Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BBC: LHR T5 Int Arrivals "unchecked"  
User currently offlineJamesontheroad From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 556 posts, RR: 1
Posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6232 times:

I apologise to everyone bored of hearing about T5, but my jaw continues to drop at the revelations about T5...

Quote:
T5 foreign passengers 'unchecked'
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7394621.stm
Updated at 11:42 GMT, Sunday, 11 May 2008 12:42 UK

Security errors at Heathrow's T5 have allowed foreign passengers to enter the UK without showing their passports.

British Airways (BA) blamed confusion over the terminal's layout for overseas passengers being treated as domestic arrivals and bypassing immigration.

...

It is understood the security breaches happened when shuttle bus drivers collected passengers from overseas flights and dropped them at a gate intended for domestic arrivals.

...continues


 banghead 

41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6093 times:

Doesn't surprise me.  Yeah sure

I remember when I got off my plane a few weeks ago at T5 I couldn't make out where to go next. Proving how difficult it is to navigate, they had people acting as guides all over the place.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11708 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5971 times:

Mistakes happen, similarly I was in a coach with LHR-BCN passengers onboard from an IB flight which stopped off at a domestic arrivals point. Nobody noticed, and they didn't even have the excuse of being unfamiliar with the new terminal building.


Dan  Smile



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineRutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3038 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5946 times:

This is what comes of merging domestic and international !
Years of separation just about everywhere in Europe WORKS !

Those few ! shuttle services should be returned to the ideal T1 facility straightway AND NO NEED FOR THOSE FINGER PRINT (BIO SPYING) techniques to be employed on people traveling legitimately within the SAME country.


User currently offlineTheginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5932 times:

A BAA problem this time at least!!!

User currently offlineMDS From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5902 times:

It's ridiculous.
They really need to get their act together with Terminal 5.
Regardless of how complicated it is, there's no excuse for such incompetence.

(Also, my first post!)


User currently offlineManchesterMAN From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 1234 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5866 times:



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
This is what comes of merging domestic and international !
Years of separation just about everywhere in Europe WORKS !

This story has nothing to do with segregation of domestic and int'l pax. This could have happened at any airport. The bus drivers dropped the pax at the wrong arrival point. Could have happened at T1 as well.



Flown: A300,A319,A320,A321,A330,A340.A380,717,727,737,747,757,767,777,DC9,DC10,MD11,MD80,F100,F50,ERJ,E190,CRJ,BAe146,Da
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5866 times:



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
Those few ! shuttle services should be returned to the ideal T1 facility straightway AND NO NEED FOR THOSE FINGER PRINT (BIO SPYING) techniques to be employed on people traveling legitimately within the SAME country.

I've kind of been surprised that BA didn't consolidated all of its domestic operations at LGW and use LHR exclusively for longhaul and most European flights after Open skies took effect. I know that would be a pain for UK citizens living outside of London having to transfer between LGW/LHR to connect but it would solve this problem and make it quite a bit easier for BAs passengers who are just making a connection in LHR.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineTonyBurr From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1041 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5635 times:

United1 says:
"I've kind of been surprised that BA didn't consolidated all of its domestic operations at LGW and use LHR exclusively for longhaul and most European flights after Open skies took effect. I know that would be a pain for UK citizens living outside of London having to transfer between LGW/LHR to connect but it would solve this problem and make it quite a bit easier for BAs passengers who are just making a connection in LHR.


United1, do you fly through London often? Do you fly through international cities, using them as a transfer point often? To say that LHR should be used for long haul and LGW for domestic is quite a statement. LHR is not just an O&D for London. People transfer it for onward flights throughout the world and the UK. How would you see a BA passenger arriving at LHR from NRT transferring to LGW for a flight on BA to MAN at say 7:00 AM. How long would you estimate the time needed to be?
Isn't the problem found in Japanese airports except NGO? How many hour between Tokyo's international airport and domestic airport at say 4:00 PM?

From your travel experience, how would you see the transfers accomplished in your divided London airports with heavy luggage and four children in tow ?


User currently offlineTCXDegsy From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 518 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5604 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 7):
I know that would be a pain for UK citizens living outside of London having to transfer between LGW/LHR to connect but it would solve this problem and make it quite a bit easier for BAs passengers who are just making a connection in LHR.

