this mindless job that employ a simple flashing light? (And how about some signs in languages other than English)

Of course the magic machine designed to let Brits through faster wasn't working (the hours were posted). Couldn't see why it was only open a few hours a day. If they needed a body to redirect those that the machine misdirected they could have taken that lady off her high chair.

intortola
30th Apr 2012, 13:54
Compared to Miami, LHR is a breeze.................

Flew CDG-MIA on 26th, immigration hall full in MIA but all desks manned, was through in approx 15 minutes, no problem.
Did not arrive at LHR on this trip but did depart from T5 to CDG, arrived into MAN from JFK and no problem at all at immigration, straight through, only had hand luggage and was in the hotel less than 30 minutes after landing.

MPN11
30th Apr 2012, 16:05
My last two trips through IAD, we spent about 10 minutes at the Border, and sadly had to wait a minute for baggage.
My last two trips through LHR, we spent about 10 minutes at the Border, and had to wait about 15 minutes for baggage.

At IAD they seem to have done a bit of rescheduling of International arrivals, so that the 10 Border Agents on duty at their 50 desks can actually manage the through-put.
At LHR we were apparently lucky, at 06** in the morning. The e-passport gates were operating [yes, all of them], and we were amongst the first to get off the aircraft.

I have no doubt that other airports, or at different times, will generate completely different 'statistics'. And that's the problem: snapshots of when it all goes Pete-Tong make great Daily Mail headlines, but what is the reality? I suspect that the arrival of a bunch of long-haul flights within 30 minutes of each other would test the processing capacity of any Border, anywhere.

As a footnote, last year at IAD there was a 'staff announcement' that 'overtime had been approved for those staff who wished to remain at work to process the incoming International flights'. You can have as many desks as you like, but without the bums on seats to operate them - you're screwed. And who is supposed to pay? ;)

OFSO
30th Apr 2012, 16:21
My BIL arrived at Heathrow last night on a flight from the Far East. At some later point in the flight they were informed that Border Agency staff would be coming on board to check passports after landing.

They didn't.

He finally disembarked and more than an hour's wait later, BIL and wife got back into the UK. I won't repeat his comments here because they are easy to guess.

Heathrow isn't functioning now by any normal standards and it won't be during the Olympics, either.

Shropshire Lad
30th Apr 2012, 16:40
I suspect that the arrival of a bunch of long-haul flights within 30 minutes of each other would test the processing capacity of any Border, anywhere.


I think that is one of the problems though. It's not as if they are surprised by the fact that a lot of long haul flights are suddenly turning up. This happens on a daily basis. Actually - maybe they are surprised by it and that's the reason why we have the queues!!

I can imagine the conversations

"Oh crikey more hoards of people coming though and we still haven't got enough staff"

"I know - that's the 5th time this week and it's only Friday."

"Weird - the same thing happened last week - what do you think's going on?"


I suspect that if BAA have resorted to handing out leaflets apologizing then the situation must be coming to a head.

OFSO
30th Apr 2012, 17:33
I just heard that to alleviate the queues at Heathrow during the Olympics, the Border Agency is considering a system where each arriving passenger checks the passport of the person next to him in the queue. This is so briliant I wonder why they don't do it all the year around......

PAXboy
30th Apr 2012, 20:58
Don't Panic!!!
You'll be relieved to know that the 'immigration minister' has it all under control ...
The UK's Border Force will ensure all immigration desks are fully staffed during summer peak times, Immigration Minister Damian Green has told MPs.
Mr Green made an emergency Commons statement on the lengthy immigration queues seen at Heathrow recently.

He said delays were caused mainly by severe weather disrupting flightsPhew! And there we were thinking it was penny pinching and managerial incompetence. :rolleyes:

BBC News - Damian Green makes pledge over airport queue delays (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17896216)


Added this quote from the BBC article:
Mr Green also said there would be a new Border Force central control room at Heathrow and rapid response teams to deal with pressures across the airport, and new shift patterns would be implemented within weeks.

