Thanks Movers...not!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
buoy15,
I have no doubt that as a visiting aircraft, essentially performing an AT task, you have been "fecked around" when all you wanted to do was land, load and go. I once saw/overhead the crew of a Nimrod R1 that had diverted in to BZZ trying to get a crew bus to come the aircraft after the first bus had refused to take them as he was a pax bus.
However,the frustrations that you experienced with all the other agencies are unfortunately part-and-parcel of the AT business. The sections that you complain about actually do get their job done safely - but doing it efficiently, every time, needs manning and experience levels that they simply don't have. Customs are not under the control of Brize, but UK servicemen have not proven themselves trustworthy to this agency. You may have been seen as a slightly lower priority than packing the next TriStar off to points east - not ideal I know, but surely you can understand the need to prioritize.
Such problems are no different to those experienced every day by AT crews - even (usually?) at their own bases. Other RAF bases are usually worse and the US military bases have many of their own special frustrating rules - such as no people on, or working on, the aircraft during refuelling. Airports are generally much better, but we often use the cheapest (and worst) handling agents and the MoD are such bad payers that they will abandon us for their better customers when one arrives. I'm afraid if you don't want to wear day-glo jacket then you should rule out working at an airport - it's not a Brize invention designed to p*ss you off!
In no way do people at Brize think it is the equivalent of Heathrow. In many ways I wish they did, maybe then we could have ATC rules and equipment that are more appropriate for large aircraft. I don't understand what you mean by "competing to be in the same league". Are you saying that Brize should redesign it's processes? Using what as a model?
As for your assertion (I think) that movers are following rules laid down by aircrew - you are simply wrong. Movements regulations are set by the own policy people, striving to adhere to the rules and practices of the airline industry as laid down by ICAO, IATA, JAR and the CAA. Similarly, the regulations for the operation of the aircraft attempt to follow best practice from those sources. What is your suggested alternative?
Finally, as to insulting the crews - again I believe you are simply wrong. Considering the age of the aircraft, the relative inexperience of the crews and the demands of the tasking, I think they are doing a fine job. The last HERRICK RiP saw a 100% dispatch success rate for the TriStar - something for which movers, engineering, ops and crews should all take credit. Do you think that the crew of your tanker on ops behave as BOAC prima-donnas? And, by the way, one difference between BOAC/BEA and Brize crews is in the accident rate; Brize has been doing Strat AT for 40 years without killing anyone.
I have no doubt that as a visiting aircraft, essentially performing an AT task, you have been "fecked around" when all you wanted to do was land, load and go. I once saw/overhead the crew of a Nimrod R1 that had diverted in to BZZ trying to get a crew bus to come the aircraft after the first bus had refused to take them as he was a pax bus.
However,the frustrations that you experienced with all the other agencies are unfortunately part-and-parcel of the AT business. The sections that you complain about actually do get their job done safely - but doing it efficiently, every time, needs manning and experience levels that they simply don't have. Customs are not under the control of Brize, but UK servicemen have not proven themselves trustworthy to this agency. You may have been seen as a slightly lower priority than packing the next TriStar off to points east - not ideal I know, but surely you can understand the need to prioritize.
Such problems are no different to those experienced every day by AT crews - even (usually?) at their own bases. Other RAF bases are usually worse and the US military bases have many of their own special frustrating rules - such as no people on, or working on, the aircraft during refuelling. Airports are generally much better, but we often use the cheapest (and worst) handling agents and the MoD are such bad payers that they will abandon us for their better customers when one arrives. I'm afraid if you don't want to wear day-glo jacket then you should rule out working at an airport - it's not a Brize invention designed to p*ss you off!
In no way do people at Brize think it is the equivalent of Heathrow. In many ways I wish they did, maybe then we could have ATC rules and equipment that are more appropriate for large aircraft. I don't understand what you mean by "competing to be in the same league". Are you saying that Brize should redesign it's processes? Using what as a model?