A bit of a pain? Understatement of the year, methinks!



next flights: BA1441 0566 0581 1446 EDI-LHR-MXP-LHR-EDI
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27316 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5604 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 7):
I've kind of been surprised that BA didn't consolidated all of its domestic operations at LGW and use LHR exclusively for longhaul and most European flights after Open skies took effect. I know that would be a pain for UK citizens living outside of London having to transfer between LGW/LHR to connect but it would solve this problem and make it quite a bit easier for BAs passengers who are just making a connection in LHR.

That has to be the craziest thing I have ever heard !! Its like saying lets make OAK for Domestics and SFO for international flights .

As for the mess up at T5 , I guess there are some very happy people now living visa free in the UK ...LOL...


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5535 times:



Quoting TonyBurr (Reply 8):
United1, do you fly through London often? Do you fly through international cities, using them as a transfer point often? To say that LHR should be used for long haul and LGW for domestic is quite a statement. LHR is not just an O&D for London. People transfer it for onward flights throughout the world and the UK. How would you see a BA passenger arriving at LHR from NRT transferring to LGW for a flight on BA to MAN at say 7:00 AM. How long would you estimate the time needed to be?
Isn't the problem found in Japanese airports except NGO? How many hour between Tokyo's international airport and domestic airport at say 4:00 PM?

I logged about 120K across the Pacific last year (a chunk of it through the much maligned NW hub at NRT.) The year before that most of that was across the Atlantic. As I said it would be a bother for people not transiting international to international or terminating in London. However to your point of someone arriving from NRT and connecting to MAN and having to transit to LGW in order to make the connection, BA operates very frequent flights between LHR/LGW and MAN so there isn't much of a worry about missing a flights. There are already quite a few passengers that have to transfer between LHR/LGW in order to make international connections on BA everyday so its not like theres no precedence for making passengers transit between the airports.

As an example LAX-WAW via London on BA requires a transfer between LHR and LGW.

Quoting OA260 (Reply 10):
That has to be the craziest thing I have ever heard !! Its like saying lets make OAK for Domestics and SFO for international flights .

Its hard to compare SFO/OAK to LGW/LHR as SFO/OAK do not have a single carrier with split hub operations between them, also SFO/OAK are not slot constrained so unlike LGW/LHR there is no reason to have a carrier split its hub. Also why is it crazy to suggest that BA move its domestic operations to LGW and have LHR as its international hub? If anything it would reduce the amount of people having to be processed through customs as there would be no more reason to have passengers making international to international connections clear customs just to transfer between LGW/LHR.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27316 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5514 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 11):
Also why is it crazy to suggest that BA move its domestic operations to LGW and have LHR as its international hub?

Do you know how many British people still depend on LHR for connections to BA's worldwide network? Alot of Domestic flights to LHR feed BA's WW network.


User currently offlineConcentriq From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 368 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5514 times:

Arriving to CDG in 2006 from ORD: apparently french border services were short of staff. we waited for 1 hr in some corridor, after which we were all marched through the border crossing without showing our passports. All they said, that if you need transit visa, wait here for passport stamp. Since Paris was my final destination, i didnt stick around to get a stamp.


Mobilis In Mobili
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5442 times:

Quoting OA260 (Reply 12):
Quoting United1 (Reply 11):
Also why is it crazy to suggest that BA move its domestic operations to LGW and have LHR as its international hub?

Do you know how many British people still depend on LHR for connections to BA's worldwide network? Alot of Domestic flights to LHR feed BA's WW network.

About 11% of LHRs traffic is domestic, I have no idea how many passengers are in transit or are terminating in London. So the entire point behind this thread was to discuss how to prevent people from bypassing customs accidentally.

The way I see it BA and BAA have several choices all of which have pluses and minuses.