But the Immigration Services Union's Lucy Moreton told BBC News: "It takes some time to move from terminal to terminal at Heathrow - it takes about 45 minutes to get to each side of the airport.

"So even then deployment isn't going to be an instantaneous thing as Mr Green thinks it is." She criticised him for talking of "an unexpected surge in passenger flows" and said: "These aircraft have been flying for some hours and we do know exactly how many people are on them.

radeng
1st May 2012, 07:55
Latest is that "if it takes 4 hours to process people during the Olympics, so be it".

Head of border agency. My response would be to issue him a P45 for 'gross misconduct'

PAXboy
1st May 2012, 09:38
Taken from an article on BBC web this morning:
Mr Green denied that discussions had taken place between airports owner BAA, the airlines and the government, over whether higher landing fees should be introduced to fund extra border force staff.

The Financial Times claims that the Prime Minister David Cameron would support such a move.

Mr Walsh stated that in the past, the airlines offered to pay for more people, but the move was rejected by the government.Very interesting.

Also, from: Rain blamed for latest chaos in Heathrow queues - Home News - UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rain-blamed-for-latest-chaos-in-heathrow-queues-7697848.html)

Analysis by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reveals that the iris recognition immigration system, which scans the unique patterns of travellers' eyes to confirm their identities, has cost just over £9m – but has only been used 4.7 million times, at a cost of £2 per passenger scanned.

Davidsoffice
1st May 2012, 11:37
Have the passengers never said stuff the queues and just walked through? What would/could the BA do? K, those that need a stamp thingy would have to wait but the rest, especially those with EU passports should just walk.

SLF3
1st May 2012, 11:53
'The performance target is 25 minutes for EU passengers at Heathrow, though the target is routinely missed.'

So even if they meet the target I will still spend more than two working days a year waiting in line at Heathrow - plenty of time to reflect on the benefits of locating an international business in the UK and of paying 50% tax.

And when you do get to the desk, the staff are such nice people.

radeng
1st May 2012, 12:27
There won't be a problem with immigration for people going to the Olympics.

The expert Lord Coe says so!

Video: Lord Coe: Heathrow queues will be sorted by London 2012 Olympics - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/olympicsvideo/9238551/Lord-Coe-Heathrow-queues-will-be-sorted-by-London-2012-Olympics.html)

So he knows more than the head of the Borders Agency....

TightSlot
1st May 2012, 14:30
I'm going to have a rant! I'm sorry, but I just can't hold back any more. A sort of fury wells up inside until it just bursts out (I suppose I'll regret this later...)

The whole crass, tacky Olympics farce is maddening. It's ludicrously expensive (estimating £12 - £24Bn now) and involves the temporary suspension of some of our laws and ancient rights and our ability to travel, and indeed live, normally. I didn't want it in the first place and will be boycotting all tv coverage, London and specifically the sponsors as a result.

I hope that they don't fix the problems at Immigration: I hope the problems get worse. I hope that the world stays away, and that if it in fact turns up there are riots in the queue - at least that way something might get changed in the long term. I love the fact that while imbecile Britain stands back drooling and sucking its' thumb, wondering where the comfort blanket of democracy has gone, other people in the world appear to be deciding that they don't wish to be treated with total contempt by the local authorities. I say visitors should go for it, big time: Fight, Scream, Punch, Kick - knock the desks and the staff over: Hang the Border Patrol managers from the nearest ceiling beam with their own Tensabarriers. Hell, let's provide disembarking passengers with firearms: Maybe they'll move on from Immigration and change some other stuff in Britain for the better?



OK - Sorry. I'm going to have a drink and a lie down now

ExXB
1st May 2012, 15:51
Couldn't agree more Tight Slot.

I too will be boycotting this party. What can you say about an organisation that is sponsored by McDonalds, Coca Cola, and Heineken? :ugh: puke: :vomit:

Apparently British beers cannot be purchased on-site or within a km or two, nor is there any food other than McDoodoo. I'm guessing you can also have any soft drink you want, provided it is made by Crappy Cola.

