Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

BA - Lesson 1:01: How To Seriously Upset A Group Of Premium Customers

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

BA - Lesson 1:01: How To Seriously Upset A Group Of Premium Customers

Old 30th Jan 2010, 17:09
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 75
Posts: 529
Why ARE shopping centres so important Airside? I have already packed my bags, and they have long since disappeared into the mysterious world that usually delivers them to me at destination. So what is then supposed to happen?

OMG - I can't live without that shirt, I gotta have it and stuff it into my carry-on? Oh, and those 4 ties, and that yummy sweater?

OH - I have never seen a Harrods shop before, I must buy some of that? Keep filling my shopping bag, I'm sure the airline will now let me take it onboard.

IIRC - they even sell LUGGAGE? How does that work when you're already airside?


A little interest in the PEOPLE [those poor souls who actually pay a lot of money to fly in the aluminum tube] and their welfare [I said their welfare, not your profit] might reassure some of us.
Two-Tone-Blue is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 17:21
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: On a plane
Posts: 156
Two Tone-you're going off on a bit of a tangent here mate. The shops etc are all down to the airport operator not the airline. The airport operator has no say on what happens onboard the aircraft with regards to welfare. I don't quite know what your point is with regards to BA's treatment of premium passengers
CornishFlyer is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 17:32
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 75
Posts: 529
Apologies ... I went off one one.

I guess my main point [lost in the haze] was Donkey497's point. So much bullsh1t in the Terminals, and actually very little to justify me paying a J-class fare.

However, I will use my Company letterhead for complaints in future. I tend to keep private and company aspects separate. I have already ensured my Company does not use BA for business purposes - I just happen to be caught in a personal pre-booked BA trip in a couple of months.

I promise to sharpen up.
Two-Tone-Blue is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 17:47
  #24 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 9,047
All old companies are like this - in ANY sphere of commerce (or govt for that matter). There is nothing that can be done about it. There is no sorting things out. There is new Board/Pres/CEO that can fix it, because the corporate response is now so deep and so wide, that it has overtaken company instructions. The need to save money and maintain 'face' is exactly the approach that kills the company/govt in the end.

It's just human nature and it's been like this, I rather think, since man formed the first village committee ... So I have stopped complaining (unless I think I can get a small freebie but then only for the freebie) and I just buy elsewhere. I do this in ALL my purchasing decisions. In this forum, I have been saying for a couple of years that I though BA would not be in it's presently constituted form within 10 years. Once the cabin crew made their decision, and the various responses of the mgmt, I have shortened that to five years.

hunterboy
If BA goes under, who/what do you think will replace them?
Firstly, the UK govt will jump around a lot and splurble at the TV cameras as they always do, "We want to secure as many jobs as we can" blah-blah but the deciding factor will be how much consolidation the UK govt (via Monopolies & Mergers Commission, or whatever it is called these days) will allow.
  • If VS want a big chunk will they allow it?
  • If no single buyer can be found, will they allow it to be broken up amongst several, with the Short/Medium/Long going in different directions?
  • Will they insist it be sold 'as one entity' thus almost guaranteeing it's downfall?
  • What about a consortium led by it's One World partners?
  • What if BD (oops, I mean LH) wants to take the major piece?
The politicos will want someone to buy the husk lock, stock and reinvent Britland Airways/Brits can really fix this Airways/whatever, but my guess is that commercial realities of a market that has more carriers and capacity than needed, will go for consolidation, not more of the same. Thus, I suggest, an independent UK carrier is likely to close.

I take no delight in this and feel very sad for those that will lose their jobs, particularly the 95% brilliant staff (at all levels) BUT this is what happens to old companies and BA started in 1919 and those preceding 90 years that gave them their worldwide reputation - are now dragging on the wings. They lived on their reputation for some time but that too is now fading. I stopped using BA as my first choice after the Dirty Tricks episode, my lack of spend is infinitesimally small and the times that I have travelled on them since then, have been good. My argument is with the mangers.

