Time to think of our British Wounded

When we watch the news, too often we hear in amongst the latest Economic Problem, Banking Scandal, Company Collapse, the Newscaster say 'Today a British Soldier/Marine/RAF Crew member was killed in Afghanistan/Iraq, or some other far off place and four were wounded' 

Then they move on to the next item probably someone with no real talent who has been deemed a celebrity by the media.
 
Unlike the old saying 'Old Soldiers never die they just fade away'. our Wounded it appears fade from our thoughts the moment the Newscaster moves on.

Fortunately one Charity has been formed to specifically help those who whilst not making the ultimate sacrifice have been wounded in the service of Queen and Country:

Help for Heroes (Support for our wounded)

As we celebrate the birth of Christ, who ultimately suffered much and sacrificed himself in our name, please remember those who who have also suffered much in the name of this country.

Gurkha Courage - Justice for the Gurkha's

A Gurkha soldier serving with the British Army in Afghanistan has been killed in action. Meanwhile four of his comrades in the Royal Gurkha Rifles have been awarded the George Cross, second only to the Victoria Cross in terms of gallantry awards. Once again the Soldiers from a far land are serving our Queen and Country in Combat. Their predecessors have fought and died in many lands on our behalf winning the admiration of those who served along side them and the respect of the enemy they faced.

Yet if they retired from the British Army prior to 1997 they do not have the right of residence in the UK See: Gurkha Justice Campaign Post

As Remembrance Day approaches it is timely to remind people that One hundred thousand Gurkhas fought in the First World War. They served in the battlefields of France in the Loos, Givenchy, Neuve Chapelle and Ypres; in Mesopotamia, Persia, Suez Canal and Palestine against Turkish advance, Gallipoli and Salonika. One detachment served with Lawrence of Arabia.
250,000 Nepalese Gurkhas served in the Second World War and in Britain's (so called) Small Wars to the present day


The Campaign led by Joanna Lumley now has the support of Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons and a Letter has been sent to the Home Secretary requesting that Right of Settlement be extended to all former Gurkhas 

So with cross party support, it shouldn't be difficult to get the relevant legislation drafted and passed in this Parliament!

Three Elections - Interesting Results

Due to other matters and being diverted by another issue, the Idle Man is behind the curve on posting about three important elections, so:

Glenrothes
Whilst back in July I saw the SNP victory in the Glasgow East By-Election as a much needed 'shock' to the current Government
(I enjoyed the Glasgow East By-Election), this time around as one who believes in the United Kingdom, the last thing I wanted was an SNP Victory. The pundits predicted it would be a close run thing between Labour and the SNP and therefore it was a relief when Labour won comfortably.

I found Alan Cochrane's Article in todays (8th Nov 08) Online Edition of the Daily Telegraph particularly Interesting:
Glenrothes by-election: Scotland independence question sank Alex Salmond's SNP as it sums up my views so much better than I can express them!

US Presidential Election
The lead up to this election retained by interest much longer than usual, but with 14 Days to go, I just got totally turned off by the amount of increasingly repetitive coverage being given by the British Media.

However as an Interested observer I was not so much impressed by the fact that Barack Obama won, but the scale of the victory.
Regardless of what happens Barack Obama as the first mixed-race Afro-American President elect has already earned a footnote in History. As President he is going to face serious challenges both at home and abroad, but is also burdened by expectations from his supporters which are so great, that no president could meet more than a proprotion of them. It is therefore vital that he and vice-president elect Joe Biden, build a strong team to support the new presidency that can work their way through the minefield of challenges facing them and with the support of a Democratic controlled Congress pushes through the agenda he has set.
I hope history will assess him as one of the great American Presidents, but only time will tell!

New Zealand General Election
In Britain the lead up to the New Zealand elections have been
over shadowed by Glenrothes and the US Presidential elections, the result marks a shift in New Zealand from Centre Left, to Centre Right, with the National Party winning 45.5% of the vote, to the previously incumbent Labour Party polling 33.8%.

Because of proportional representation system, to form a Government, John Key leader of the National Party is going to have to gain the support of several minor parties and the at least tacit support of the Maori Party. As the Maori Party views on some matters is highly divergent from those of the National Party, this could get interesting.

Helen Clark who has been New Zealand Prime Minister for 9 years, accepted responsibility for her parties loss of the election and will stand down as Labour Party Leader.

The Idle Man see this change as being as much about the electorate being jaded (Third-Term-Itus) about the Labour Government as a vote for National Party Policies.
As an observer, I have had mixed (in some cases extremely negative) views about Helen Clark's policies, but despite this believe she has been an important and overall one of New Zealand's best Prime Ministers.

BAA Refuses British Eagle Tribute Flight - UPDATE

This is an update to my previous post: BAA Heathrow Refuses British Eagle Tribute Flight

The BAA in its original statement as to why the Slots had been withdrawn, gave the reason as: They were concerned that the operation of the DC6 at Heathrow was potentially disruptive to normal operations.
To quote from my previous Post:
As every effort had been made to ensure that the DC6 operation would be no more potentially disruptive than any other Heathrow Flight, this is balderdash!


In the Flight Global News Article, the reason was: Congestion Concerns.
As the Slot Requests were originally granted by ACL (Slot Coordination Limited) Who are responsible for Heathrow Slot Coordination on behalf of all concerned, obviously wouldn't have granted slots if they had any indication that this would cause/exacerbate congestion.

In an email response Mike Brown (BAA Chief Operating Officer Heathrow) stated: To operate nostalgia or other flights of this type is totally inappropriate at such an airport.
This is interesting on several counts as:

• The DC6 has Operated a commemorative flight for the BAA from LHR
• If this was the policy, why were slots initially granted and arrangements made to waive landing and other fees?
• f the DC6 was carrying an AOG Spare, or a commercial cargo, would this have meant it was OK?

In addition, it should be noted that extremely well run European and US Airports welcome the occasional visits by 'Heritage Flights' and do everything possible to accommodate them.

Subsequently the Heathrow Media Centre in an another email response reverted to the Congestion Concerns Theme.

Personally I believe that Mike Brown's stated reason was probably nearest to the truth.

But I will leave final word to someone more erudite than !:
The BAA, the current incumbent of what amounts to an aviation heritage site as well as a major contributor to the UK economy, is also displaying a lack of any sense of history; and a mean-spirited lack of gratitude to the industry on whose past and present motivation its revenues depend.

BAA Heathrow Refuses British Eagle Tribute Flight

Whilst this crass last minute decision by the BAA to refuse to allow this tribute flight to operate, has the Idle Man 'spitting feathers' others are close to apoplexy!

At a time when the BAA needs to win friends and influence people, this decision will lose friends and alienate people, well done chaps!

Background and Summary
As the last leg of a successful European Tour that has taken Douglas DC6A G-APSA to Innsbruck, Berlin Tempelhof (prior to the closure of that historic airpot) and Rotterdam, it was planned to operate into London Heathrow.

This was not just any Rotterdam-Heathrow flight, but to commemorate the 40th anniversary on the 7th November 2008 of the last British Eagle Commercial Flight which was also Rotterdam-Heathrow, with an Aircraft delivered to British Eagle in 1958 (Fifty Years ago).

Now operating into the World busiest International Airport requires more planning than the other Airports on the Tour, but as the Aircraft has visited Heathrow in recent years both on Commercial Charter and two previous commemorative flights (including one for BAA), the team planning this flight understood what needed to be done to enable it to go ahead.

Included in this was satisfying Air Traffic Control that the DC6 could conform to the relevant requirement and this was achieved, plus obtaining the required Airport Slots and again these were granted.

In addition the planning was positively helped by BAA Staff who arranged for Landng Fees to be Waived and by Signature Flight Support the Handling Agents who agreed to waive handling fees.

Yet two days ago the BAA withdrew the Airport Slots because they were concerned that the operation of the DC6 at Heathrow was potentially disruptive to normal operations.

As every effort had been made to ensure that the DC6 operation would be no more potentially disruptive than any other Heathrow Flight, this is balderdash!

The DC6 Flight Team News Report In Full
The following is the full News Article from The DC6 Website an Air Atlantique operation:

HEATHROW REFUSES ENTRY
With great regret we must announce that we are no longer able to visit Heathrow this Friday, 7 November. We realise that this will be a bitter disappointment to many people.