This ain't sports, it's marketing. (And I'm boycotting their products as well)

radeng
1st May 2012, 16:58
Totally agree with you tightslot. And ExXB.

Why the BF's ever got us into this mess, i shall never know. Proven total incompetence of the politicians, to whom it should have been obvious what the costs would be.

I'd really like heads removed on Tower Green.

Tableview
1st May 2012, 17:03
To the three preceding posters and to everyone else who has expressed similar opinions :

:D:ok::D:ok::D:ok::D:ok:

I was beginning to think I was almost alone in having such sentiments, which in fact apply to pretty much all so-called 'sporting' events.

TightSlot
1st May 2012, 17:28
Aaaah! A Capetonian raises his head

PAXboy
1st May 2012, 20:41
TS + others.

YOU ARE CORRECT!!!
At the risk of this thread now going to JB ...

If my work permitted, I would be out of the country for the whole period and find the tiniest possible island to sit on.

The politicians went for it because they knew that they would all be out of the game by the time the games happened. They had win-win. They 'won' because they supported the bid and then because they got the games. Yet, ANYONE and EVERYONE knew that the money would evaporate into the back pockets of the big boys and the wide boys. The history of the Olympics since 1945 is clearly visible.

I could rant about this for ages simply because it was damm stupid arrogance to get the country into this. Especially when a property and financial crash was already overdue at the time of the bid. So it was bound to have popped at the wrong moment and it did.

And DON'T get me started on that bl@@dy word 'legacy' because the legacy is debt. I lived in the Munich Olympic village for six months in 1999/2000 and could see how amazingly far forward they were in their thinking. They were planning in the late 1960s and I'll bet the things that are left behind in East London are not as good.

Actually, there's no chance of this thread going to JB - because TS is on our side. ;) :cool:

radeng
1st May 2012, 21:45
Sticking my head above the parapet for a minute.............

Is there anyone anyone on Pprune who supports this completely stupid idea dreamt up by mentally deficient idiots?

There doesn't seem to be................

Tableview
2nd May 2012, 06:18
Is there anyone anyone on PPRuNe who supports this completely stupid idea dreamt up by mentally deficient idiots?

I know people in ZA and Australia who are in favour. Easy for them to say that!

I have also heard that a friend's neighbour's cousin's hairdresser has a gay partner who lives in Walthamstow and works for MuckDonalds and is in favour because they will get 5p. overtime.

I have yet to hear of anyone in the UK with greater intelligence than an amoeba who is in favour of it.

farci
2nd May 2012, 08:21
If my work permitted, I would be out of the country for the whole period and find the tiniest possible island to sit on.
Why not come to Glasgow and hide out? We're 400 miles away, the beer's great and the people are nice :ok:

...Oh - hang on!! The Commonwealth Games are being held here in in Glasgow in 2014. We've sold everything in the city to pay for them, we've forcibly ejected people from their houses to build an athletes' village and we will shortly change some of our laws to facilitate the elite's progress through the city. :ugh:

Er, any ideas for that small island for the year after next?

Carry0nLuggage
2nd May 2012, 09:26
I think the only ones in favour of the London olympics are the Parisians.

Back to the main topic. This problem has been brewing for years. Many's the time I've returned from work into LGW or LHR and legged it to immigration only to see the staff closing desks. Funny how they always decided it's time for a tea break just ahead of 2 or 3 or 737's load of pax arriving at once.

Those passport reading machines seem to be even slower than the IRIS ones. Most frustrating to see fellow pax in longer queues going through the desks faster than you can via the automated gates.

Out of interest, what would happen if a large group of UK passport holders held up their passports and marched through en masse, politely but firmly declining to be stopped? What authority do the BF have? I'm guessing the plod would arrest as many as possible followed by a few exemplary prosecutions and sentences.

PAXboy
2nd May 2012, 10:09
COL That is sedition and the thought police will track you down and punish you for even having asked the question. :eek:

Thanks for the warning, farci - GLA is off my list for a while.