As for your assertion (I think) that movers are following rules laid down by aircrew - you are simply wrong. Movements regulations are set by the own policy people, striving to adhere to the rules and practices of the airline industry as laid down by ICAO, IATA, JAR and the CAA. Similarly, the regulations for the operation of the aircraft attempt to follow best practice from those sources. What is your suggested alternative?
Finally, as to insulting the crews - again I believe you are simply wrong. Considering the age of the aircraft, the relative inexperience of the crews and the demands of the tasking, I think they are doing a fine job. The last HERRICK RiP saw a 100% dispatch success rate for the TriStar - something for which movers, engineering, ops and crews should all take credit. Do you think that the crew of your tanker on ops behave as BOAC prima-donnas? And, by the way, one difference between BOAC/BEA and Brize crews is in the accident rate; Brize has been doing Strat AT for 40 years without killing anyone.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wherever
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's just poor all round......
I was leaving Akrotiri on posting with my wife and 7 week old child. I had already spoken to customs re my child's lack of passport and they put the necessary procedures in place for us to leave.
On the day of departure the movers proudly announced to my wife and myself that we could fly but our child would have to stay, despite us producing the docs that the customs people had given us. When we were a little upset with this decision we asked to speak to the customs people to be told that the office was closed but would reopen at 1230. The flight was about 30 min later. Deciding that time was off the essence here we went straight to customs to find anyone to find out what was going on - when we got there we found out that the customs office was open and that they would have been shut at 1230 and that the movers knew the times well.
Once we had got my child onto the aircraft( a fairly stressful time) we sat in out VC10 with rearfacing seats and strapped my child's european standard car crash seat into the chair(very secure the helo loadies would have been proud) I was told that he couldn't occupy the seat for t/o or ldg as it was authorised. Fair enough I said - I know the drill been aircrew for a while, I asked for the additional lapstrap so that I could secure my son to myself. At this point I was told that I couldn't do that as they didn't have any lapstraps. When pressed as to what the VC10 crew felt was a suitable method of restraint for a 7 week old child I was asked "can you hang on to him?" by the Steward. At this point I was getting a little frustrated and pointed out that I needed to secure a bag in case it flew round the cabin but apparently I can hang onto a child. At this point I asked to speak to the organ grinder not the monkey and the FS loadie came over and said exactly the same thing. My only options were to hang onto my child or get off the plane. Having fought hard to get onto the plane and with my next job pressing(if I missed the flt it would have been tricky) I foolishly elected to stay on board. I should have got the Captain down to speak to him and then got off the plane if I got no satisfaction. I did complain to the PRO and got a written response about 3 months later(the speed of military paperwork is astounding).
Frankly the military AT fleets should do what it's best at - flying into sh1tholes and pulling out the stops for the boys on the ground and leave flying families etc to the civvies. Appalled at the Movers, AT Fleet and myself(for not having enough courage to do what I should have done - get off) is not the word.
On the day of departure the movers proudly announced to my wife and myself that we could fly but our child would have to stay, despite us producing the docs that the customs people had given us. When we were a little upset with this decision we asked to speak to the customs people to be told that the office was closed but would reopen at 1230. The flight was about 30 min later. Deciding that time was off the essence here we went straight to customs to find anyone to find out what was going on - when we got there we found out that the customs office was open and that they would have been shut at 1230 and that the movers knew the times well.
Once we had got my child onto the aircraft( a fairly stressful time) we sat in out VC10 with rearfacing seats and strapped my child's european standard car crash seat into the chair(very secure the helo loadies would have been proud) I was told that he couldn't occupy the seat for t/o or ldg as it was authorised. Fair enough I said - I know the drill been aircrew for a while, I asked for the additional lapstrap so that I could secure my son to myself. At this point I was told that I couldn't do that as they didn't have any lapstraps. When pressed as to what the VC10 crew felt was a suitable method of restraint for a 7 week old child I was asked "can you hang on to him?" by the Steward. At this point I was getting a little frustrated and pointed out that I needed to secure a bag in case it flew round the cabin but apparently I can hang onto a child. At this point I asked to speak to the organ grinder not the monkey and the FS loadie came over and said exactly the same thing. My only options were to hang onto my child or get off the plane. Having fought hard to get onto the plane and with my next job pressing(if I missed the flt it would have been tricky) I foolishly elected to stay on board. I should have got the Captain down to speak to him and then got off the plane if I got no satisfaction. I did complain to the PRO and got a written response about 3 months later(the speed of military paperwork is astounding).