Operation into London Heathrow, in common with many large airports, requires the allocation of a slot for each movement. Slots for our intended operation were allocated to us last week, at which point we confirmed with our supporters that we would be making the journey. Yesterday, however, we were advised by a representative of BAA, the airport operator, that these slots were to be withdrawn because they were concerned that the operation of the DC6 at Heathrow was potentially disruptive to normal operations. In the course of several commercial charters into Heathrow in recent years, and two previous commemorative flights (including one for BAA), our experience has been that the DC6 does not cause any inconvenience. Moreover, we were able to demonstrate to the relevant ATC unit that the normal approach speeds and operating procedures of this Public Transport certified airliner were in line with current standards and would require no special treatment. We have had the great pleasure over recent years to visit each of the other capital airports in Europe. Regrettably, this busy international airport felt unable, at the eleventh hour, to agree to our visit.

Our flight this Friday was intended to commemorate the last commercial flight, exactly forty years ago, of a British Eagle aircraft on exactly the same route from Rotterdam to Heathrow. The captain of that original flight was to join us. We had hoped that this would be an uplifting event in these turbulent times, to remind people that flying can still be a fun and romantic endeavour. Unfortunately it appears that commercial priorities, or perhaps a misunderstanding of the nature of the DC6, has caused BAA to decide otherwise. We are tremendously grateful to our handling agent at Heathrow, Signature Flight Support, who generously agreed to sponsor our ground arrangements, and to members of the BAA team who arranged that our landing fees would be waived.

The aircraft will return directly from Rotterdam to Coventry within the next few days. We will publish the times accordingly. This will conclude public flying for this season as the aircraft enters scheduled maintenance on 23 November.

We look forward to an exciting new season in 2009 and to meeting more of you throughout next year.

Trade Unions and the BNP

Firstly, I will state that I have never been a member of any Political Party and in terms of my politics I am effectively in the centre, wavering slightly to the left, or slightly to the right depending on the issue.

Secondly, I was a member of a Trade Union for over a decade, with the result that I am extremely cynical and suspicious of British Trade Unions, although I still support the need for them.

Now the question is should a member of any extreme Political Party also be a member of a Trade Union?
Having watched in the past, with loathing and deep concern elements of the extreme left attempt to influence and control a mainstream Trade Union, perhaps the obvious answer is NO!

But that rule would disbar someone with strongly held Political beliefs from having a vote on issues that have a direct effect on their Pay and Conditions in a Unionised Company, so membership of a Political Party should not be a bar to membership of a Trade Union, or indeed Guild, or Staff Association.

Then again should the Trade Union Movement align itself with any Political Party, in my opinion NO!
But the reality is that the TUC is aligned with and provides major funding to the Labour Party and that is NOT going to change.

What apparently is being attempted is to allow Unions to disbar membership, or expel an existing member for being a member of a Political Party (Hang ON that is a major infringement of Civil Liberties).

So if I was member of any party then I could be barred from Union Membership?
Apparently so, but this is a targeted attack on the extreme right, in particular the BNP!

Whilst I find the BNP core agenda totally unacceptable, I also find the core agenda of the Extreme Left just as unacceptable, but for different reasons. However neither the British National Party (BNP), nor (for example) is the Socialist Worker Party (SWP) an illegal organisation. So why should membership of either bar membership to a Trade Union?

Well apparently the BNP is a special case because it is deemed Fascist as against the SWP which is merely an Anti-Capitalist Revolutionary Marxist Organisation. So one has Race and Immigration as part of its core agenda and the other wants to turn Britain into a Marxist State (which would certainly result in mass emigration, rather than illegal immigration).

So why has the BNP in particular become an issue inside Trade Unions and therefore because of its political clout with many Labour MPs, a Political Issue in Parliament?
Because the BNP is (unfortunately) doing rather well, especially among the rank and file members of several major unions and also has won council seats in some Labour held Parliamentary Constituencies.

The vehicle for changing the law to allow Unions to bar/expel those who are members of a political party the Union Leadership doesn't like, is the new Employment Bill. This is now back in the Commons after being amended by the Lords.
The rise of the BNP has produced 'fear uncertainty and doubt' in both the Unions and the Labour Party. Instead to tackling the reasons for this move of to an extreme right wing party, they are just trying to smother its ability to gain influence within the Union Movement.

The Unite Union Web Site puts its views as follows:
MPs and unions fight to protect right to expel extremists. Leading UK trade unions and MPs are pressing the Government to show leadership and act to protect unions from attack by extreme right-wing groups.

Fears are growing across the labour movement that unless the Government backs a series of key amendments to the Employment Bill as it enters its key Commons' stages on Tuesday (November 4th) trade unions will become highly vulnerable to infiltration from the BNP and the far right.

According to unions, Labour MPs and anti-fascist campaign group Searchlight, amendments to the Bill made during its Lords' stages must be overturned because they prevent unions from expelling people for membership of a political party, an issue that came to recent prominence when train drivers union Aslef fought for and lost the right to expel a BNP activist from their ranks. Further, the Lords' regressive changes come at a time when the BNP is a growing menace and seeking to extend its bases within Britain's communities.
End of Extract from Unite Web Site.

So the Unions want the right to expel extremists, which sounds reasonable, except this apparently will only be applied to the BNP and far right. Does this mean that the Trade Unions are concerned that so many of their members will become members of the BNP that they will overturn the current leadership at least at local level?
Apparently so!

But what is to stop a Union from applying this to members of other parties, Conservative, Liberal-Democrats, SWP, etc?
Apparently Nothing!

So who will define what is an acceptable Political Party to permit Union Membership?
The Union Leadership, because they know best. Oh really!

Trade Unions should only be concerned with protecting members pay, terms and conditions, plus in skilled trades the applicable standards, not the politics of individual members. But British Unions spend much of their time playing domestic politics rather than actually fulfilling their primary purpose.

Attempting to change the law purely because of Political expediency is almost as unacceptable as the policies of the BNP and SWP and impinges on the Civil Liberties that should be central to our democracy.

The Brand & Ross Sitrep

The situation as of today stands as follows:
BBC Action:
Russell Brand: - Resigned from his Radio 2 show! His TV Show on Channel 4 continues (I fleetingly saw him as I switched Channels - So checked the Schedules). As I indicated in my last post, he irritates me and I don't get his 'humour'.

Jonathan Ross: - Suspended for 12 Weeks without Pay (In effect a fine) and on final warning. I don't think this enough, but at least its something.

Legal Situation:
I still believe Brand and Ross actually broke the Law in two areas (see Brand and Ross Suspended by the BBC) and this remains outstanding,

Ofcom:
Still investigating.

Fallout at the BBC
Lesley Douglas: The controller of Radio 2, has resigned over the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand phone prank scandal.
Although she has done the honourable thing by accepting both responsibility and therefore accountability (something some of our leading Politicians need to learn), I regret that this Scandal has caused the end of her 23 year (and apparently unblemished) career with the BBC.
Mark Thompson: The BBC Director General had a difficult interview with Emily Maitlis on BBC Newsnight (see also BBC Newsnight Wikipedia Entry) but as once he was in the loop (on Holiday when this became a Scandal) took decisive action and therefore will probably be safe in his job for a while.

However during the Interview with Emily Maitlis the subject of a joke about the Queen on Mock The Week was raised. I am a fan of this show, but occasionally it does go beyond edgy into 'out of bounds territory' and I think this joke was an example. The fact it remained in for Broadcast was obviously an editorial decision and whilst I believe it was unacceptable, I and not sure if the majority of viewers would agree it went too far. This is part of the problem that faces all Comedy Shows, who decides the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable. Although the Brand and Ross radio show was so appalling it should have been a 'no brainer' to have deemed it unacceptable, a lot of the after the watershed comedy shows are 'edgy' and therefore the boundary between acceptable/unacceptable often going to be close.

Will I stop watching Mock the Week because of this one Joke?
NO - It was in bad taste, but it was single joke and in my opinion should not have been broadcast. The rest of that show I found very funny and my personal view is the rest of the jokes and banter did not actually cross the boundary. Unlike the Brand/Ross Situation there was no sustained stream of sub-juvenile behaviour.