As far as I can tell, the British govts have relied on people 'doing the right thing' for a very long time. They have presumed people will ask and then follow the rules. The turnaround will happen one day.

GrahamO
2nd May 2012, 10:14
Evidenced by the number of people applying for tickets, and the massive oversubscription, and the continuing moans about not being able to get tickets on just about any sports website ............ the overwhelming majority of people interested in any sport in the UK are looking forward to the Olympics.

These people however don't inhabit moaning Forum threads like this one - they have their tickets and are happy and looking forward to the events.

A small vocal minority really need to get a life and accept that the world does not revolve around them and their views.

Peace :D

PAXboy
2nd May 2012, 10:45
No problem with that point of view GrahamO. I just hope that all those folks can look back in ten years time with satisfaction at what was done and the value for money. By that time the legacy will be clear, although the financial debt may not be paid off.

I wasn't born cynical, it's just that I've lived in the UK for most of my life ...
Shalom. :)

radeng
2nd May 2012, 11:56
I would be happy with that Graham IF..

Those that want it PAY for it, those that don't, don't.

Those that don't want don't get inconvenienced by it.

It's not a case of 'getting a life', it's case of immense selfishness and inconsideration for those that don't want it.

GrahamO
2nd May 2012, 18:08
/me inserts tongue in cheek firmly

I would be happy with that Graham IF..

Those that want it PAY for it, those that don't, don't.

Thats okay, but we live in a democracy where such decisions are not down to individuals opting out of everything they don't want. For example, your pension and healthcare is almost certainly funded by others that would rather not fund you and let you die early and in pain. You cannot have it both ways. If it was people only paying for things they want, I doubt much of the airline industry would even exist and most posters would be out of a job.

Those that don't want don't get inconvenienced by it.

Nowhere in the world works like that. Every person on the road behind you is being inconvenienced by your presence on the road, and I doubt you consider the inconvenience you present to everyone else around. If only you stayed at home, everyone else would be much better off ? Hoe self-important can one person come across when they expect everybody else to not 'inconvenience' them but will of course expect all the social norms to apply to everyone else.

It's not a case of 'getting a life', it's case of immense selfishness and inconsideration for those that don't want it.

Not at all - its an overweening self entitlement attitude of folks who like to pay and put up with the things they like and want and feel offended if anyone else wants the same, should it not suit them.

Really, it is a case of getting a sense of perspective of your own importance to the world and moderate your expectations.

The anti-olympics lot are a small, irrelevant minority, and as such their inconvenience is of no relevance in a civilised, democratic society. And if Heathrow cannot cope, its because folks don't want to pay a reasonable price to fund the throughput they want. Of course they pay a reasonable price but I suspect ,ost of the money goes on final salary pensions rather than funding direct front line staff salaries.

(thats my grumpy minority viewpoint to which I am resigned to accepting will not be changed)

Tableview
2nd May 2012, 18:25
I'm not sure that "The anti-olympics lot are a small, irrelevant minority, and as such their inconvenience is of no relevance in a civilised, democratic society" is true or even fair.

Whilst I would concede that we tend to mix with people whose views and politics coincide with our own (the major exception in my life and probably most other peoples' being the person I live with but that's another story!), most of the people whose views on this I have heard think it's a massive and utter nuisance at best, and a waste of money and a security risk at worst. Even my sports-mad brother-in-law takes that view and is sickened at the toguht of how much it will cost him.

I haven't seen any polls, but I would suspect that the anti-Olympic brigade are far from being a small minority, but I have no facts with which to back that up.

TightSlot
2nd May 2012, 19:06
Weirdly GrahamO I kind of agree with and understand your points made: This is one of the penalties of a democracy for the dissenter and to believe otherwise would be childish. I get it, I really do...

For me, the problem is that I strongly suspect that a lot of the enthusiasm is manufactured: I'm not convinced that the minority against is that small. The cultural and social pressure is certainly "on" to approve. That said, you're absolutely correct that this was a decision reached democratically and we have to accept it.

