Binman62 - 12/02/2012 00:40 GMT
Have used T5 and Glasgow in last 36 hours plus heathrow express.
T5 2 escalators I tried to use did not work. Lift airside did work but doors sticky and slow. 2 lights not working in the lift. Escalator to BA lounge pavilion not working ( the cloud was however fully operational).
2 sets of doors in Glasgow out of order as was arrival escalator. T5 arrival toilet was pretty unpleasant and only 1 of the 3 auto exit doors working.
Tensa barriers everywhere in arrivals.
Heathrow express .... Why do they have to shout....repeatedly.....over the tannoy. I know it's going to London / t5/ central terminal/ etc.........it does not go anywhere else!
I also do not get this rubbish about security checks. You are prevented from boarding until the train is swept, then dozens of unchecked passengers with lots of bags get on!
The checks are an empty futile gesture and the state of t5 and to a lesser degree Glasgow, is further evidence of why BAA should be stripped of control of UK airports
Have to agree Binman. On my arrival at T1 there was an endless walk to immigration with the only two - anyway short - travelators being out of service.
I also wondered about the need for the station announcement on the Heathrow express, which was my first time, and seemed to go off every five minutes.
Mind you I find the continual anuncements on DLR, overland trains and I think the Tube a nonsense and quite disturbing especially if you're having a chat with someone.
Tim2sms - 12/02/2012 09:15 GMT
Binman62 - you are spot on. BAA have been a disaster. Debt leveraged monopolies guarantee high prices and low customer satisfaction. I believe every airport in the UK should be made to publish its Passenger Service Fee on its web site homepage, alongside average peak hours security line and immigration line queue lengths.
SimonS1 - 12/02/2012 09:47 GMT
Not to mention the abomination of last Sunday.
Any other industry and Comedy Colin would have received his P45 a long time ago.
NTarrant - 12/02/2012 09:58 GMT
Quite agree about the silly, don't board for safety checks, Binman. Complete tosh. It doesn't happen on the tube at any LHR station. As usual some buffoon came up with an idea.
What exactly did anyone expect when the UK allowed an essential national utility (for that is what Heathrow is) to be run by a foreign private company?
BAA's ultimate owners have a long list of priorities - to themselves, to their staff, to their shareholders. Providing a good service to Heathrow's customers (mostly British, mostly captive customers) is very low down on the list, and improving the functioning of a UK national asset doesn't figure at all. Indeed the more flights that have to go via eg Madrid because Heathrow has no spare capacity, the happier BAA's ultimate owner will be.
The idea of selling essential national infrastructure to foreigners who do not share your dependence on it working is a uniquely British stupidity. The fond belief that a regulator can force a company to provide a good service when it is not actually a priority for the company itself has been proved to be false. Britain took the money up front, and is now paying a very big price.
To quote a friend who recently returned from living in Bangkok:
'You fly around for an age in circles, you finally land and once on stand it takes a while to put the jetty at the door.
You walk a long way along bleak, narrow corridors for miles and even as a UK citizen have to stand in a long queue to be snarled at by an immigration officer.
You arrive at baggage claim and your priority tagged bags are far from first. You clear customs who are either absent or there in so much force as to appear intimidating and emerge in to a shopping centre where you have to fight your way to stand in another queue for a taxi, the driver of which knows that you owe him is living and a big tip and you just think WELCOME HOME, what's so great about being back here?'
Maybe they'll invest the money from the sale of STN in improving the disgrace just off the M4 or maybe they will just build a few more shops.
Bucksnet - 12/02/2012 18:45 GMT
Cedric, the whole country is run by foreigners!
Cameron is working for Common Purpose/EU/DVD. Clegg is half Dutch and half Russian. Millipede is Polish. Common Purpose/DVD penetration is endemic in all levels of government; only the military pro-British.
Even if we had a prime minister who had the balls to block the sale of Heathrow to foreigners, he would be over-ruled by the EU.
You're right Bucksnet, but why do the French, Germans, Italians etc get away with blocking the sale of strategic national interests to foreigners, EU or not? Makes my blood boil!
Bucksnet - 12/02/2012 19:18 GMT
Thank you LP.
The Germans started planning the EU in 1941, so they of course are in charge and do what they want. France has been a German client state since the creation of the fifth republic, and the Germans need a powerful state backing the EU so let them get away with whatever they want.
I must admit that I don't know too much about geo-strategic issues regarding Italy, but it seems they don't play by the rules unless it suits them.
I reckon it is the French calling the shots Bucksnet. The Germans are prepared to allow it as they are still apologising for the wars and wish to limit their assertiveness.
The French successfully engineered the CAP whereby although they are a highly developed country still manage to be a net benificiary of the EU. They appear happy to create increased bureaucracy and control as it is part of their culture whilst giving them more jobs. The french citizens then ignore bits they do not like. The Brits and Germans being anxious to comply asap once they have signed-up.
Bucksnet - 12/02/2012 19:40 GMT
Reckon all you want. The French fifth republic is essentially Vichyist and therefore pro-German. France was a German client state even before it joined the EU. Trust me, the French are not in charge.
The autonomous, driverless pod system being trialled in T5 has been well received and a welcome BAA initiative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQle11xtYzY
openfly - 12/02/2012 19:57 GMT
The appalling standards of BAA and its airports are now being highlighted by the new owners at Gatwick. Gatwick has improved so markedly in all areas that the local MP Henry Smith has publicly congratulated them and stated this in the House of Parliament records. Actions such as this should, hopefully get the BAA into action. Mind you, they are so arrogant that my theory will be totally destroyed.
BeckyBoop - 12/02/2012 20:21 GMT
Joy.. state the obvious why dont you and just base it on LHR. You all forget they have standsted and 4 other airports which dont get a mention. xx
Binman you should become the BAA director of operation and strategy and the BA director of customer experience. if you get either postion i will be come you PA!!! xxx
I blame Captain Scarlet for failing to eliminate the Mysterons.
lloydah - 12/02/2012 21:17 GMT
Perhaps the new runway could be disguised with folding palm trees too so that no one in the gov. would notice it.
VintageKrug - 12/02/2012 21:35 GMT
It's ridiculous to identify the Mysterons as the cause of the problem. Disgusted doesn't know what he's talking about.
As long as you don't take up a position of FlyingChinaman's PA, that sounds like a splendid suggestion, BB.
RichHI1 - 12/02/2012 21:45 GMT
I agreew ith all the negative comments about BAA but feel I should point out it was an abomination long before the Spanish bought it. Barajas is actually quite well run. I think the rot is deeper than we think at Heathrow and the other legacy airports. Nice to see Gatwick is imporving by reports here.
Bucksnet - 12/02/2012 22:12 GMT
Rich, BAA was badly run before the Spanish bought it. The trouble now is that the new owners will not run it for the benefit of the country, and have massive debts to pay which lead to higher charges and worse service.