-

Brand and Ross Suspended by the BBC

I admit that I find Russell Brand extremely irritating and his sense humour totally out of synch with mine, so I neither watch his Television Appearances, or Listen to his Radio Shows.
However a very large number of people think he is brilliant.

As for Jonathan Ross, well.. I think he does Film 2008 as well as any replacement for Barry Norman could. His Friday Night Show is hit and miss, but without Michael Parkinson being around anymore, it is probably the best there is! I don't listen to his Radio Show, so cannot comment.

As for the Broadcast that has caused the pairs suspension, well I did not listen to it, but it is obvious from the transcript that they made several unsolicited, offensive (bordering on the obscene) telephone calls to a private number.
Regardless of other causes of offense during the Programme, they appear to have broken the law under the Telecommunications Act of 1984, the Malicious Communications Act 1988 Section 1 as amended by Section 43 Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 and the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

Unfortunately it appears the maximum they could each be fined is a £1000.00, a sum that is 'loose change' to Jonathan Ross and hardly noticable by Russell Brand. However if these Laws have been broken then Messrs Brand and Ross are both directly responsble and accountable. regardless of whether the recordings made were subsequently Broadcast.

The fact they were Broadcast and without the permission of Mr Sachs and his Family makes things even worse (One assumes there are grounds for Civial Action against the pair and the BBC).

From reading the transcript, the attempts at humour for most of the show was sub-juvenile and much of it was offensive to Andrew Sachs and his Granddaughter. One senses the show became an ego trip, each egging each other on.

The responsibilty for actually allowing the show to Air with both the Phone Calls and the related offensive material, also makes the BBC Editorial, Production Team and their Executive Managers culpable on several counts.

However both Brand and Ross have 'power' in the BBC and taking them on about their behaviour and the shows content would require someone with a strong personality an ability to stand their ground in the face of 'bullying', plus knowing their superiors would support them, not side with the 'talent'. I am NOT excusing the Editoral and Executive failures, just that I suspect
that the Production team had neither the experience, or confidence to deal with these massive egos.

Ofcom, which is responsible for Broadcast and Communications standards are going to have a field day with this. I hope that when their investigation reaches a conclusion, if they decide a fine is appropriate, then it should be severe. From what I've read, a fine equivalent to six months of their salary from the BBC would probably be a salutary lesson for messrs Brand and Ross. As for the fine on the BBC well I suspect it will be very large.

Will this end Brand's and Ross' careers?
As regards Russell Brand personally I wouldn't care if this was the case.
As for Jonanthan Ross, I suspect his career will be seriously dented and it will take a while for viewers to warm to him again. Whether this will end his hopes of eventually becoming an 'elder statesman' of chat shows, probably not, but it will take a lot longer to achieve it.

As to should they be sacked from the BBC?
Personally my opnion is YES. But in reality and the way the media 'protect their own and their investment in talent ' then Russell Brand possibly and, Jonathan Ross probably not.
Even if both were sacked, then they would be back on TV and Radio within the year, because that is how Broadcast Media works in the UK.

However if I was Jonathan Ross' agent, I wouldn't be accepting any invites to guest host Have I Got News For You for a couple of years at least.

UPDATE 28 Oct 2008 1819 GMT:
Russell Brand has resigned from his Radio 2 programme

UPDATE 31 Oct 2008 1418 GMT:
The Brand & Ross Sitrep (On this Blog)

Bournemouth Aviation Museum Reopens

The 24th October saw the official reopening of Bournemouth Aviation Museum at its new site at Adventure Wonderland next to Bournemouth Airport. The reopening was carried out by the Mayor of Chrischurch and celebrated by a flypast from locally based Percival Pembroke BNPH.

The Museum is open daily from 1000 to 1600 (except certain winter public holidays) - See the web site: Bournemouth Aviation Museum

I am really pleased that the Museum has, due massive efforts by the Trustees, Sponsors and the Volunteer Supporters, managed to get back up and running. However the circumstances of its closure on the 17th December 2007 at its original site on Bournemouth Airport, even now are a cause of some angst (See: my post of 08th June 2008 entitled Bournemouth Aviation Museum Closure).

But that is in the past and the Museum has great plans for the future, which I hope they can bring to fruition.

Gurkha Justice Campaign

A Message from Joanna Lumley re:

The Gurkha Justice Campaign

Gurkhas are fighting for Justice. They want the same terms and conditions as their UK and Commonwealth counterparts.

Britain has had no greater friends than the Gurkhas. They have served all across the world in the defence of our Country for nearly 200 years.

Over 45,000 died in the two World Wars as part of the British Army.
They are still fighting in the British Army today.

You may have seen in the media that the Gurkhas have been fighting in Parliament and the Courts. Step by step, things are getting better - but there is a long way to go.

On Tuesday 30th September, the High Court ruled their treatment had been unlawful in terms of the right to live in the UK if they retired before 1997.

Following that fantastic High Court decision, the Government has to change the law on how it treats Gurkhas. We demand the full, fundamental change in the law that will allow all retired Gurkhas the right to live here.

By signing up below you will be expressing your support for all Gurkhas and we will be able to contact you in the future as we mount the largest ever campaign to get them the Justice that they deserve.

Join me in the campaign: together, we can finally right this wrong.

So having read Joanna's Message, please add your Name to the Petition here: The Gurkha Justice Campaign Petition

See Related Post: Gurkha Courage - Justice for the Gurkha's

The last flying Vulcan Needs Help - Please Sign the Petition (British Citizens Only - Sorry)

Those of you who have seen the Avro Vulcan flying will know that it is an awesome sight. Now there is only one flying example, XH558 and this is endanger of being grounded forever.

The Vulcan is a living symbol of the Cold War Era when along with the Victor and initally the Valiant formed the Aircraft Types equipping the RAF Medium Bomber Force and the four minute warning, meant something other than alerting you to your next appointment, or to check the dinner in the oven.

However even in those dangerous times the Vulcan Squadrons could indulge in at a least a wry smile,
Like the successful Attack on New York which so frightened the Pentagon:
Extract from a Guardian Article :
n 1961, four nuclear bombers entered United States airspace, flying high above the maximum altitude of the defending American fighters. Three jammed the ground-based and airborne radars directed at them. The fourth arrived unchallenged and unforeseen, over New York City.

The aircraft was an Avro Vulcan bomber, capable of carrying a 21,000lb nuclear payload. It looked like a scary version of Concorde. The New York stunt was part of an Anglo-American military exercise which proved the plane's ability to deliver nuclear bombs wherever they might be needed, whoever the enemy. The RAF called it "the tin triangle".
End Extract
Come to think of it the RAF Vulcan Crews did play some serious tricks on the USAF as in Red Flag 1977 or 1978 where they used the Girlfriends and Wife's Picnic (with lots of Cars) at a specific geographical location as an offset aiming point to get them on target (tsk, tsk). Getting even snottier on one departure by doing a spectacular full bore ultra short take-off at max weight (thus wrong footing all the TV and Still Cameras), whilst an RAF Type was telling the press with feigned surprise 'that was how they always did it'!

Even when not armed and dangerous, the Vulcan was used to 'show the flag' across the world from Australia, through the Far East . USA and Canada. A single Vulcan doing even a simple display, was as exciting as the Red Arrows.

In 1982 when the timetable for phasing out was set, the Vulcan went to war for the only time in its long career when single Aircraft, each supported by Victor Tankers flew the Black Buck Raids over the Falklands.

Whilst The Government supports the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight through the RAF , the entire Vulcan project has so far only been supported by private donations and volunteers. Whilst we are in a global financial crisis, Government support to keep XH558, is flying is not even going to show on Government Spending statistics.

So please sign the 10 Downing Street Petition: to keep Vulcan.XH558

Honouring the past and inspiring the future.

Links:

• The Vulcan Operating Company and Vulcan to the Sky Trust Site

• THE Vulcan Site to visit is: Vulcans in Camera

Vulcan Videos:
There are a lot of recent video's of XH558 since its return to flight, but the following are often overlooked:

• Anti-Radiation Flash White (The Death Ride Era): The Avro Vulcan - If this had been for real, the surviving Aircraft and their Crews would have had no Airfields to return to!
• Vulcan and Blue Steel (With Test Launch and Vickers Valiant shots)
• What might have been: Vulcan Skybolt Testing
• The Year after operational retirement Avro Vulcan airshow display Commentator/Interviewer the late Raymond Baxter
• AVRO VULCAN XH558 DISPLAY SCAMPTON '91
• Flying the Vulcan

Russia and China End Border Dispute

An event not widely reported has been the formal end of all territorial disputes between China and Russia, so I thought I would cover it here!

