Bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 4211 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8361 times:
Quoting Gkirk (Reply 6): So people transferring to long haul flights at LHR are still getting screwed with a change of terminal?
And your latest anti BA suggestion is ?
Which would passengers prefer, another ill prepared move, resulting in flight cancellations and another baggage mountain. Or a few more weeks of transferring between terminals, which after all has been the norm at LHR for the past 40 years or so.
BA needs to ensure that they have got everything right this time before the move, and BAA needs toi ensure that the building work on the terminal is actually finished; bearing in mind that BAA have been telling us the completion date for around 2 years, but half the lifts didn't work on day 1, and passengers reported pallets of building materials scattered around
Sketty222 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1778 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 8331 times:
I think its a very good move by BA management. Now they'll have time to sort out the operation and get it working properly before the majority of longhaul services move across. It will also give them and BAA a few more weeks to iron out any problems with the baggage system so that when the larger aircraft move across( hence more bags) there will be no issues.
I dont know how this will affect the other airlines' moving into the space that BA had previously occupied. I think they may have something to say about it
Pilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1427 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 8055 times:
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 7): BA needs to ensure that they have got everything right this time before the move, and BAA needs to ensure that the building work on the terminal is actually finished; bearing in mind that BAA have been telling us the completion date for around 2 years, but half the lifts didn't work on day 1, and passengers reported pallets of building materials scattered around
Completely agree, and can confirm the place still was a building site when I passed through it on April 1st. Given this was a building that was 'handed over' almost 1 yr ago to BAA/BA for familiarisation and general fitting out, the finish in parts was appalling. Ceiling tiles were missing in large sections exposing wires/air conditioning and heating ducts and there was sawdust/wood chippings and glass panels/railings on certain sections not finished/missing. On the numerous escalators from the first outside Pier back to the main terminal the floors looked scuffed/worn and dirty.
While the visual impression of the building from the outside looked impressive, in the arrivals section after a long haul flight overnight from Hong Kong, I was shocked that the building had been allowed to be opened in such a state, it was a disgrace to BAA & BA
ManchesterMAN From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 1251 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7949 times:
Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 12): Like DEN, HKG etc etc when they opened. Some people have very short memories
I actually don't see how you can even compare DEN and HKG to T5. These were complete airport moves. All BA has done is moved SOME of their flights to the other side of the same airfield. Frankly the move that BA has just made is on a much smaller scale than DEN and HKG and they should have learned from these problems anyway or perhaps not been so publicly confident that T5 was going to work like clockwork from the start.
I wasted 5+ hours of a saturday morning to attend a trial at T5 so this sort of thing wouldn't happen and so did many thousands of other people.
BCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7906 times:
The airlines that were due to move to Terminal 4 on 30 April will now probably be seeking some compensation for the inconvenience, so who will be liable - BA? BAA?
Bearing in mind that already BA will have to pay out GBP 12 million in compensation to passengers as a result of the T5 chaos, it just makes me think that had they spent the time and money to ensure that all their staff had been properly trained and be made familiar with T5, and all systems were thoroughly tested before the first flight landed, the cost would have been a fraction of GB 12 million and BA would have save a fortune not to mention the damage to the BA brand.
I remember that when I attended a T5 trial, a senior BAA spokesman gave a prep talk to participants and said that T5 will set a benchmark for international airports worldwide. Seems the benchmark is a chaotic opening, baggage systems that break down and total disorganisation.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 29571 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 7750 times:
Quoting Elite (Reply 20): Does anyone know if the JFK-LHR route is affected or is it still T5?
JFK will not go to T5 until June
Longhaul flights operating from Terminal 4 are:
Abu Dhabi - Muscat Delhi Montreal
Abuja Denver Mumbai (Bombay)
Accra Dhaka Nairobi
Bahrain - Doha Dubai Nassau - Grand Cayman
Baltimore Entebbe Newark
Bangalore Houston Philadelphia
Beijing Islamabad Phoenix
Boston JFK Rio De Janeiro
Cairo Kolkata (Calcutta) Sao Paulo - Buenos Aires
Calgary Kuwait Seattle
Cape Town Lagos Shanghai
Chennai Luanda Tel-Aviv
Chicago Lusaka Toronto
Dallas Mauritius Washington
Dar Es Salaam Mexico -
Zoom1018 From Taiwan, joined May 2005, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 7736 times:
Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 18): Quoting ManchesterMAN (Reply 17):I actually don't see how you can even compare DEN and HKG to T5.
Quite easily; same problems, different scale. Ultimately though, they screwed airline ops equally successfully at the beginning.
How long did it take HKG to resolve the problems? Comparing an overall airport move and a terminal move is funny... and HKG was like ten years ago...
BlueShamu330s From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 3396 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 4 days ago) and read 7694 times:
Quoting Zoom1018 (Reply 22): Comparing an overall airport move and a terminal move is funny...
Not at all. The principle is exactly the same, just on a different scale. The end result though, when an airline is moving lock stock and barrel, be it 500 metres down the road or 50 km down the road, if it goes tits up, it has exactly the same effect on an airline's operations.
BA, in a bizarre sense, is lucky in that they can hold back on some of the move to sort out the $hit. Relocating to a completely new airport doesn't give you that luxury.