1. Continue on as before and hope that this never happens again (not realistic as mistakes will happen from time to time.)
2. Shift domestic operations to another part of LHR (that will increase BAs LHR operating cost as they now need to operate in two or three terminals again Domestic, 757s out of T3 as long those operations continue, and T5. Not to mention continuing to annoying the rest of LHRs airlines as they will have to reshuffle their own flights again.)
3. Move Domestic to LGW and consolidate international operations at LHR (causes domestic passengers to have to transit but at the same time lowers the amount of workload for Customs by ending the practice of having international to international passengers transit.)
4 Structurally modify T5 so segregate Domestic form International passengers (probably the most costly option however may be the most foolproof one as well)
5. Require all passengers Domestic and International to see a customs agent before leaving the airport. (Would add greatly to customs workload and annoy the heck out of domestic passengers transiting and ending their journeys at LHR.)

[Edited 2008-05-11 15:26:10]


Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5360 times:



Quoting Rutankrd (Reply 3):
This is what comes of merging domestic and international !
Years of separation just about everywhere in Europe WORKS !

Either do it the sterile way (segregated), or do it the non-sterile way (everyone clears immigration), but the third way is asking for trouble. Of course the trouble comes from people making mistakes, but the solution has always been to make it less complicated so mistakes are harder to make.

One way to possibly mitigate this problem is to create "domestic buses" and "international buses" with two different markings and colors (orange for one, blue for the other, etc.), and the bus drivers also are assigned to one route or the other all the time (no switching by day, no two assignments on the same day). That way, on the off chance international bus still pulls up to the wrong plane or unloading point, EVERYONE working there would know the error. "hey, what's the orange bus doing here?"



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5255 times:

I realize the demand for gates and slots at LHR is tight, but wouldn't it be simpler to make one terminal for "UK-only" domestic flights, and the rest to be divided up between international carriers?

Let's say T1 is domestic only, and the others become international. In order to access the other terminals secure areas, one must show their passport/onward ticket. Arriving passengers at the other terminals have no access to any other terminals until they've gone through customs.

Practical considerations aside, I would assume Britain's main focus is security. And while I understand that many airlines are firmly entrenched in their terminals, it strikes me as being VERY insecure having this "haphazard" system of mixing international and domestic flights, with the hope that untested technology will make everything run smoothely.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5112 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 11):
There are already quite a few passengers that have to transfer between LHR/LGW in order to make international connections on BA everyday so its not like theres no precedence for making passengers transit between the airports.

Have you ever actually done the transfer from LHR-LGW or v.v. ? It's a NIGHTMARE ! It's really really bad, and viciously expensive (GBP18.00 for a slow, tedious one-hour bus ride). The queue for the transfer bus at LHR is total chaos - even if you book a ticket before hand there's no guarantee of getting on the bus you want without fighting your way to the front of the line. I hate doing it, and will do anything to avoid it.

Quoting Concentriq (Reply 13):
Arriving to CDG in 2006 from ORD: apparently french border services were short of staff. we waited for 1 hr in some corridor, after which we were all marched through the border crossing without showing our passports. All they said, that if you need transit visa, wait here for passport stamp. Since Paris was my final destination, i didnt stick around to get a stamp.

Same at NCE only they don't make you wait. If you arrive very late at night (BA352 from LHR is a classic example), the immgration desks are not manned - you just walk through. Similarly, the desks are only manned after 7am so if you arrive early enough at the airport, feel free to leave France, nobody cares.

Quoting United1 (Reply 14):
Require all passengers Domestic and International to see a customs agent before leaving the airport. (Would add greatly to customs workload and annoy the heck out of domestic passengers transiting and ending their journeys at LHR.)

All Schengen passengers clear customs at their arrival point, regardless of where their journey started. They just don't need to clear immigration.


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5054 times:



Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 17):
Have you ever actually done the transfer from LHR-LGW or v.v. ? It's a NIGHTMARE ! It's really really bad, and viciously expensive (GBP18.00 for a slow, tedious one-hour bus ride).

Actually I have, while transiting from a UA flight from ORD to a domestic UK flight that was not served via LHR and it sucked. That being said it is an option to move domestic to LGW and consolidate international at LHR I never said it was the best option but it is an idea.

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 17):
Quoting United1 (Reply 14):
Require all passengers Domestic and International to see a customs agent before leaving the airport. (Would add greatly to customs workload and annoy the heck out of domestic passengers transiting and ending their journeys at LHR.)