During the Cold War period in the Soviet era, Russia felt threatened not only by the Western Alliance, but also by its former ideological partner China. Whilst there were several close calls, other than very occasional and plausibly deniable special forces clashes in the 'proxy wars' Russian Ground Forces and NATO Alliance Ground Forces never met in combat.

The same could not be said of China, where a historical and often bitter Border Dispute dating back to the late 1920's, which after the ideological rift in the 1960's resulted in both sides stationing Armies along the disputed border. Hardly reported in the Western press, these occasionally resulted in armed clashes, in some cases involving major formations and desperate fighting.

Since the end of the Soviet Union things have changed both in Russia and China, so gradually each disputed part of the 4,300 Kilometer (2,672 Mile) Border has been resolved by diplomatic negotiation, starting with the Eastern Border in 1991, Western Border 1994 and a supplementary to the Eastern Border Agreement in 2004.

It is this 2004 Supplement to the 1991 agreement which has paved the way for resolving the last remaining disputed territory the island of Heixiazi Island (Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island) and associated islets and Yinlong Island (Tarabarov Island) both situated at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuir Rivers. This dispute has been the most difficult to resolve due to the Islands and Islets being so close to the major Russian City of Khabarovsk.

Whilst the 2004 Supplement set down in principle how this would be resolved, with Russia returning Yinlog and half Heixiazi, this did not sit well with the citizens of Khabarovsk and in May this year as the proposals were being brought to the Russian Parliament, there was a major demonstration by Cossacks in the City., However high local feeling, the Russian Parliament ratified the proposals in June. This led to the formal signing of the treaty in Beijing on the 21st July 2008. This in turn led to critical comment in the Chinese non-government controlled media about some of the already agreed borders, most notably that Outer Manchuria (Priamurye) is Russian Sovereign Terrority.


Signing a piece of paper and actually changing the situation on the Ground are two very different things. The handover of Territory, Manning of the new Border Posts and the new Border Markers ceremonially being unveiled on the 14 October.

China in particular is trumpeting this agreement and its implementation as an example of how Border Disputes can be resolved peaceably. But actually this is a primary example of two countries interests outweighing their territorial disagreement. China needs Russian raw Materials, Oil, Gas and Nuclear Power. Also their interests coincide on a number of World issues notably Iran and North Korea.

Therefore as an example, this agreement has little relevance to most other territorial disputes, where joint interests are outweighed by sovereignty.

For thos who may be interested Wikipedia has a list of Territorial Disputes Worldwide

Heathrow Expansion Debate at the RGS

On the 7th October, there was a debate at the Royal Geographical Society on Heathrow expansion. From the ABTN Report this was an interesting evening (too say the least). The 'great and good' from both sides argued the Case for and against expansion and I am sorry I missed it!

Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Vince Cable (a politician I normally respect) spoke out against Heathrow’s third runway:
“The business case is weak and overstated, and politically, in any case, it is not going to happen.”
Well I am sorry sir, Heathrow is too important to the country for Politics (see High Speed Trains and Heathrows Third Runway) and the Business Case is unfortunately overwhelming.

Staying with those who oppose the expansion

Sir Peter Hall, Professor of planning at University College London: Denounced Heathrow as a “war time mistake” with a design flaw since 1949. Sir Peter briefly presented a plan for a new airport in the Thames Estuary, complete with high-speed rail links and motorways.
Well Sir Peter, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it is remembered that limitations of Heathrow were recognised quite early on and there have been many opportunities to alleviate, if not rectify the problem. Starting with a more aggressive expansion of Gatwick in its early years, or actually building one of the projects for a brand new London Airport proposed during the 1970's/1980's. Some of these mirror the Thames Estuary Airport you propose.

Moving to those in favour:

Lord Soley, a former Labour MP and campaign director of the Future Heathrow coalition, made his political prediction.
"The Tories will have an enquiry,” he said. “They’ll decide that they can’t cover Stansted in concrete because there are too many Tory seats there, and that a new airport in the Thames Estuary would cost £36bn.”

Lord Soley also highlighted the need for Heathrow to integrate road, rail and air travel in order for both the airport and the UK to remain competitive.

Hmm. I wouldn't bet against that prediction, the sad thing is that whilst a third runway at Heathrow has become a necessity, a new Airport for London to replace Heathrow (eventually) should form part of a long term (20 year) Transport Infrastructure Plan. I would however dispute the cost of £36bn as even if started today any new Airport would cost at least 50bn to do properly. My views on the need to fully integrate at least rail and air travel is covered in:
High Speed Trains and Heathrows Third Runway

Tom Kelly, BAA’s corporate and public affairs director, also spoke in favour of Heathrow’s expansion.
“A new world order is emerging,” he said. “In a new world order global connections is what it’s all about.”Mr Kelly described the advantage Paris and Amsterdam have over Heathrow, each with at least one more runway.

He added: “It does mean that year on year Heathrow loses its position.”

Well that sums it up from a competitive viewpoint!

According to Colin Stanbridge, chief executive of the London Chamber of Commerce:
94% of businesses said Heathrow was vital.“We know that business is in favour of the expansion of Heathrow,” he said. “They are going to improve the connections that will allow business to flourish, and if business flourishes then society will too.”

That deals with the Business viewpoint. So what's Missing. ah the environmental issues. So over to: Mark Lynas, author of three books on climate change, who put forward the
environmental argument against, after stating that:

“there is nothing evil about aviation.”
Quoting the UK’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions 80% by 2050,
Mr Lynas claimed that by then “three quarters of all our emissions will come from aviation if we carry on this way.”
Mr Lynas said the only option left is demand management,
This was seen by both Mr Stanbridge and Lord Soley as a risk to job security in the West London area.

Lord Soley also took on the emission arguement by covering the progress made by Aircraft such as the A380 in reducing carbon footprint.

The bottom line is not altered by this debate. Due to Political ineptitude by governments since the mid-1960's Heathrow is the primary Air Gateway for the UK. To remain Competitive and therefore to help the national economy it needs a third runway. What should be put in train now is a 20 year Integrated Transport Plan for Air, Road and Rail, including a New Airport to replace Heathrow.

From the Political track record this appears unlikely, but even Politicians sometimes have to face reality.

Oh No Lord Peter Mandleson is back!

New Labour's very own Prince of Darkness has returned from his exile in Brussels and been welcomed back into the court, sorry cabinet of Gordon Brown (is this a case of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer?).

Not only that, but to get him into the inner circle. he has been elevated to the peerage in the process (HRH the Queen gets a lot of rotten jobs these days)!

Nick Robinson the BBC Political Editor, who's views I normally respect sees Mandleson as a real asset to the Brown Government
Quote:
'Mandelson brings huge strategic and presentational experience'.
Unquote
Hmm. I see Baron Mandleson as:

• A Self-serving Careerist Politician.
• Someone who has turned 'plotting and back stabbing' into a career plan and indeed art form (his 'bitchy remarks' made within the hearing of Journalists, form a small but telling insight into his pyche).
  
• A revolving Door Minister who after his first resignation should have disappeared from Public Life and after his second Resignation should have been consigned to the dustbin of History. Instead he was exiled to Brussels as Trade Commissioner.
  
• Having said that, as Trade Commisioner in Brussels, I suspect this post suited his Machiavellian nature for Plotting and Playing one off against the other. Also not a bad paying job in the bargain.

Under New Labour standards in public life have become something of a sick joke, but at least I thought Peter Mandleson's time on the Domestic Political stage had to be over. He was no longer an MP, surely there was no way back. Oh no - the instant peerage.

So once again the new age Machiavelli stalks the corridors of power, worse still he is once again a Minister of the Crown. One hopes that he will finds at least some time to do the job as starts his new plots and counts his continuing salary from Brussels and new Cabinet paycheque - but I doubt it.

See Peter Mandleson - Wikipedia Entry for more details on his Life and Career to date

High Speed Trains and Heathrows Third Runway

One of the few definite Transport Policy Stats to come out of the recent Conservative Party Conference was that if elected to Government at the next general election they would scrap plans for a Third Runway at Heathrow and instead build High Speed Rail links to Manchester and Leeds.