My rant was more about the general state of affairs in Britain today - of which the Olympics are merely a part. I'm aware that I sound like 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" and hate myself for doing so - which of course only fuels the cross-ness,

I hope that you, and others, enjoy the Olympics: I won't, but that's my issue. I still hope that the revolution begins with foreigners queueing at Immigration because I despair of Britain ever healing itself. We should not be imposing our sad little management incompetencies on others - It's discourteous, unwise and foolish, since we apparently expect them to simultaneously be queuing up to invest on these shores.

Tableview
2nd May 2012, 19:09
you're absolutely correct that this was a decision reached democratically and we have to accept it.

Was it? By what democratic process was the decision reached? I may have missed something by not having been in the UK but I do have access to the media.

radeng
2nd May 2012, 19:45
If you had the choice, would you take the money and

Spend it on making sure that the elderly needing care in their homes get more than 15 minutes for a visit?

Not get rid of hundreds of uniformed policemen when crime is not under control?

Not see nurses made redundant and wards closed?

Spend more money on getting unemployed youngsters into work?

Get homeless families out of bed and breakfast and into council housing rather than expensive private housing?

Not have Air Ambulances funded by voluntary contributions because the ambulance trusts can't afford it?

Not have workers in the defence industry made redundant and become a drain on the State while depriving the Armed Forces of needed equipment?

Not have even violent criminals let out of jail because there isn't the funding to provide enough places for them?

And many, many more examples.

OR - Fund the Olympics.


Note, too the hidden costs to businesses - and even the Government. Ofcom must have spent a small fortune so far on provisions yet LOCOG said they didn't want to have to pay for radio licences.


And, as Tableview said, were we asked? We weren't, so you cannot say it was democratic decision.

Admittedly, we don't really live in a democracy - we only like to think we do.

PAXboy
2nd May 2012, 22:45
With great reluctance, I return to topic but I would much prefer to discuss this fascinating topic and ALL of the points of view.

Immigration staff are to stage a one-day strike in the bitter dispute over public sector pensions, threatening huge disruption at airports including Heathrow, which is already being hit by massive delays.The Immigration Services Union (ISU), which represents 4,500 Border Agency staff, said its members will walk out next Thursday, May 10, at ports and airports across the UK and abroad.
from: Heathrow immigration staff to strike on 10 May over pensions - Home News - UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/heathrow-immigration-staff-to-strike-on-10-may-over-pensions-7707160.html)

radeng
3rd May 2012, 09:04
The thing I don't understand is this. Is not the pension and all that is involved with it in terms of retirement age, employee payments etc part of the contract of employment? If so, how come the government can unilaterally break that contract without formally dismissing everybody and offering them re-employment on the new contract?

I think some councils have done that: if the employee rejects the offer of employment, can he then get redundancy?

It does suggest that any contract with the government for anything can be broken as when they wish. Ipso facto, then the government never negotiates in good faith......

MPN11
3rd May 2012, 17:49
Oh well, I'm LHR T5 will work perfectly for all International Arrivals tomorrow, whether they are UK, EU + Swiss, or Others.

Or not, of course. :mad:

CARR30
5th May 2012, 12:24
Heathrow is a mess and UK civil servants, particularly security staff, are mostly self-serving jobs-worths.

In what sense is this 'news'?

radeng
5th May 2012, 17:49
Airport security aren't civil service, but BAA employees. The civil servants who do the work are the ones who are being downsized and expected to deal with large volumes of traffic while their managers hit targets for reducing staff numbers - at the behest of politicians with no idea of reality.

One government agency 'reduced headcount' at the end of last year with payouts which were pretty generous. Even to a guy who was retiring in March this year.........They now have taken om the same number of new people in the same grades but without the experience and real knowledge, but they moved the budget numbers by not having people for 6 months so it looks good.....

rjc54n
6th May 2012, 13:25
This mess seems to be a depressingly familiar story of poor decision making driven by incompatible requirements, misplaced faith in technology and a shrill, partisan politics over-influenced by opinion polls and the media. It has been a long time in the making.

The first requirement was the political decision to toughen border checks. A heady mix of terrorist threat and public unease over immigration and asylum whether exaggerated or real, created a political will for perceived tighter borders.

The second requirement was to reduce expenditure in the face of a large deficit, recession and expanding borrowing. To a greater or lesser degree this was the narrative of all parties.

In order to do more work (tighter checks) with less resource (budgets and headcount cuts) productivity must increase substantially. I imagine that this was anticipated as a result of technology investment in biometrics and automated borders. I also imagine that those productivity improvements were grossly over-estimated and under delivered (the error rate for E-passport gates is well documented.)

So something had to give. In the first place the border force took the very pragmatic approach of relaxing checks for low risk passengers at peak times. Alas, this was deemed politically unacceptable (after much press hysteria) and Brodie Clark was sacrificed to protect his political masters.

So now they have nowhere to go. The technology won’t improve things quickly. A pragmatic approach to checking has been ruled out as political suicide and there is a finite pool of trained staff (probably feeling overworked and under siege right now). Given capacity is limited and insufficient queues have increased.

As always the crisis will eventually be managed and the news agenda will move on. However I do find it vaguely depressing that our current climate of public discourse discourages sensible, nuanced, truthful debate and makes these sort of issues more rather than less likely.

radeng
6th May 2012, 15:50
Knowledgeable sources tell me that Brodie Clark was considered useless by many of the Border Agency staff, partially because he didn't know what he was doing. How true this is, I know not, but his popularity with the staff was pretty low.

rjc54n's analysis seems pretty accurate to me, however. The demonstrated incompetence is why I still like the idea of a public flogging of the Home Secretary every time the wait exceeds 10 minutes in the EU queue!

notlangley
18th May 2012, 07:50
The smart people (like the Princess Royal) have found a clever way to bypass Heathrow's queues. Of course the Duchy belongs to her sister-in-law, but anything to avoid the queues in Heathrow.

ptr120
19th May 2012, 22:35
farci,

no laws will be changed to failitate the elete's progress through the city for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, as there won't be any Olympic style games lanes. The only law that will be introduced is around brand protection / ambush marketing, which is a bid comittment.

wub
20th May 2012, 13:52
I arrived at Heathrow at 05:00 yesterday morning and had to transfer from T3 to T5. I was ahead of the pack and as I got to the bus stop, the bus pulled away with 3 pax on board, just as the 50 or 60 people who wanted to transfer were coming down the escalators behind me. We then all stood about for 20 minutes, despite the service supposedly running every seven minutes. It is this kind of incompetence that gives LHR such a bad name and will surely cause it to struggle during the Olympics.

WHBM
20th May 2012, 15:00
I arrived at Heathrow at 05:00 yesterday morning and had to transfer from T3 to T5. I was ahead of the pack and as I got to the bus stop, the bus pulled away with 3 pax on board, just as the 50 or 60 people who wanted to transfer were coming down the escalators behind me. We then all stood about for 20 minutes, despite the service supposedly running every seven minutes.
This is typical of outsourced services (such as the Heathrow Transfer bus) nowadays, where the only measure is whether the bus leaves at the appointed moment, say at 05.10. Whether there are a large number of passengers approaching is completely by-the-by to those from Heathrow who gave out the contract. They will of course never be around at that time of morning to see the doors slammed in the face of those approaching, and probably can't even understand why people are dissatisfied with this approach.

The "every 7 minutes" may be a generic statement, but will doubtless only apply to some other times of the day, not at 05.10 on a weekend morning when the desire to avoid night payments will be paramount, so the schedule at that time is doubtless one bus only. The normal excuse why the full agreed service timetable is not shown is "to mke it easy to understand".