All Schengen passengers clear customs at their arrival point, regardless of where their journey started. They just don't need to clear immigration.

I should have been more specific, a typical usage of the word Customs here in the US is as a combined term for Immigration/Customs even though in reality Immigration and Customs are two separate things. That being said I was referring to domestic passengers having to see an immigration agent (even if its just to be waved through with a stub form a domestic flight and an ID) which would of course add to the line that is already present to clear customs and immigration.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5030 times:

I arrived at IAD once from LHR and rather than directing us along the corridor to immigration, we were let through the inner double doors into the gate area like a domestic arrival. It was convenient for me, but I felt badly for the people who checked luggage. The aircraft was a UA 777 and there was a UA 777 scheduled to arrive from SFO at about the same time.

Quoting United1 (Reply 7):
I've kind of been surprised that BA didn't consolidated all of its domestic operations at LGW and use LHR exclusively for longhaul and most European flights after Open skies took effect. I know that would be a pain for UK citizens living outside of London having to transfer between LGW/LHR to connect but it would solve this problem and make it quite a bit easier for BAs passengers who are just making a connection in LHR.

Few passengers would tolerate that. Most would instead change planes at FRA or AMS, for example. NRT-FRA-MAN or NRT-AMS-MAN would be much preferred to NRT-LHR/LGW-MAN.


User currently offlineCV990Coronado From South Africa, joined Nov 2007, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4977 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Bus Drivers Am I missing something? Surely in 2008 and a First World airport we should be bussing passengers around !


SSC-707B727 737-741234SP757/762/3/772/WA300/10/319/2/1-342/3/6-880-DAM-VC10 TRD 111 Ju52-DC8/9/10/11-YS11-748-VCV DH4B L
User currently offlineBramble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4944 times:



Quoting United1 (Reply 11):
Its hard to compare SFO/OAK to LGW/LHR as SFO/OAK do not have a single carrier with split hub operations between them, also SFO/OAK are not slot constrained so unlike LGW/LHR there is no reason to have a carrier split its hub.

The operations are not the reason for comparing them. It is the distance between them that makes it a good comparison. Why not compare EWR/JFK?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 15):
One way to possibly mitigate this problem is to create "domestic buses" and "international buses" with two different markings and colors (orange for one, blue for the other, etc.), ......................, EVERYONE working there would know the error. "hey, what's the orange bus doing here?"

A simple solution and quite adequate until BAA/BA get the prcedure sorted out in T5. A probelm may be that the transfer routes were checekd by people who are comfortable in airports so can spot/understand airport signage. I have a mate who is a brillant web designer but cannot cope with airports,,his spacial awareness shuts down,his wife has to do all the airport navigation.


User currently offlineUzimmermann From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 61 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4933 times:



Quoting OA260 (Reply 10):
That has to be the craziest thing I have ever heard !! Its like saying lets make OAK for Domestics and SFO for international flights .

Between OAK and SFO you could at least do a ferry and bypass the road traffic!  Wink

Just kidding.


User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3682 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4843 times:

What exactly is the procedure at LHR for ensuring that the buses deliver passengers to the correct terminal entrance ?

I've never been bused at LHR, but at other airports where I have, it always appears to be a quite chaotic procedure


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6132 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4775 times:



Quoting Bramble (Reply 21):
The operations are not the reason for comparing them. It is the distance between them that makes it a good comparison. Why not compare EWR/JFK?

Still not a good comparison, you can't just look at one aspect (distance in your case) when trying to figure out a solution you have to look at the entire picture and one part of that picture is BA has its operations split between LGW and LHR. JFK/EWR are a good comparison just from a distance perspective however neither airport has a airline based at it that splits its hub operations between both airports.

So painting a bus is a simple and easy short term solution, so if my idea is so "crazy" and unworkable what is your long term solution to the problem?



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
25 OA260 : I did it with two cases and it was an experience I would not want to do unless it was the only option. LOL..... true...
26 Elite : Agreed, especially if it is something as major as this - it is directly related to national security. Britain is a prime target for terrorist attacks
27 Sketty222 : The only problem with this is that it increases the minimum connecting time for passengers on domestic to longhaul travel. This means that a lot of p
28 Babybus : Btw, this used to happen too at LGW back in the 80's. Sometimes an international flight would arrive at what was largely a domestic pier, the south pi
29 JGPH1A : Oh no, not this again. Please, it was entirely random, and therefore there is no way for a terrorist to take advantage of the mistake. In any case, B
30 Ncelhr : There has been talk about this at airport executive level, but since it's to do with French Police, it's a thing nobody seems to want to take respons
31 JGPH1A : Really ? Why is it a concern ? All they have to do is get to Spain or Italy and walk across the border. It's been that way for years, it's not been a
32 Luv2cattlecall : True, I doubt a terrorist would enjoy that low level of certainty of getting a "free-pass"...plus, it's not like people are bypassing security and ho
33 Ekskycargo370 : When do you think LHR will be bulldozed and a new airport built in a sensible location?
34 Maskeer : A proper high-speed rail link between LHR and LGW for passengers and cargo may work, methinks! This day and age, even cargo movements may be automate
35 David L : You can if that one aspect is enough to put a lot of people off flying BA via London - people like me, for example. Passengers don't give a hoot abou
36 Concentriq : Is this common occurence? I cant imagine its common in US. I'd imagine this sort of thing would be all over the news here in US. I can just see: "cha
37 Cubsrule : At MIA, they send a f/a on at least some of the buses to ensure that this does not happen. They could do something similar anywhere in Europe.
38 JGPH1A : It doesn't make the airport any less safe - just marginally less annoying. Passport control is an unnecessary bureaucratic headache, the sooner we do
39 Talaier : That would certainly be very American. In any case, usually when you don't pass immigration properly and you don't have a stamp (especially in the US
40 SKAirbus : At gatwick South Terminal and North Terminal domestic passengers arrive at the same area as international passengers. How do they manage to tell who h
41 PanAm747 : About the time that Elizabeth II abdicates the throne... Maybe T3 then? This would split the difference... Besides, if travellers at LAX can change t
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Int'l "Arrivals" At IND posted Fri May 14 2004 18:25:18 by 7E72004
LHR T5: Risk Of "major Air Crash" posted Sat Dec 1 2001 17:56:11 by Singapore_Air
LHR T2 Closed Due To "an Incident" posted Tue Oct 10 2006 16:41:36 by CHRISBA777ER
Int'l "Arrivals" At IND posted Fri May 14 2004 18:25:18 by 7E72004
BBC Breakfast About To Show LHR T5 Preview posted Tue May 17 2005 08:14:04 by Ready4Pushback
LHR T2 Closed Due To "an Incident" posted Tue Oct 10 2006 16:41:36 by CHRISBA777ER
USA Int'l Rout Authority: "US Points"? posted Thu Feb 10 2005 18:39:32 by Lrgt
BBC Breakfast About To Show LHR T5 Preview posted Tue May 17 2005 08:14:04 by Ready4Pushback
Ooo, BBC Spelt Qantas With A "U"! posted Sun Aug 15 2004 12:04:24 by Zanadou
USA Int'l Rout Authority: "US Points"? posted Thu Feb 10 2005 18:39:32 by Lrgt
LHR T5- Finally Running Smoothly? posted Thu Apr 10 2008 12:51:37 by A350
Ooo, BBC Spelt Qantas With A "U"! posted Sun Aug 15 2004 12:04:24 by Zanadou
LHR T5: Automated Baggage Sorting System Fails posted Sat Apr 5 2008 03:51:07 by SINGAPORE_AIR
LHR T5- Finally Running Smoothly? posted Thu Apr 10 2008 12:51:37 by A350
LHR-T5-Baggage Handlers At Fault? posted Tue Apr 1 2008 14:03:55 by TonyBurr
LHR T5: Automated Baggage Sorting System Fails posted Sat Apr 5 2008 03:51:07 by SINGAPORE_AIR
Question About LHR T5 Picture In AW&ST posted Mon Mar 31 2008 17:14:55 by 787seattle
LHR-T5-Baggage Handlers At Fault? posted Tue Apr 1 2008 14:03:55 by TonyBurr
Question About LHR T5 Picture In AW&ST posted Mon Mar 31 2008 17:14:55 by 787seattle