• Heathrow is one of the busiest International Aiports, and the primary International Port of Entry into the UK. Whilst Domestic Flights are important, a large number of passengers use these flights as onward connection on arriving from overseas.
• Even if links to Manchester and Leeds were built, not all connecting passengers would use this facility if a Flight was on offer. This means that if these Links were available today, possible reductions in Heathrow Traffic would be minimal in terms of Flights and at most a couple of percentage points in Passenger throughput. Because of the demand for Heathrow Slots, any slack would be immediately taken up and demand would still exceed supply by a wide margin.
• So providing High Speed Rail Links as a substitute for a third Heahtrow Runway is probably the most stupid tranport policy statement in last decade.

Because of incredibly inept Government Transport Policy (both Labour and Conservative) since the 1970's a Third Runway at Heathrow is now a National necessity, however unpalatable this maybe politically.
A second Runway at Stansted is unfortunately also going to be needed and at some point a second Runway at Gatwick, again these are going to cause difficulties for whatever Party is in power. But as previous Governments from both Parties avoided the hard decisions, these failures to act were bound to eventually come 'home to roost'.

From the above, it might be assumed I am against High Speed Rail Connections. I am certainly not.
As far as I am concerned there should be High Speed (Japanese Bullet Train Speeds) Rail Backbones linking all major population centres from the West Country to at least as far north as Aberdeen, with High Speed Cross links between East and West. Returning for the moment to Airports, the London Cluster of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted should have high-speed, high technology Rail Links (for example MAGLEV) linking them and the same type of links between Edinburgh, Glasgow and Prestwick.

.
But surely this ia all a 'pipe dream'! No it should be a 20 Year plan, something British Governments it appears are incpable of carrying through. Also this entire situation could have been avoided.
If Airport Planning has been inept for the last 40 Years, Government Policy on Railways can only be described as totally incompetent for the last 50 Years.

The Beeching Report of 1963 provided an accurate and dismal description of the British Rail Network.
Approximately 50% of Routes didn't cover operating Costs and out of all the Stations on the Network approximately 50%, produced 95% of the revenue from ticket sales!

This led to the Beeching Plan of 1965 and this was basically divided in to two parts:

• The closure of the totally uneconomic parts of the Network. This part of the plan was seized upon by the Politiciians as it saved a lot of money. Which was NOT what Beeching intended.
• The upgrade of 3000 Miles of track and investment in Rolling Stock, Stations and other infrstructure, using the money saved from closures. This was NOT what the politiicians wanted to hear and whilst some major projects covered by the plan were implemented, much of it was quietly shelved.

The failure to implement all the recommendations of Part 2 of the Beeching Plan set the tone for Governments handling of Railway infrastructure projects ever since.
This follows a simple pattern: Commision a Grand Plan, accept the recommendations and then start, or even complete, one, or at most two of the Major Projects and quietly shelve the rest.

How different the situation across the Channel where the French had a plan and in the main stuck with it regardless of changes of Government.

So whilst I regard the Conservative Policy on the Heathrow Runways as idiotcy, I do support their plan to build High Speed Rail Links to Manchester and Leeds, but this element of the policy should be built on, not treated in isolation and should form part of a National Transport Infrastructure Plan with Political Oversight involving not just the Government of the Day, but keeping the Opposition (including the LiB Dems, who have some talented members) fully in the loop. Transport is too important nationally to be a politicial football. We have wasted at least 40 years, please, don't waste the next 40!

See also an Article Posted on th 14 October:
Heathrow Expansion Debate at the RGS

Alitalia - Is the Opera entering its final act?

Despite deadline after deadline being missed the Italian Government has cajoled, twisted arms and I suspected pleaded with the CAI Investors Group, the Unions and Foreign Airlines.

The result so far is an agreement with CAI Investor Group and the Unions, however it is now apparent that a minority stake of around 20%-25% by either Lufthansa, or Air France-KLM is required to make the rescue viable, at least in the short term.

So what is the Situation at the time of writing:

• A the non-core assets of Ground Handling, Heavy Maintenance, etc will be sold, or liquidated. I see this as the next major battle between the Italian Government and the Unions.
• More than 3.000 Redundancies in the Airline (probably 3,200). With those being made redundant being reployed into State owned industries, or direct Government Employment.
• 1bn Euro Investment by CAI Investor Group to purchase the 49.9% Italian Government Shareholding.
• Air One to be 'folded into' the new Alitalia. At a personal level I am saddened by this as the Staff and Management of Air One have worked so hard a building a safe, efficient and effective Commercial Airline.
• One question that doen't seem to have been answered, is how Alitalia continues to operate? The bankruptcy administrator (appointed by the Italian Government) has several times stated deadlines to start liquidation and has said that the end of September was a final cutoff date (See the related article on the 29th August: Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection)
  

On the surface little has changed since the original CAI Investor Group plan, formulated in late August and presented to the Unions in early September. Which after intensive talks was abandoned.
Whilst there has been a lot of tweaking on the subject of pay cuts and other terms and conditions, the major change has been the decision to bring in Foreign Investment, up to a quarter of the total Shareholding in the restructured Airline.

Back in July I wrote an article Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off? in which I noted that the change of Government, which forced Air France-KLM to abandon its Alitalia takeover, was a lucky escape for the French-Dutch Airline. So does a minority stake make sense, for either Lufthansa, or Air France-KLM?

Well, I have considerable doubts that the Unions will not start 'flexing their muscles' once the restructured Alitalia starts operating and that the new Airline will once again become commercially unviable (see my Article on the 13th September: Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?) But there are on the face of it sound reasons why both Lufthansa and Air France-KLM want to be part of the new Alitalia .

Lufthansa (which it appears is the favoured foreign investor) would bolster its already large presence in the Italian Market, plus the advantages of Timetable Integration, which it itself would provide tangible benefits .

As for Air France-KLM, it has watched with some dismay as Lufthansa has built its presence in the Italian Market and see a need to counterbalance this by using a stake in Alitalia. Having negated the Lufthansa's current advantages, the other gains would primarily Timetable integration, which has commercial/financial advantages. However for political reasons Air France-KLM is seriously disadvantaged as a bidder for a minority stake.

Both Lufthansa and Air France-KLM are both in 'Empire Building Mode' and in some cases are competing for stakes, or takeover of several Airlines. So far Lufthansa seems to have the upper hand in those areas where the interests of both overlap.

Meanwhile, sitting on the sidelines is British Airways, which is heavily involved in its ongoing talks to merge with Iberia. It has stated that it is not in the running to buy a holding in the new Alitalia, but has expressed a strong interest in more traditional commercial tie-in. How this could be achieved if either of its major European Rivals has a large minority stake is difficult to see.

Although it appears this is the start of the final act of this tragi-comic Opera, when Italian Politics is involved who knows!

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
13th January 2009:
Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

13th September 2008:
Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?

29th August 2008:
Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection

29th July 2008:
Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?

Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?

The intial deadline for agreement between the Unions ansd those mounting a rescue plan was set for Thursday (11 September 2008) - This as I expected passed, because I thought the Unions would play the brinkmanship card until the after the deadline . But hope still appeared to linger as talks conntiued into Friday.

But finally Roberto Colaninno's CAI investor group ran out of patience abandoned talks to buy the state-owned carrier because of union opposition.

So where does this leave Alitalia?
The simple answer should be immediate cessation of operations. But that is of course commercial common sense, not something that can ever be assumed when a company is owned by the Italian Government and de facto controlled by nine Italian Unions.

The labour Minister was quoted as saying: "The situation is worrisome and getting worse" and followed this with "Alitalia won't be able to operate much longer if there aren't new developments". Well there is an understatement to say the least.

If this was a daytime Soap Opera, even the most hardened Soap Addict would consider the plot too surreal.

The Government Appointed Administrator it appears will not start firing staff immediately, which was previously his implied position if talks failed. But Alitalia will run out of funds at the end of the month and then at least in theory there is no choice company will be liquidated

But it is obvious the Unions in a total suspension of any understanding of reality still believe that a better deal will magically appear, Well this is Italy and suppose there might be divine intervention, but if there is it won't be based on any commercial logic.