Frankly the military AT fleets should do what it's best at - flying into sh1tholes and pulling out the stops for the boys on the ground and leave flying families etc to the civvies. Appalled at the Movers, AT Fleet and myself(for not having enough courage to do what I should have done - get off) is not the word.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian Potter
Thank you, - elloquent and articulate, I accept your points
However, when you are on an Ops/CT, which includes an intermediate land/pickup, organised and agreed 24hrs before, with planned fuel and timings, and a notified VIP on board, I would have expected that during BZN morning prayers that day, (and other days) stn management would have highlighted this and we would have been dispatched as intended
The red mist fogs up very quickly when the supposedly simplistic of things don't happen as expected and then start to snowball
I don't expect special treatment or for anyone to flout the rules regarding safety - there is a war on whilst it's peacetime in UK????
But I do expect someone who has reached rank or experience levels to use his/her initiative and common sense - which they are trained and paid for - to assess a situation, and safely say
"Iv'e left my rule book in the office, but that looks ok to me, let them go home - and by the way - they are inside the wire, so they must be bone fide and they are actually on the flying programme - go for it!"
Never had these problems at Lyneham, Gatwick or Heathrow, doing the same format
I suppose Nimrod could qualify for Strat AT since 1968 with no losses!
Thank you, - elloquent and articulate, I accept your points
However, when you are on an Ops/CT, which includes an intermediate land/pickup, organised and agreed 24hrs before, with planned fuel and timings, and a notified VIP on board, I would have expected that during BZN morning prayers that day, (and other days) stn management would have highlighted this and we would have been dispatched as intended
The red mist fogs up very quickly when the supposedly simplistic of things don't happen as expected and then start to snowball
I don't expect special treatment or for anyone to flout the rules regarding safety - there is a war on whilst it's peacetime in UK????
But I do expect someone who has reached rank or experience levels to use his/her initiative and common sense - which they are trained and paid for - to assess a situation, and safely say
"Iv'e left my rule book in the office, but that looks ok to me, let them go home - and by the way - they are inside the wire, so they must be bone fide and they are actually on the flying programme - go for it!"
Never had these problems at Lyneham, Gatwick or Heathrow, doing the same format
I suppose Nimrod could qualify for Strat AT since 1968 with no losses!
Last edited by buoy15; 3rd Aug 2007 at 15:08.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saint Evil,
In 1968 my mother took my 3 month year old sister, my two and four year old brothers and I (aged seven) out to Singapore on a RAF VC10 to meet my Dad who had been posted out to Penang a few weeks earlier. No problem at all.
Since then I have personally have flown on more VC10s than you have had hot dinners, to every corner of the world.
Why do I think you are talking complete rubbish!!!!!!
In 1968 my mother took my 3 month year old sister, my two and four year old brothers and I (aged seven) out to Singapore on a RAF VC10 to meet my Dad who had been posted out to Penang a few weeks earlier. No problem at all.
Since then I have personally have flown on more VC10s than you have had hot dinners, to every corner of the world.
Why do I think you are talking complete rubbish!!!!!!
Last edited by SRENNAPS; 3rd Aug 2007 at 22:08.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SRENNAPS,
Could have suggested the over head luggage space for the ankle snapper, as it,s perfectly secure and if wedged in between other bags the little screaming ****e machine is going no where...................and the closed door would drown out the incessant bleating as no doubt the child takes after his dad.................
Could have suggested the over head luggage space for the ankle snapper, as it,s perfectly secure and if wedged in between other bags the little screaming ****e machine is going no where...................and the closed door would drown out the incessant bleating as no doubt the child takes after his dad.................
Last edited by Seldomfitforpurpose; 3rd Aug 2007 at 23:31.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shack37 - why do you think I am exaggerating a little?
SFFP - could I ask you to confirm which "ankle snapper" you are talking about?
Heliport - Yes just got back from the pub (last night) and no, I was in a good mood, just astounded by some of the replys posted on this thread about fellow colleagues in blue.........Again!!!!!!
SFFP - could I ask you to confirm which "ankle snapper" you are talking about?
Heliport - Yes just got back from the pub (last night) and no, I was in a good mood, just astounded by some of the replys posted on this thread about fellow colleagues in blue.........Again!!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gainesy
ISTR that regular AT pax flights had a thing called a Skycot for babies, sort of a carry cot that dangled from the overhead.
As you say the "Skycot" was suspended from the hat rack that aircraft used to have before the introduction of overhead bins. Back in the days of British United Airways I was a member of the Design Office and recall producing a modification for the BAC 111 to introduce the locating points for the "Skycots" when BUA had the Air Trooping Contract.
As you say the "Skycot" was suspended from the hat rack that aircraft used to have before the introduction of overhead bins. Back in the days of British United Airways I was a member of the Design Office and recall producing a modification for the BAC 111 to introduce the locating points for the "Skycots" when BUA had the Air Trooping Contract.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Srennaps, I don't believe you've had more VC10 flights than hot dinners consumed by Saint Evil. Please clarify "every corner of the world"
You suggested another poster was talking rubbish, were you there? Was that one of your 1000s of flights on VC10s to yet another corner of the world. Just how many "corners" are there.
You may thik you got back from the pub in a "good mood", your post suggests otherwise.
You suggested another poster was talking rubbish, were you there? Was that one of your 1000s of flights on VC10s to yet another corner of the world. Just how many "corners" are there.
You may thik you got back from the pub in a "good mood", your post suggests otherwise.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shack 37,
I must admit I am not sure how many hot dinners have been consumed by the person in question – so I agree I was totally out of order. But trust me I have been on a hell of a lot of VC10 trips.
No, I was not there to see the incident but I would suggest that the person was not properly prepared for a posting back to UK given the publicity on the subject of passports for young kids and he had quite an “attitude” about the subject. I would also suggest that there was an “attitude” towards the cabin staff about rear facing seats and lack of lap straps.
This kind of attitude is quite normal in civie street but sorry it seems that certain people in the forces like to “bring it on” in this modern day and age.
There are only 4 corners to the world ….. As the world is flat…..therefore an oblong…… so, yes I have been to all 4 corners… Having said that it might be have been more?????
Finally, sorry if my post suggested I was in a bad mood, just get a bit annoyed reading about people that blame the system to hide their own incompetence.
I must admit I am not sure how many hot dinners have been consumed by the person in question – so I agree I was totally out of order. But trust me I have been on a hell of a lot of VC10 trips.
No, I was not there to see the incident but I would suggest that the person was not properly prepared for a posting back to UK given the publicity on the subject of passports for young kids and he had quite an “attitude” about the subject. I would also suggest that there was an “attitude” towards the cabin staff about rear facing seats and lack of lap straps.
This kind of attitude is quite normal in civie street but sorry it seems that certain people in the forces like to “bring it on” in this modern day and age.
There are only 4 corners to the world ….. As the world is flat…..therefore an oblong…… so, yes I have been to all 4 corners… Having said that it might be have been more?????
Finally, sorry if my post suggested I was in a bad mood, just get a bit annoyed reading about people that blame the system to hide their own incompetence.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Srennaps
I can see that perhaps you have seen incidents like this a time or two and it appears the travelling lads may have a different attitude to my time in blue when we were only to happy to sit down, strap in, shut up and sleep for X hours. That said, a couple of points made by SE in his post smell of p**sing around by staff who maybe could have been a bit more sympathetic.
Unless he was deliberately untruthful (he should have the benefit of the doubt) he stated:
He had consulted customs (immigration?) prior to travel.
He was given wrong information about customs office hours by movements staff just prior to boarding. If this is so then I can understand a little stress resulting in dummy spitting at the CC.
Anyway, all ended well for him and family so end of story I guess.