ExXB
21st May 2012, 08:42
Some years ago I was transferring from t4 to T3 (BA online GVA-LHR-HKG). As we approached the shuttle bus stand I overheard a couple of staff talking about "a fire in the tunnel". So I stopped and asked them if they meant the cargo tunnel used by the shuttle buses. They confirmed that the buses were not running, and they had no idea when they would.

Although I had a legal connection the inbound did arrive late and it was getting tight. I asked them about immigration queues and was informed that going land side was probably "an" option. So my colleague and I did that, and with HEX got to T3 as they were beginning to board.

Got on the plane and then waited over 2 hours for connecting passengers. Guess where they were?. Apparently they waited until the fire was put out, the tunnel was inspected, and evening tea break was taken. According to the man accross the aisle no announcement was made to the 'hundreds' of the connecting passengers at T4 and no suggestion made that many passengers could do the landslide connection that we did. Once the buses starting running there was only one every 20 minutes or so.

Missed my connecting flight in HKG, but CX took care of us…

PAXboy
21st May 2012, 11:57
In my experience, ExXB, that is exactly what happens when you take a business and chop it up into little pieces. If you separate and outsource and split to save money, there are gaps that occur where there used to be joins.

On legal paper - it all looks fine - and can be proved to be fine. But it isn't because humans are involved.

I won't start my usual rant about this commercial process that I first saw in the USA in 1988 and has spread as a contagion through government as well. :ugh:

PAXboy
23rd May 2012, 00:25
BBC News - London 2012: Heathrow Airport in numbers (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18162258)
Interesting reading, some big numbers here.


Heathrow in numbers - how the UK's biggest airport is getting ready for the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Some 500,000 people will be flying into London for the Olympics and Paralympics this summer.That includes 100,000 athletes, 20,000 members of the media and 150 heads of state. Most of them will arrive via Heathrow.

It will be the start and finish line for the bulk of visitors, giving the country's biggest airport its busiest day ever.That day will be Monday 13 August, the day after the closing ceremony and the day 65% of visitors are planning to leave.


Some 203,000 bags will be squeezed on to the baggage system - that's 35% more than on a normal day and about 13,000 more than it is designed to handle.


Of those bags, 15,000 will be oversized - full of canoes, javelins, bikes and poles for the pole vault. There will also be more than 980 firearms to check, plus ammunition.

DaveReidUK
23rd May 2012, 20:20
full of canoes, javelins, bikes and poles for the pole vault

I'm pretty sure you'd get disqualified for using a bike in the pole vault, though I believe canoes and javelins are allowed for their entertainment value.

Chuchinchow
27th May 2012, 09:54
I used to enjoy being able to afford and to consume walnut whips. When do readers/contributors to this thread think I will be able to buy one again?

Behind the Curtain
29th May 2012, 14:34
Being a hand-wringing liberal, I have at least two opposing opinions about the Olympics. I think the games themselves are a great thing, albeit one that we wouldn't be paying for had the economy entered its current state a few years early. But they *are* happening, and I want to make the most of it. I don't mind the inconvenience, but then I don't know how much I'll get yet.

What I am more than wary of is the "corporate" side of things and the meddling in our affairs that the IOC require. The shop at St Pancras that is "proud to only accept Visa".

I thought TightSlot's post (http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/482383-heathrow-airport-may-not-cope-during-olympics-5.html#post7167796) a page or so back was very eloquent. If it is a minority that is against the games, it isn't small. I think that's a bit sad but I hope I have at least tried to understand why.

As to LHR... Here's just one sample in millions: I came back from FRA at about 2100 last night. I would have had a short wait at immigration (5 mins?) but as IRIS was working I was straight through in about a minute. Luggage appeared quickly. The BA flight before it was perfect, and at the start of the journey there were just 30 minutes between putting the last glass down at the Wäldchestag (http://www.frankfurt-tourismus.de/cms/tourismussuite/en/events_trade_fairs_messe_frankfurt/waeldchestag_festivals_frankfurt_forest.html) and walking through to air-side. A quiet evening, certainly, but a journey of a kind we all deserve from time to time!