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
13th January 2009:
Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

06th October 2008:
Alitalia - Is the Opera entering its final act?

29th August 2008:
Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection

29th July 2008:
Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?

XL Leisure Group Failure; - Here we go again

The XL Leisure Group went into Administration today
(12th September 2008) and the joint administrators decided that immediate cessation of all trading was the only option.

The failure of the United Kingdoms third largest travel group has an immediate effect on customers, staff, companies supplying services to the group (which in turn may affect the staff in these companies) and investors, whether shareholders, or banks and because of the range of XLLG activities these effect will extend globally.

Before background to this failure I think it necessary to list the companies which form XL Leisure Group many of which do not have XL as part of there trading Name and at the same time provide links to useful information to XLLG Customers:

XL Leisure Group - Companies and Holdings
First I will cover companies in the group which should provide British customer protection under the CAA run ATOL Scheme:

• The Really Great Holiday Company PLC - ATOL 3827 Trading as:
  
  • Cruise City
  • Excel Holidays
  • The Florida Skytrain
  • Transatlantic Vacations
  • Travel City Direct
  • Travel City International


• Kosmar Villa Holidays PLC - ATOL 1760


• Freedom Flights Limited - ATOL 5296


• Aspire Holidays Limited - ATOL 6536

British Customers who are on, or have booked Inclusive Tours Holidays through the above XL Leisure Group Companies should be protected by the CAA run ATOL Scheme and the Links above are directed to the relevant form for that company. However some of the above may also have Flight Only offerings and these may not be covered!

The XL Leisure Group also own the following companies offering services to British Customers:

• XL Airways - Flight No's XLA - Whilst NOT Covered by the CAA ATOL Scheme see this page: CAA run ATOL Scheme See also the ABTA Advisory
• Medlife -See the ABTA Advisory
  
• In addition it has a 20% Stake in Libra Holidays
• It also has very close relationship with two French Tour Operating Companies CrystalTO and Heliades.

The XL Leisure Group also have Airline Subsidairies in France, Germany and Ireland: Neither the French nor German Airlines have been affected by the Parents failure and continue to trade normally (sources CAA and XL Web Site), but the Irish Airline appeared moribund even before the collaspe:

• XL Airways France Wikipedia Entry
• XL Airways Germany Wikipedia Entry
• XL Airways Ireland

The Commercial Arms of XL Leisure Group:

• XL Aviation -XL Aviation is the commercial sales arm of XLLG. It sells charter capacity on flights operated by XL Airways and also buys and sell charter capacity on numerous other airlines.
• XL24 - XL24 is a dealer in "relief" aircraft in the airline-to-airline market, providing sub-chartered aircraft from the XL Airways and other fleets to other airlines who require the extra capacity on short notice.

Finally there are two other airlines in which the XL Leisure Group has a share holding:

• Xtra Airways - USA 19%
• Skywest - Australian 5%

Because of the size of the XLLG Groups British Activities this failure has been considered the greatest since Court Line in 1974.

Impact on those who have to deal with the Immediate Aftermath
Whilst the media obviously concentrate on the impact on Customers they never consider the efforts of the failed groups employees and agencies staff who have to deal with the immediate and ongoing aftermath of the failure.

British Travel Group and AIrline failures always seem to be decided in the small hours of the morning (Court Line, Laker Airways, International Leisure Group, spring to mind). This means the first non-executive staff who are aware of the situation are the Night Shift Operations and Crewing Staff.

Whilst being now aware they probably soon won't have a job in the near future, they have to get on with the task of getting a sitrep out to all their Customer Representatives at destinations around the world and to crews Nightstopping overseas, in most cases this will have to be initiated by a Phone Call which will slow things down.

As this progresses they will have to commence the notification of Ground Handling Agencies around the Route Network to brace themselves for what is to come (bearing in mind these Ground Handling Agencies will also be owed money).

The CAA will also be among the first notified and they will have to start the work of planning and implementing the rescue of ATOL covered passengers, plus building it Web Site Advisory Notices etc, other parties such as ABTA will also have to be advised and by this time the Media will be 'on the case'.

Bad News travels fast and soon the Operations and Crewing Centres will be bolstered by PR and Enquiries Staff. By the time the first Passengers start to arrive at European Destination Check-in, most Sections in the affected Airline and Travel Companies will be manned, whether these are customer contact, or not.
Whilst these sections workload will dramatically increase as the day wears on at least they are spared directly facing the Passengers.

Even when pre-warned the Ground Handling Agencies will not have much time to call-in extra staff and initially at least they and the Company Representatives will be overwhelmed, especially as the rest of the Ground Handling Agencies Operations have to continue normally.

The situation will get worse if there are a lot of affected flights through the Airport and each flight has Passengers some of whom are protected under ATOL and some who aren't. With the assistance of the Airport Authority it may be possible to at least move these passengers to a special area of the terminal building. But it is very unlikely that the Company Representatives will have sufficient local funds to provide even Light Refreshments.

Representative at the Hotels where customers are staying will now also be in the 'firing line' and with even less direct support than their colleagues at the Airports.

Whilst the first day is always the worst day in reality, for the company and agency staffs it is usually the second day that seems the worst because although the rescue of the stranded has started, those not covered by the ATOL Scheme will becoming more desperate, and although the general situation will improved at the individual level, the customers will be even more frustrated and angry and the staff attempting to deal with the situation will now be overtired.

By now writs and impounding of assets by Agencies and Airport Operators probably will have started and even as the stranded passengers , crews, station engineers if expatriates and later as the Hotels clear, the Hotel Representatives are repatriated the work for the Airport Based staff changes, but goes on as they try to keep Head Office informed and deal with local debts and in some cases income.

The fact that almost all such staff stay on the job in some cases without knowing if they will get paid never ceases to amaze me (the two extremes I know of was a representative on when being told his company had failed took the cash box and company car an ran for it, the other was a Guy who spend six months in Lagos after the Airline Failure and having told Head Office that he could do no more, was sent a thank you message, but no Ticket. British Airways very kindly flew him home, to discover for some to the period he hadn't been paid).

However normally after seven days most of the 'front line' action will be over and most overseas representation will either have been repatriated, or made redundant if locally employed.
The callcentres and operations centres including crewing and engineering will linger on with decreasing coverage for about six months.
The Head Quarters and Operational Back Office Sections will be rapidly wound down, but a small number of staff will be retained for an extended period as the company is liquidated some might even be there for a year or two.

But most staff will be out of work within two months. For the Customers a ruined Holiday for the Staff a difficult and in some cases bleak future.

It must be borne in mind staff in supplier organizations may also in some cases be affected and some businesses owed a lot of money may themselves go under.

Regardless, the Administration of the Liquidation such a large and relatively organization will continue and indeed in 5 years time may still be ongoing.

Reasons for Failure
The reasons quoted are the result of volatile fuel prices, the economic downturn, and were unable to obtain further funding.
All of which is no doubt true, just as it was for the failures in the past of Court Line, Laker Airways and ILG (International Leisure Group).

But just as in these cases there is slightly more too it than that. Like the three mentioned above XL Leisure Group has expanded aggressively in a very short time. At lot of this expansion following the Management Buyout of 51% of the equity, with the previous owners Avion Group of Iceland retaining 49%.

Such rapid expansion requires funding and that funding is obtained on the basis of sustained growth and a favourable interest rate coupled with NO major changes in operating costs. Well two out of the three have not gone XLLG's way!

It appears that XLLG's failure has caught the General Media at least by surprise, but like Court Line, Laker and ILG the signs have been noted in the Financial and Airline and Travel Industry Presss for weeks, with early indicators back at the end of 2007.

For Example:
Travel Weekly - November 2007 - XL Leisure Group sheds 500 jobs (although the reference to Libra Holidays is I consider the most important)
TTG - June 2008 - XL Leisure Group records £24m loss
Times Online - 31 August - XL Leisure Group enters crisis funding talks
Telegraph 31 August 2008 - Hope for XL after lenders spend the weekend in talks

From the 1st September the coverage in Business sections continued to rise, but I think you have got the flavour of the concerns being expressed.
As additional funding did not come to fruition and the main revenue earning season coming to an end (which obviously had not been that impressive as far as the financial instutions were concerned), then Administration was going to be likely. When it came about the Administrators were obviously so concerned they shut down operations immediately.

