Scottish ATC probs 16th July ?
 

Before I write a rude letter to the carrier, I should like to try and verify their claim:

"blah blah, ATC computer failure today (Monday 16th July) caused many restrictions in Scottish air space. Ou apologies for any blah blah this might have caused."

Thanks,
but that Thanks is 2.5 hours later than it was scheduled to be :mad:

Sorry to dissapoint your letter writing side pal but Scottish ATC went tits up at about 1330GMT yesterday....... Apparently just a wee glitch nothing to be stressed about but it caused a few little delays :)

Hope this helps.

Yes 1330GMT yesterday ScottishATC computers went down.... So genuinely not the carriers fault. :rolleyes: Anybody know how long they were down?

It was also LATCC computers all out too, so I guess that Manchester suffered the same fate. They were off for about 30 mins, long enough to cause said delays. :rolleyes:

Fine, thanks very much folks.

I was slightly concerned as a colleague travelling back to EDI from MAN was delyaed by 90 mins due to non-availability of crew but that could well have been a knock on from the ATC, without the carrier (BA) specifically saying so.

I was on EZY and their shuttle had obviously had incremental delays so that my 20:55 was 2.5 hrs late.

But the cabin crew worked very to cheer people up - so I'll go an put his comments in the relevant thread.

That said, most PAX were rather disturbed by the bounce-and-bump landing!

PAXboy I have thought twice whether I should dignify your post with a reply. The Scottish radar was down yesterday causing delays. Believe it or not we don't routinely lie to our pax and we do everything we can to avoid delays. Flights leaving on time make for happier pax; make the cabin crews' lives "easier" and means we can look at maybe getting home on time.

Like most pax you have fallen into the trap of judging your flight by on-time preformance and the softness of the landing. Maybe you have a very sensitive tush, but the 737 is designed to be landed "firmly", this gets it on the ground quicker giving more runway length in which to stop.

Please try to have a little more consideration to everything that goes on behind the scenes both in ATC, on the flight deck and in the cabin. We do our utmost to make your flight safe and some delays are out of hands. We don't like having to apologise and not meeting the expectations of our paying pax. If you want us to fly the a/c in any condition with dodgy ATC and have soft landings everytime, you'd better find a some remote third world country with a plethora of 20,000' runways.

Didn't notice a thing!!Can't have been down for long surely..
I had a pilot Barbie once..OOPS,no that was a Barbie pilot.Equally aerodynamic...

Dear PB,

I am sorry that I did not explain myself more fully.

Firstly, I do not think that carrier's routinely lie to the pax, this one in particular. The problem is more usually one of omission. Had the captain said in his welcome message that the reason for the problem was ATC computer failure - I would not have said a word. But he used the anodyne phrase, "... difficulties all day." which CAN be used to mask a raft of the carrier's own problems. I realise, of course, that he might have thought that mentioning computer failure would upset the pax and so chose the simplistic answer. Fair enough.

"Like most pax ..." Allow me to say that, having been paxing for 35 years, I am well aware of the on-time performance issues and make full allowance for them. I have been shuttling around the UK and Europe long enough to know what can get in the way of arrival times.

As to the landing - what I said was, "... most PAX were rather disturbed ..." I was not. I have experienced significantly harder landings. However, most pax ARE taken aback by a firmish landing, leave alone a bounce. Not least because they are often entirely unaware of how close touch down is. One lady was very nervous and subsequently became nauseous during the taxy to stand. I knew the firm landing was to ensure that we made the turn off and avoid the back-track. Which we did.

I take a great interest in the airline business and am well aware of the multiple difficulties that are faced by flight and cabin crews every day. My nephew is a pilot (not in this country) and my sympathies are ALWAYS with the line, not the pax.

Please also see my complimentary comments about the CC who continued to make amusing P/As that reduced stress and made everyone laugh.

I have been a fan of EZY since they started using them for leisure and business. I have been through the early days and the cancelled flights AND last New Year's snow problem, so am not oblivious to the downside but I always reccomend them.

Again, I am sorry that, in my attempt to make a brief post, I made it too brief!

[ 21 July 2001: Message edited by: PAXboy ]