There are many examples of old companies that have gone under/been bought out, Woolworth's and Cadbury's for two different and recent examples.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 19:30
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 64
I assume the senior manager avoided immigration and customs as well.
V800 is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 20:15
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 130
Hunterboy wrote:
I'm all for customer choice, and the power of the customer. As a frontline BA employee, I am one of the "apologists" that you hear when the buses don't turn up or the BAA jetty doesn't work, or the deicing rigs arent allowed on a stand to de-ice because the BAA H&S police have forbidden it.
If BA goes under, who/what do you think will replace them? Do you think the new incumbent will fare better given LHR's creaking infrastructure?
Are you willing to pay more to expand and upgrade Heathrow Airport?
Sadly, for UK plc, most of us aren't willing to pay.
(snip)
.... thanks to planning constraints, buses are necessary for the life of T5
(snip)
Ah, but so many of us are paying more because of LHR's exhorbitant landing fees etc... what are they doing with all that money?
T5 was supposed to be state of the art, and should have been built to cope with at least the next 10 to 20 years in mind. How come it needs buses to operate after about 2 years? Bad planning, lack of foresight... whatever, it will be down to so-called senior managers somewhere, people not fit to do those jobs
HamishMcBush is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 21:24
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 56
Posts: 493
Having been thouroughly dissapointed by BA T5's "seamless" service over the last year on many occasions, for example European to long haul = arrive T3 stand, bus to terminal, bus from T3 to T5, long walk around endless terminal back to gate with......another bus to the aircraft on T5 stand I can only assume that the whole thing must have been designed by one of those wonderfully British committees with lots of tea and buns and not a cross word said....
rmac is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 21:25
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 731
Terminal 5C should alleviate some of the problems but as far as i'm aware there was never enough capacity planned into T5 to cope with all of BAs needs.

I just find it incredible that these stands without jetties aren't better served and that aircraft regularly arrive without any coaches waiting or steps. I've been on several BA flights myself that have had to wait 15 or 20 minutes for steps to be put on. Clearly not acceptable.
Fargoo is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2010, 22:17
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 684
All the above comments are spot-on. Question is, who is responsible and will anything change?
Where does all that APD and landing fees go? It certainly isn't being pumped into improving UK plc's transport infrastructure. BA and the other airlines have to lump it.
Sadly, because BA is LHR's biggest user, we have to lump it more than everybody else. That coupled with the employment of some of the worse managers and staff I have ever met, mean BA is what it is. Given carte blanche, WW or even I could sort BA and LHR in 3 months. Sadly, life ain't like that.
hunterboy is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 12:49
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: West Wales and Zug, Switzerland
Age: 59
Posts: 416
I can also ask when C will be finished and will this help!
Jarvy is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 18:53
  #31 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 9,047
Jarvy
I can also ask when C will be finished and will this help!
I don't know when it will be finished but I confidently predict it will make no difference. I say this because:
  • They pitched expectations for T5 too high and after such a big fall, it can never be recovered in time.
  • LHR has been known as chaotic for the past 30 years. It was not fixed by T4 and not by T5. No expansion through Sipson will change anything. The place is congenitally poor.
  • The capacity issue was never dealt with by UK govt.
  • The Loco's have ripped away capacity and much money from connections that are now more difficult. to make. So it might have eased capacity demand but it took revenue.
  • Other carriers, such as Continental, have taken up the offers from the regional fields that were enlarged for the LCCs and now can support medium and slightly longer routes, where people can connect easily (USA East coast, or Middle East) so it might have eased capacity demand but it took revenue.
  • Now the global recession has removed much of the demand and will continue to affect us. Since the war, we benefited from US pax who wanted to change planes in a country where they could (almost) understood and often to visit the old country. All of that is going to slide away in the continuing economic crisis. We might be out of recession but that is a purely technical measure, we are still off the runway and have the gear well ploughed in.
The airport has been caught been the conflicting demands of:
  1. British Airports Authority, then BAA plc and it's various owners/managers shareholders that have changed nothing.
  2. Civil Aviation Authority of all persuasions that have changed nothing. 'Light touch'? no problem but, actually, that seems to translate into heavy touch behind closed doors because of (3) ...
  3. Governments of both persuasions that have never allowed clear forward planning. (Remember the whole Stansted inquiry? Will another runway be built at STN? Nope!)
  4. BA has always wanted special treatment to match the special treatment it's competitors get but were not allowed it for T4 and so went full out to get it for T5 and ... screwed it up.
  5. All the folks in transport and govt that took decades to get the Tube connected to the airport and even longer to get the mainline and then ensured that it was horrendously expensive.
These factors mean, I contend, that LHR lost the edge against continental Europe some 20 years ago Since then, the Middle East has opened up as well with their mega-terminals and (some) subsidised carriers. Consequently, the game is over, finished and done. Whatever happens at LHR is all avgas in the wind. The place will remain what it is. As always I repeat, this gives me no pleasure to say but I simply comment on what I have seen in the 44 years since I first paxed through the place as a boy.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 20:03
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oil Capital of Central Scotland
Age: 52
Posts: 426
as far as i'm aware there was never enough capacity planned into T5 to cope with all of BAs needs
Can I ask one simple question?


WTF not?????



What kind of moron (& I use the only because I can't think of a stronger one) has a billion pound terminal built that isn't big enough & has no room for future expansion? The BA board members who agreed to this deal must have the collective brain power of a six week old boiled cabbage.
Donkey497 is online now  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 20:13
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: london
Posts: 177
Terminal C is due to open soon, that should ease congestion and diminish bus transfers.
fly12345 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 21:58
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 731
Quote:
as far as i'm aware there was never enough capacity planned into T5 to cope with all of BAs needs
Can I ask one simple question?


WTF not?????



What kind of moron (& I use the only because I can't think of a stronger one) has a billion pound terminal built that isn't big enough & has no room for future expansion? The BA board members who agreed to this deal must have the collective brain power of a six week old boiled cabbage.
There isn't enough ground space at that end of the airport to cope with the number of flights, there was always a plan to build a T5D where the ancilliary area east is located but I guess the downturn and the takeover of the BAA has put paid to that for now.

T5C will hopefully help but it's still not enough.
Fargoo is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 22:08
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 455
Terminal C is due to open soon, that should ease congestion and diminish bus transfers.
T5C will hopefully help but it's still not enough.
Open soon ? The last I heard was that T5C was not expected in time for the wonderful Olympics
beamender99 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2010, 22:47
  #36 (permalink)  
Just another number
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 1,078
Terminal 5C is due to open in May this year and is on time. It is Terminal East that they are trying to get ready by the 2012 Olympics.

Dave
Captain Airclues is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2010, 06:54
  #37 (permalink)  

the lunatic fringe
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 63
Posts: 617
T5 is squeezed between the two runways to the north and south. The m25 to the west, and the central area to the east. Heathrow is by modern standards a very small airport in area. That small space meant the architects had to go "vertical" with the design of T5. Hence the lifts and elevators that everyone hates.

T5 was never going to be big enough for BA. It cannot be any bigger because of the space constraints.

If the UK was China we could bulldoze most of Staines away...

So the quote below seems a little over the top.

What kind of moron (& I use the only because I can't think of a stronger one) has a billion pound terminal built that isn't big enough & has no room for future expansion? The BA board members who agreed to this deal must have the collective brain power of a six week old boiled cabbage.
L337 is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2010, 08:07
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 38
Posts: 6,168
WTF not?????
Cos there's no room on the airfield. Is that too simple? It's really that straightforward bearing in mind it's built on a reclaimed sewage works. It was the best they could do.

Speaking of capacity, I see that the new gates 247-249 at Terminal 1 as part of the Heathrow East building are already in use.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2010, 11:16
  #39 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 9,047
As I said, governments of both persuasions, have never allowed forward planning. They did not allow the site to be expanded and they did not allow a brand new site - other than proposing them in silly places like mud flats and far out to the East or even far South East. A new site that was further along the M4 could be have been set up 25 years ago but it wasn't and now the cost would be horrible.

The airport is trapped and I am doubtful that the Northern expansion through Sipson will actually go ahead. If it does, I suggest that the operation of the place will remain as chaotic as it is now.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2010, 11:35
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 455
Terminal 5C is due to open in May this year and is on time. It is Terminal East that they are trying to get ready by the 2012 Olympics.
Thanks for that clarification
beamender99 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.