Gustav and Civilian Telecommunications

This post is related to my more general comments on the
Handling of the Gustav Hurricane Emergency
Whilst in the US the Emergency Services, Police National Guard and Coastguard, have dedicated Radio Networks and Landlines to maintain their Communications, Civilians are dependent on their normal service providers.

As my interest in telecommunications is both professional and personal, my attention was quickly drawn to an article by:
Rajani Baburajan on TMC Net entitled Service Providers Step up to the Challenges Presented by Hurricane Gustav.

Most of this post is made up of comments on extracts from her article, which starts:

The strength and weaknesses of communications technologies are revealed during disasters. People depend on these technologies during emergencies, and during such times offering flawless services is of utmost concern to providers.

The impact of Hurricane Gustav is the latest example of such a situation. Maintaining telecom infrastructure during hurricanes is a difficult task, made more difficult by increased volume of calls from people checking on friends, colleagues and loved ones in the hurricane zone — volume that can result in overloaded networks.

Extremely well put, I wish I could write as clearly and concisely as Rajani. In the UK we tend to forget how easily Mobile Networks can be overloaded especially when a very large number of simultaneous calls are attempted from the same cellular cluster. In the US this can be exacerbated by operator coverage limitations, which in the UK are only experienced by a relatively small percentage of users regardless of operator.

As for Landline Telephony, both in the US and the UK, there is an almost religious belief we will be able to connect a landline to landline call, but actually this is NOT the case. Whilst landline networks normally have a large contingency volume handling capacity they can under certain circumstance reach this. Especially if there has been damage to local, or enroute network infrastructure. Whilst my limited knowledge of the UK Disaster procedures for Landline Networks is at least 15 Years out of date, I assume the Cascading Priorities still apply with at its most extreme only Government and nationally vital telephone numbers will be allowed to connect calls.

Back to the Gustav Emergency: The two dominant operators in the affect areas are the resurgent AT&T and T-Mobile. Again quoting from Rajani's article:

In anticipation of power outages and network jams that can occur during hurricanes, major service providers including AT&T and T-Mobile this weekend prepared their teams to deal with hurricane Gustav in a competitive manner.

The last two words which I have highlighted caused me to raise an eyebrow! Dealing with a disaster of potentially massive proportions in a competitive manner, hmm, surely this is a typo, obviously this should be cooperative manner.

No it wasn't a mistake as the next few paragraphs relating to AT&T revealed:

AT&T on Sunday announced the availability of more than 2,000 GoPhone devices with $15 airtime to people who were ordered to evacuate. The phones were made available on a first-come first-serve basis to residents who live in areas where mandatory evacuation was ordered.

AT&T distributed the phones through its retail locations in Houston and San Antonio, Texas, where a large number of evacuees from Louisiana and southeast Texas were staying. AT&T said it planned to make the phones available as early as Monday evening.

Chris Penrose, vice president and general manager for AT&T's wireless unit in south Texas, said this initiative will help people connect with family and friends or take care of critical needs in times of crisis.

This is what I consider to be 'a nice gesture', but with more than one eye on the PR value than actually being a good corporate citizen and now surely having got that out of the way, AT&T will tell Rajani what they have been doing to maintain service to customers!

Apparently not, as Rajani moves onto the practical efforts being made by T-Mobile inc (part of T-Mobile International AG, the mobile communications subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG) to deal with the emergency:
T-Mobile deployed an incident command team to Birmingham Command Center and locations throughout the Southeast and in Texas, to mobilize its team of engineers and technicians in case the hurricane affected networks. The company said it fortified its network switch operations that serve the Gulf Coast. Additionally, it planned to beef up its microwave radio equipment and send out Cell-on-Wheels (COWs) teams to facilitate wireless communications affected areas.
Good practical engineering and command control planning and implementation. No instant PR value, but what I would expect a reputable Telecommunication Provider to do in a Disaster Situation. Well done T-Mobile.

This good corporate citizen stuff is followed by some practical (and what I consider commonsense) advice to evacuees which I hope was made available via PBS, Public Service Advertising and handed out on the Evacuation Buses:
Service providers also requested people to adopt wise communication strategies to help them serve better during such crises. For example, instead of making voice calls to their friends or relatives, providers suggested using text messages, which use fewer network resources. Providers also asked customers to use landline phones as a backup since they do not require electricity to operate.

Finally Rajani covers what the Web (providing access is available) can do to help:
With advanced Web communication technologies such as Google Maps, weather, news, and alerts available on mobile phones, customers can utilize these resources to determine the status of weather conditions and handle emergency situations wisely. Examples of such services include AT&T’sMobiTV, AT&T Mobile TV and My-Cast Weather. Wireless data devices such as Apple’s iPhone and BlackBerry smartphones allow sending of messages to large groups of people simultaneously. However, these services are available under special subscriber plans and limited to a few subscribers.
All good practical stuff.

For More Articles by: Rajani Baburajan<

For Related Articles in this Blog See:

• Handling of the Gustav Hurricane Emergency
• Katrina has wiped out by Communications - Inveneo and friends to the rescue
  
• Preparing for a visit by Rita - Gosh She is here!
• Shock & Awe by Katrina

Handling of the Gustav Hurricane Emergency

Sitting on my hilltop in West London safe in the UK, I watched the BBC and ITN News coverage of the build up of the emergency evacuation plans for New Orleans and thought this is a text book example of both how it should be done and American organisational and operational capability at its best. Effectively the complete opposite of the situation that existed prior to the arrival of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when along with almost every Commentator I was scathing about the emergency plan and its implementation (see: Shock & Awe by Katrina ).

Disaster Planning on this scale with the co-ordination of so many agencies Federal, State, City and Parish is one of the most difficult and complex civilian tasks to undertake. But the 'acid test' of any plan however carefully constructed is when it has to be implemented and whilst I am sure in the careful analysis in the coming months there will be a few changes made and unfortunately some people with 'personal agendas' will highlight any shortfall, I have to say as an interested but uninvolved observer it was incredibly well done!

Every plan of this nature depends on effective Command & Control Communications and as this is only mentioned when it falls down, the implication is that it didn't and as Command Control is vital, I think those responsible should be lauded.

The 'sharp end' of any plan is those who's duty is to stay behind and British coverage at least, has not really touched on the courage of the Emergency Services, Police and National Guard who had to remain in the danger zone to protect the lives of those who would not be evacuated and guard property against those in any society see disaster as a criminal opportunity. I hope those in authority acknowledge their role.

In my article on Katrina I wrote:

After the ritual bloodletting in the political arena, hopefully wise men and women will learn and build on the lessons so painfully taught by Katrina. But in New Orleans it appears the problems encountered in the aftermath of the 1993 Floods were forgotten, so I cynically suspect will the lessons of Katrina by 2017.

Well Wise Men and Women did take the lessons of Katrina to heart and build a disaster plan that worked and hopefully they will continue to 'tweak', update and maintain the plan and the resources required, so that even if not required again in New Orleans until 2017 it will be ready and waiting to be implemented.

Related Articles in this Blog:

• Gustav and Civilian Telecommunications
• Katrina has wiped out by Communications - Inveneo and friends to the rescue
• Preparing for a visit by Rita - Gosh She is here!
• Shock & Awe by Katrina

Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection

Alitalia has applied for bankruptcy protection whilst efforts to restructure the company continue. To this end administators will be appointed to oversee the process

In my previous post on this subject: Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?
I wrote:

Alitalia as currently constituted is NOT VIABLE. Without a massive downsizing both terms of routes, fleet, bases and therefore staff. A renegotiation of Ground and Aircrew contracts of the remaining staff, to bring these in line with commercial reality, not custom and practise, is also required, otherwise Alitalia will be forced to cease operations.

What I never expected was that, Roberto Colaninno the man appointed to take charge after the restructuring process would state the situation even plainer terms when talking to a journalist with La Repubblica newspaper:

"No one can buy Alitalia in the state it's in,"

He went onto say:

"With all respect, I am not Merlin the magician. The business is toast. It doesn't exist any more. There's nothing left."