BTW. Nice to meet another flat earther, I think I may know those corners
s37
I can see that perhaps you have seen incidents like this a time or two and it appears the travelling lads may have a different attitude to my time in blue when we were only to happy to sit down, strap in, shut up and sleep for X hours. That said, a couple of points made by SE in his post smell of p**sing around by staff who maybe could have been a bit more sympathetic.
Unless he was deliberately untruthful (he should have the benefit of the doubt) he stated:
He had consulted customs (immigration?) prior to travel.
He was given wrong information about customs office hours by movements staff just prior to boarding. If this is so then I can understand a little stress resulting in dummy spitting at the CC.
Anyway, all ended well for him and family so end of story I guess.
BTW. Nice to meet another flat earther, I think I may know those corners
s37
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saint Evil
A couple of points on the regs for carrying children on AT aircraft and lap-belt extenders.
Current AT regs state that Children over 3 should be secured in their seat by the safety belt. Children under 3, but older than 6 months should be properly secured in an Innovint Child Restraint System (CRS) 2500 Seat (provided on the aircraft). Infants under 6 months are to be properly secured in an aft facing Innovint CRS. However, exceptionally, if no suitable safety seat is available (including a car-type safety seat), children under 2 yrs may be held in an adults lap, or placed in their seat and secured by the safety belt. These regs are based on the CAA General Exemption to the ANO on Child Restraint dated 29 Sep 06 http://www.caaerg.org.uk/docs/33/ORS4_598.pdf and the FAA Advisory Circular 120-87A on Child Restraint http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...%20120-87A.pdf
FAA states that "During takeoff, landing and movement on the surface, a child under the age of two may be held in an adult’s lap or be placed in a regular passenger seat and use a standard seatbelt."
The lap-belt extender was withdrawn from the RAF a number of years ago after FAA research showed that the belts themselves could cause fatal injuries to children. The FAA has band them from use on aircraft, along with Harness Restraints and Booster Seats. If you read into the FAA paper on the subject, the accepted risk analysis is that a child traveling from A to B is far safer going on an aircraft, even if un-restrained, than making the same journey by other forms of transport ie restrained in a car.
There has not been a lot of change to the civil regs for a number of years, probably down to costs. An airline can put a fare paying passenger in the seat rather than an infant that will travel for free, or a vastly reduced rate. On an RAF AT aircraft this is not an issue as all passengers, whatever the age, are allocated a seat.
A number of airlines offer a britax Child car seat (eg BA). The RAF used to do this but have replaced them with seats designed and tested specifically for aircraft use. This is the Innovint CRS 2500 http://www.innovint.de/pdfs/IAI_CRS-2500.pdf . As far as I am aware this is the best seat on the market, and is certainly not the cheapest. Other users I believe are the Swiss Air Ambulance.
Therefore kids traveling on RAF AT, not only get a seat allocated, but also are put in the best aircraft CRS there is. They are also still allowed up to visit the flightdeck, not somthing a civil airline can offer. In the very rare case when an Innovint seat or suitable child car type safety seat (CAA definition) is not available, a child under 2 can be held by an adult. Not ideal, but complies with industry practise.
On your other points, If you had come to me as captain with that attitude towards my crew, I would have asked you to leave the aircraft. The primary reason the stewards and ALM are their is for the safety of the passengers, through all stages of flight not just in emergencies. Having seen some of the ways that they are treated by passengers (of all ranks), they have my deapest respect for the restraint they show and the service they provide.
A couple of points on the regs for carrying children on AT aircraft and lap-belt extenders.
Current AT regs state that Children over 3 should be secured in their seat by the safety belt. Children under 3, but older than 6 months should be properly secured in an Innovint Child Restraint System (CRS) 2500 Seat (provided on the aircraft). Infants under 6 months are to be properly secured in an aft facing Innovint CRS. However, exceptionally, if no suitable safety seat is available (including a car-type safety seat), children under 2 yrs may be held in an adults lap, or placed in their seat and secured by the safety belt. These regs are based on the CAA General Exemption to the ANO on Child Restraint dated 29 Sep 06 http://www.caaerg.org.uk/docs/33/ORS4_598.pdf and the FAA Advisory Circular 120-87A on Child Restraint http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...%20120-87A.pdf
FAA states that "During takeoff, landing and movement on the surface, a child under the age of two may be held in an adult’s lap or be placed in a regular passenger seat and use a standard seatbelt."
The lap-belt extender was withdrawn from the RAF a number of years ago after FAA research showed that the belts themselves could cause fatal injuries to children. The FAA has band them from use on aircraft, along with Harness Restraints and Booster Seats. If you read into the FAA paper on the subject, the accepted risk analysis is that a child traveling from A to B is far safer going on an aircraft, even if un-restrained, than making the same journey by other forms of transport ie restrained in a car.
There has not been a lot of change to the civil regs for a number of years, probably down to costs. An airline can put a fare paying passenger in the seat rather than an infant that will travel for free, or a vastly reduced rate. On an RAF AT aircraft this is not an issue as all passengers, whatever the age, are allocated a seat.
A number of airlines offer a britax Child car seat (eg BA). The RAF used to do this but have replaced them with seats designed and tested specifically for aircraft use. This is the Innovint CRS 2500 http://www.innovint.de/pdfs/IAI_CRS-2500.pdf . As far as I am aware this is the best seat on the market, and is certainly not the cheapest. Other users I believe are the Swiss Air Ambulance.
Therefore kids traveling on RAF AT, not only get a seat allocated, but also are put in the best aircraft CRS there is. They are also still allowed up to visit the flightdeck, not somthing a civil airline can offer. In the very rare case when an Innovint seat or suitable child car type safety seat (CAA definition) is not available, a child under 2 can be held by an adult. Not ideal, but complies with industry practise.
On your other points, If you had come to me as captain with that attitude towards my crew, I would have asked you to leave the aircraft. The primary reason the stewards and ALM are their is for the safety of the passengers, through all stages of flight not just in emergencies. Having seen some of the ways that they are treated by passengers (of all ranks), they have my deapest respect for the restraint they show and the service they provide.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wherever
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for info regarding seat restraints for kids(I'll follow the links as my curiosity has been piqued). When we left Akrotiri in 2004 there were no such devices available, which is why I wanted to use my 3 point car crash seat secured with a lap strap on the rearward facing seat of the VC 10 as the best form of restraint. When the reply came from the AT Fleet, I was given a lovely black and white photocopy of the new seats that were soon to come into service - but little help to me at the time.
Surely if hanging onto your kids is the best way of restraining them then all of the airlines would do it as they could ditch the extra lapstraps.
Srennaps - sorry if I upset your wonderful view of the AT Fleet but calling me a liar is out of order. You could always ask the midwife who helped deliver my son who was sat in the rows next to us. She offered to help us get our kit off the aircraft and then fell about laughing as the stewardess offered my 7 week old child chicken nuggets for lunch.
Surely if hanging onto your kids is the best way of restraining them then all of the airlines would do it as they could ditch the extra lapstraps.
Srennaps - sorry if I upset your wonderful view of the AT Fleet but calling me a liar is out of order. You could always ask the midwife who helped deliver my son who was sat in the rows next to us. She offered to help us get our kit off the aircraft and then fell about laughing as the stewardess offered my 7 week old child chicken nuggets for lunch.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 79
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wanted to use my 3 point car crash seat secured with a lap strap on the rearward facing seat of the VC 10 as the best form of restraint.
Well, forward restraint anyway.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Close to ABIW
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pratt - I thought you were banned from posting?
Evil Chap - Read your diatribe with interest. Surely you would have had to go to the Handbrake House before leaving AKT and produce all your docs and satisfy them you were clear in all respects to travel? if so then surely one quick call would have cleared up all the confusion? Surely the High commission can issue passports within 7 days too so was your personal admin lacking?
Evil Chap - Read your diatribe with interest. Surely you would have had to go to the Handbrake House before leaving AKT and produce all your docs and satisfy them you were clear in all respects to travel? if so then surely one quick call would have cleared up all the confusion? Surely the High commission can issue passports within 7 days too so was your personal admin lacking?