Behind the scenes there has been a tremdous amount of 'deal making' going on with a group of Italy's most powerful families agreeing to a massive investment in a restructured entity. In Addition both Lufthansa and Air France continue to look into a post-structuring stake (which as it wouldn't be a take over any such investment would at least symbolically meet Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi precondition of any rescue deal that Alitalia's would contine to be Italian owned).

Talks with the Unions have been ongoing, but little has leaked out, except one of the Unions whilst accepting that huge job losses are inevitable wants the employees made redundant, given jobs with other state owned industries.
I suppose this would be progress of a sort, but the Unions really must wake up to simple facts:

• The job losses will be truly massive
• The inefficient customs and practises will have to go
• All worker groups will be affected whether Managers, Aircrew, or Ground Staff

Personally I still think the Unions assisted by certain Managers will cause Alitalia to self-desctruct, or at the very least make the restructured Airline as inefficient as the current incarnation and thus doomed to failure.
As I ended my last post on this subject, I shall end this one:
Alitalia please prove me wrong.

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
13th January 2009:
Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

06th October 2008:
Alitalia - Is the Opera entering its final act?

13th September 2008:
Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?

29th July 2008:
Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?

Mobile Phones On Aircraft - US Congress to vote on in-flight mobile ban

As those of you who follow the rambling path this blog takes, I have a problem with using Mobile Phones in-flight.

I first looked at this subject back in October 2007 with a piece entitled:
Mobile Phones on Aircraft - Like the Technology - Hate the Consequences

This was followed by an update Mobile Phones On Aircraft - Update In November 2007.
This was an Article 'lifted; from the excellent ABTN Site.

Now another excellent site The Register has published today news that US Lawmakers are going to vote on the pithily entitled HANG UP (Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace) Act, which has passed the committee stage.

Now this act is NOT based on safety concerns (the current FAA rules are based on safety fears for which there is NO real justification), but on these calls being an Annoying Nuisance (Which they certainly will be).

Whilst I am always suspicious about the motives of some US Legislators (see Sniping at Airbus – A game all the US Establishment can play, from June 2005 which has a slight connection with this subject and UK-US Extradition Treaty and Certain American Politicians Support for Terrorists; from August 2006, which doesn't), on this occasion I am on the side of those who drafted this act and hope it makes it into to US Law.
.
This will of course upset those who ae addicted to Mobile Calls and Texting, but this law will at least mean the experience of flying to, from and across the USA will not become any worse and for that every frequent business traveller will be immensely grateful.

Newer Post on this subject:
Mobile Phones on Aircraft: Ryanair Rollout Voice/SMS/Email Services
24th February 2009

Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?

In my many years in Aviation I have watched a number of truly Great Airlines with a proud and long history die.

Some have declined slowly like your favourite Grandparent, who when facing problems large and small, which in days past they would have shrugged off, now just hasten the terminal decline. But although you expected it, still when they go, it is a shock - Pan Am springs to mind.

In other cases they are first weakened whilst they adapt to changing marketplace and then attacked from inside as if by a virus caused by owners asset stripping without
caring for the future.

Despite this they struggle to recover, only to be taken over because they are now under capitalised and have no strength to resist - TWA is a classic case.

Then there is the new generation Management Board taking the family fortune and investing it unwisely. Swissair.

Then there was Sabena - Heavily Unionised and worse still the Unions not only extremely powerful, but unable to see the new realities.
Staffing rules both National and Union which made the ability to operate efficiently desperately difficult, both on the Ground as well as in the Air.

This coupled with internal warring between Management Factions, some who desperately wanted to push through the changes they saw as vital and those who really saw no need to change and wanted to continue operating in some hypothetical golden past.

Sabena was a National Airline living in the 1960's despite the approach of a new millennium.

The fact that Swissair chose to invest so much of its fortune in Sabena was amazing at the time and remains a source of wonder to me now.

Of course it managed to survive to 2001, but the writing was on the wall a decade before and whilst some in Sabena did read it and tried their best to implement change, they were up against powerful forces not just Unions who it appeared were determined to stop any change, but even some Senior Managment who refused to see the realities.

Now there is Alitalia. There are differences with Sabena, but there are far too many similarities.

Heavy Unionised with the Unions having the same myopic view.
Some powerful Managers who want change as long as of course their division is exempt.
Others who see change as not just vital but long overdue, but are stymied by not just Union Power, Collegue Oppostiion, and even more importantly Political and Government Interference/Intervention, which makes the Beligian Governments relationship with Sabena appear as a very 'light touch' indeed.

When Air France-KLM bid for Alitalia was successful, I saw a direct correlation with Swissair - Sabena. When the plan was scuppered by a change in Italian Government, I believe Air France-KLM had had a very lucky escape.

Alitalia as currently constituted is NOT VIABLE. Without a massive downsizing both terms of routes, fleet, bases and therefore staff. A renegotiation of Ground and Aircrew contracts of the remaining staff, to bring these in line with commercial reality, not custom and practise, is also required, otherwise Alitalia will be forced to cease operations.

But the Italian Government and the Unions want Altialia to change and yet be the same This is a dream which even those smoking opium would have problems with.
As it is obvious Italy has not learned the lessons of Sabena, it is just a matter of time before the EU (European Union) steps in and stops more Italian Government financial aid and within a few months the money finally runs out and Aitalia is no more.

I have been saddened by the failure of all the airlines mentioned, Alitalia becoming an aviation historical footnote appears inevitable as the changes required cannot be implemented and even if there was sudden change of heart I believe it is already too late.

Too often in my career I have made a written prediction which I hoped was wrong, but believed was right and unfortunately I have in the vast majority of cases been proved correct. Alitalia please prove me wrong.

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
13th January 2009:
Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

06th October 2008:
Alitalia - Is the Opera entering its final act?

13th September 2008:
Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?

29th August 2008:
Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection

Which Role Model: Shami Chakrabarti or Amy Winehouse

Shami Chakrabarti
Director of Liberty the organisation that is dedicated to civil liberties and promoting Human Rights. Qualified Barrister, erudite very bright. I may not agree with her on some , indeed many issues and even where there are areas of agreement find her emphasis is different from mine.

But this is a woman with talent. ability, and fights her battles with reasoned debate. Who has by hard work whilst a wife and mother earned the respect of even those who disagree with her. Now there is a role model for the next generation

Amy Winehouse.
Has a god given singing talent, but is convicted drug user, has been arrested for violent behaviour!
Role Model, surely not, just another sad case of someone who was born with a talent and just could not handle it!


Unfortunately, it is an extremely sad reflection on our Media driven and Celebrity obsessed society that it is not Shami Chakrabarti, but Amy Winehouse and others of her ilk (some with no talent at all) who it appears are the role models for many young women!

Idle Thoughts on the NUT (National Union of Teachers)

Maybe I do have a masochistic streak (see previous post), as I have just spent some looking at the NUT (National Union of Teachers). Now most Unions whether I like it or not, do have to a greater, or lesser degree a political activist element, but since the 1970's I have often wondered if the NUT strays too far in politics and indeed too far into having agendas approved at conference that are against the Wishes of Parents, who after all want there children to be educated, not politicised.

I have come to some conclusions, which I accept may be unfair, or just plain wrong, so why not send me a comment.

• The NUT has single handedly managed to reduce the Public's Respect for Teachers to just above Estate Agents.
• The Speeches and Policies made at NUT Conferences have greatly influenced many Parents to make sacrifices to move their children from state to Private Education, or if this is just not possible to faith Schools.
  
• The NUT has too many members who's political agenda is at variance with there professional duties.
• The NUT's antipathy towards Faith Schools, which in general 'punch far above their weight' in terms of providing children with a good education, is fuelled by the fact that these schools employ only competent staff, rather than some anti-religious stance. Especially as at last conference time was spent on faith teaching in schools
  
• NUT spends more time whinging about what should be and spends far too little ensuring Pupils get the education required.
• Class sizes. I was taught in what the NUT would consider far too large classes (40+ down to mid 30s). There were NO teaching Assistants and each Teacher had different ways of maintaining interest, discipline and spotting those who were struggling and those who were rushing ahead. Now I accept that Social Changes have made Teachers lives more difficult, but good Teachers should still be able to run a 30+ class. I think the image projected by the NUT has frightened away many who would have been good teachers!
• The NUT has NO interest in Teaching Standards, only in keeping its members employed, regardless of ability, suitability, or ethics
  

Having lit the touch paper, I shall stand well back: