Recovery of US Air Airbus A320 from the Hudson River

The recovery operation was carried out on the 17th/18th January 2009:








































Copyright Unknown


A reminder how the Crash Landing was reported on the 16th January 2009

There is now a follow-up post covering the Transport of the Fuselage through the streets of Red Hook New York:
Moving the US Air 'Hudson River' A320 to a Hangar

Strike One For Alitalia

The Reborn Alitalia is 7 Days Old and today (20th January) already has had its first strike (as against the mere disruption caused on its first day).
Admittedly this lasted a mere 4 Hours and is more a 'flexing of the muscles' by the union involved, SDL rather than a full scale clash.

This mini-strike still resulted in 22 Flights being cancelled including 6 International services!

So what was this strike over?
According to the SDL Union:
The protest was over new labour contracts and the criteria used to hire employees as part of Alitalia's relaunch.

Surely this was all resolved in the incredibly protracted negotiations between CAI Investor Group, the Unions and the Italian Government prior to the relaunch?

Actually I don't think the answer matters, just the conclusion and that is nothing has changed (so far), and the New Alitalia is the same as the Inefficient, Unsustainable, Old Alitalia.

Previous Posts on Alitalia in this Blog:
14 January 2009: Alitalia - Unions spoil first Day
13 January 2009: Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?
Last Year:
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

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

A Soldier's Life Compared with Yours

Introduction
The following is a taken from a chain email forwarded to me.
Whilst it features Canadian and US Army Soldiers and has a distinct Canadian Theme, its message applies just as much to British and other Coalition Troops currently serving in combat zones:

A Soldier's Life Compared with Yours:
Your cell phone is in your pocket.
He clutches the cross hanging on his chain next to; his dog tags:


You talk trash about your 'buddies' that aren't with you.
He knows he may not see some of his buddies again.


You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls.
He patrols the streets, searching for insurgents and terrorists.


You complain about how hot it is
He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take off his helmet to wipe his brow.


You go out to lunch, and complain because the restaurant got your order wrong.
He doesn't get to eat today.


You make your bed and wash your clothes.
He wears the same things for weeks, but makes sure his weapons are clean.


You go to the mall and get your hair redone.
He doesn't have time to brush his teeth today.


You're angry because your class ran 5 minutes over.
He's told he will be held over an extra 2 months.


You call your girlfriend and set a date for tonight.
He waits for the mail to see if there is a letter from home.


You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday.
He holds his letter close and smells his love's perfume.


You roll your eyes as a baby cries.
He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and wonders if they'll ever meet.


You criticize your government, and say that war never solves anything.
He sees the innocent tortured and killed by their own people and remembers why he is fighting


You hear the jokes about the war, and make fun of men like him.
He hears the gunfire, bombs and screams of the wounded


You see only what the media wants you to see.
He sees the broken bodies lying around him


You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don't.
He does exactly what he is told even if it puts his life in danger.


You stay at home and watch TV.
He takes whatever time he is given to call, write home, sleep, and eat.


You crawl into your soft bed, with down pillows, and get comfortable.
He tries to sleep but gets woken by mortars and helicopters all night long.


The email chain asks you to support your troops and send the email to 7 people. For once I agree and if you do receive it, please forward it on.


Each Day take a moment to remember our troops:

Alitalia - Unions spoil first Day

The New Alitalia was officially reborn yesterday and the Unions couldn't even hold back to allow the relaunch to pass without incident!

• Alitalia workers wary of the impact from a new alliance with Air France-KLM demonstrated at Milan's Malpensa Airport by chanting slogans and waving union banners, causing delays.
• At Rome's Fiumicino Airport, delays of more than two hours were reported as workers marched outside.
  

The above does NOT bode well for the future of the reborn airline.

See the previous post: Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

But on a lighter note, the following is what I think is a great quote on why the original Alitalia went bankrupt:
"Alitalia died of grandeur," Augusto Fantozzi, who ran it during its bankruptcy told L'Espresso magazine. "It paid triple for everything. To give you an example: it would send three cars to pick up cabin crew, in case the first got a flat tyre and the motor broke down in the second. It was a waste."
Whilst this was part of the problem, a less colourful, but more encompassing summary of the reasons for the failure of Alitalia from Airwise/Reuters:
The state-controlled carrier soon became a vehicle for political favours, and its unionised staff, who enjoyed lavish perks, prevented efforts to restructure to meet the 21st century challenges of an aviation downturn and low-cost competition.

Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

Today the 13th January 2009 Alitalia is officially reborn. Now owned by the Investor Group Compagnia Aerea Italiana, shorn of its non-Airline Operating activies and having absorbed the commercially oriented and efficient Air One, the new slimmer Carrier is officially relaunched.

Also although not yet signed and sealed, the Air France-KLM offer to take a 25%, 320 million euros stake in Alitalia seems almost a certainty. The previous front runner for this investment, Lufthansa, lost its position when it annouced it was starting its own Italian Airline, Lufthansa Italia. Although Lufthansa may, even at this late stage make a bid to top Air France-KLM, this seems unlikely.

Whilst it is a miracle that Alitalia has reached this point (the Pope's prayers for the Airline seems to have helped), and the investment from Air France-KLM (or Lufthansa) will keep the company going for a while, the factors that will determine whether Alitalia has long term future are complex and many are not under its control.

• The ongoing Global Economic Crisis and its effect on the Airline Industry.
• The new labour contracts with the Alitalia Unions must produce the cost savings and productivity they are designed to produce.
• Those same Unions must not revert to their old ways of immediately launching crippling strike action whenever a problem, however minor occurs between them and the company.
• How Alitalia copes with the new commerical realities with Ryanair increased presence in the Italian Market and the launch next month of Lufthansa Italia, which will cement Lufthansa's already major presence in Italy.
• Currently Alitalia is a member of the Skyteam Alliance (includes Air France-KLM), but due to not integrating its computer systems, it does not maximise the benifits. It also retains a 'foot in the door' with the Star Alliance (includes Lufthansa). Once the 25% Stake deal is signed, upgrading and profiling the Computer Systems has got to be a major priority.
• Getting Passengers to Fly Alitalia is also going to be a major problem. The frustration over the Airlines history of long delays, cancellations, poor in-flight service, and a 'take it or leave it' attitude when dealing with customers, is a major hill to climb, in regaining passenger loyalty.
• Although it no longer controls its Ground Handling and Heavy Maintenance operations, industrial action in these organisations will be just as crippling to the new Alitalia, as it was to the old one (70 Flights from Rome were cancelled due a Ground Handling Strike last Wednesday).
• Finally, the European Low Fares Airline Association filed a complaint with European Commission last Thursday over the €3 tax, levied since October on passengers leaving Italian airports under Italy's "Save Alitalia decree," amounted to €100 million of
  illegal state subsidies to Alitalia each year.

So will Alitalia Survive in the long term?
As an independent entity, probably not!
As the Italian Division, after been absorbed by a major European Carrier, probably yes!

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
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

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

Oilexco In Adminstration - Will other Dominos Fall

As has been expected, Oilexco North Sea Limited has gone into administration. Oilexco was used as a case in point in Mark Jago's Article:
Banks Risk Scottish North Sea Oil industry & Britain's Energy Future
published in this Blog on Monday the 5th. We now have to wait and see if this is the start of a domino effect and other Oil Exploration Companies and those who supply them discover their funding has dried up.

British North Sea Oil and Gas provides the United Kingdom with some level of independence in Energy Needs.
No Exploration, No Infrastructure Expansion and No Innovation, due No Funding is going to have a disastrous impact on Energy Costs and indeed stability of Supply (if Russia keeps playing Games) in the next few years, let alone in the Medium and Long Term.

As Mark said in his article:
Successive British Governments have enjoyed massive tax revenues from North Sea Oil, now is the time to put some back into to those companies working to ensure a more efficient means of maximizing existing fields and using advanced technology to exploit new resources. As the banks seem to be unwilling to invest in the future, the Government should transfer some of the money earmarked for the rumored further bank bail-out into more equitable funding of North Sea exploration.

Electricity Supply Independence by New Generation Nuclear Power Stations and significant contributions by Alternate Technologies are years away. Gas will be a primary requirement for many decades in Industrial and Consumer Applications and however much research is being done in finding suitable alternatives to oil for Vehicle use, Oil is going to be the mainstay for the foreseeable future.

So HMG get some serious money into supporting North Sea Exploration and Extraction and while your at, it starting thinking about rebuilding the Coal Industry for synthetic oil, using technology to make coal gas, appear as if it is natural gas and finally using the new technologies to build the new 'greener' coal fired power stations.

Related Posts:
5th January 2009:
Banks Risk Scottish North Sea Oil industry and Britain's Energy Future
10/11th February 2009:
Banks Continued Failure to Provide Loans makes a UK Depression Inevitable

Banks Risk Scottish North Sea Oil industry and Britain's Energy Future

Having contacted the Author Mark Jago, he has given me permision to post his article.

News that Oilexco one of the most innovative and technically advanced oil and gas exploration companies operating in the North Sea is almost certainly going to file a petition for Administration for its UK Subsidiary after funding has been withdrawn by a UK bank. This not a case of a company failing due bad management, but a 'sign written large' that the future is extremely bleak for other Oil and Gas Exploration Companies operating in the seas around Britain.

Whilst in Britain we are regularly shocked by the mega-profits of the major oil companies, we are rarely made aware of the other types of Oil Industry Companies, those who specialize in exploring for new reserves and applying advanced technology to existing fields to maximize their potential.

Taking the specific case of Oilexco which won the Technology Uptake prize at the 23rd Scottish Offshore Achievement Awards in March 2008,
This Company which is publicly listed on the London and Toronto Stock Exchanges and is based in Calgary Canada, specializes in fast tracking oil and gas development into commercial production, utilizing appropriate technologies to do this at the lowest possible per barrel cost.

Through its UK Subsidiary Oilexco North Sea Ltd the company has been in the process of taking over an existing Oil Production Platform and then upgrading it to take advantage of better technology and to use it to supply both oil and gas that would have been previously burnt off as gas waste. This in turn has required the company to fund and build a new pipeline for the Gas Production. These projects combined early ordering of hardware necessary to fast track future production expansion are expensive and therefore very large loans were required to carry them out.

This dependency on Banks loans as resulted in two interlined problems. Firstly that an over extended Bank, would place very onerous conditions resulting in the company not realizing most of the cash flow benefits from existing production and that as the overall global financial situation worsened and the oil price dropped, cut off funding altogether. .This is certainly what happened in the case of Oilexco and analysts are already intimating that other companies are in the same situation.

What effect would the total failure of Oilexco North Sea Ltd have?
Well during the first quarter of 2009 Oilexco would have started to add production that would have resulted in the more than doubling of oil production this year and added to UK supplies of natural gas. Significant oil field discoveries made during 2007 and 2008 would have resulted in a material increase in North Sea output over the next two and a half years.

Had the bank extended the existing funding through 2009 and committed to supporting existing operations Oilexco and shareholders would have had the time to commit the necessary capital to ensure successful survival of this company and its ongoing North Sea development. The bank would have also had the opportunity to continue profit from an ongoing successful relationship with company.

Last weeks Oilexco news came at a time when gasoline prices in the US hit a low for the week averaging around $1.61 a gallon or under 42 cents per litre with Oil consumption of 19.9 million barrels 70 percent used for transportation down 3.7 percent from more normal volume slightly above of 20.6 million barrels. According to government EIA data raw oil at 60 percent, tax at 19 percent, with sales and marketing costs accounts for the price consumers pay at the pump. Canada is the largest exporter of oil and gasoline products to the US much of it from oil sands oil produced below cost at under $50US per barrel. Canadian prices were down in some Ontario locations below 62 cents Can per litre. Pump prices and oil futures were up Friday on OPEC news that 1.2 million barrel per day production cuts were completed on announced cuts of 3.4 million barrels and shipbroker reports of an 8.9 percent decline in on board tanker oil shipments.

Successive British Governments have enjoyed massive tax revenues from North Sea Oil, now is the time to put some back into to those companies working to ensure a more efficient means of maximizing existing fields and using advanced technology to exploit new resources. As the banks seem to be unwilling to invest in the future, the Government should transfer some of the money earmarked for the rumored further bank bail-out into more equitable funding of North Sea exploration.

The alternative will risk Oilexco drilling rigs and talented personnel being move to energy development projects away from the North Sea. Other North Sea oil companies partnered with Oilexco will also be negatively affected with future development being delayed or shelved. Oil production in the North Sea will decline more rapidly and oil import costs will balloon on higher priced oil and a declining pound.

Related Posts:
7th January 2009:
Oilexco In Adminstration - Will other Dominos Fall
10/11th February 2009:
Banks Continued Failure to Provide Loans makes a UK Depression Inevitable

Fotopic Reappears

This forms a follow up to my previous posts on Fotopic:
1st Fotopic Disappears - followed by a Deafening Silence
2nd Fotopic Disappears - But the Silence is broken

As Joel Rowbottom hoped the Fotopic Service resumed early this morning.

Whilst the Fotopic Operational Status Log has posted the following:

Mon 05 Jan 2009, 10:41 (logged by jon)

We apologise for the extended outage this weekend which was caused by a technical fault. There will be a full statement coming soon. Thanks for bearing with us.

Here is the Statement from Snappy Designs:
QUOTE:

STATEMENT FROM SNAPPY DESIGNS LTD, 5TH JANUARY 2009

Dear Fotopic User,

On Friday 2nd January 2008 photo sharing site Fotopic.net suffered a core equipment failure while upgrading the server and network capacity. As a result of this the Fotopic.net website was unavailable from approximately 9am on Friday 2nd January.

Despite our best efforts to resolve the situation the gallery service remained unavailable until approximately 10:30am on Monday 5th January 2008.

As a result of this outage we are examining our hosting capability and contingency plans, but wish to assure customers that Fotopic.net has not ceased trading and will be enhancing its services during 2009. No data or images have been lost during this time and all systems are back to normal.

Additionally we will be extending Plus and Premium subscriptions by an extra 2 weeks as a goodwill gesture.

We apologise for the situation which was ultimately out of our control, and would like to thank customers for bearing with us.

Best regards,

The Directors
Snappy Designs Ltd trading as Fotopic.net
UNQUOTE

Even though the promised full statement has been issued, users will be asking Snappy Designs some hard questions about why they didn't release some information via Internet News Services to mitigate the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt across the Fotopic User Community, that resulted in wild rumours and speculation.

However from the Idle Man's viewpoint with Fotopic back online, this will be the last post on the subject until...

Fotopic Disappears - But the Silence is broken:

There is NOW an update covering the restoration of service here: Fotopic Reappears
This Post forms a follow-up to my previous Post:
Fotopic Disappears - followed by a Deafening Silence

Thanks to one of the co-founders of Fotopic and former owner Joel Rowbottom there is NOW concrete information on the Fotopic Situation.

Please Note: Joel has worked hard to obtain this information despite NOT being an employee, director or Shareholder in the company that now owns Fotopic.He has done this to assist and he deserves to be thanked by all users of the service.

Here is the main elements of Joel's post on:
The Former Fotopic Users Group on Google (any highlighting is mine NOT Joel's):
QUOTE:

I've just got off the phone after managing to track down one of the directors of Snappy Designs. I asked them to post here but they have declined (I reckon because they can't get in touch with their PR people at this hour).

Therefore here is the news as I understand it:

1. The reason it's unavailable *is* a hardware fault with the interface to the outside world. The gentleman I discussed the situation with isn't an IP engineer so was unable to give me solid details on how it's failed but if I can be of assistance in getting it back up I will be - sadly the old Cisco 4000 series in my garage won't cut the mustard with at least a partial routemap! The router is intentionally powered down which could mean anything from a router failure to a cabling fault.
   
2. Snappy Designs is solvent - and they're injecting more cash into it to sort out Printshop and the rest. At that point (apparently) the Printshop system will change somewhat and be more "automatic". I don't have any more on that so please don't ask me for further details.
   
3. There is a plan to give Plus/Premium users at least a fortnight extension across the board.
   
4. It's 'hoped' that it (Fotopic) will be back in the early hours of Monday morning. I make that a 72-hour outage. I will keep track of what's going on and see if I can get further information tomorrow.
5. The architecture for Fotopic.net is still largely the same as when we left in May. This means that when it comes back it should be mostly OK - the image servers will probably take about 20 minutes to populate their caches during which it'll be a bit slower than usual. I have volunteered to be on standby to help the engineers if required.
   
6. There will be a full statement going out to all Premium/Plus users when it's back, which will explain things. I did ask if they had any plans to email their users prior to the recommencement of service but there are no facilities to email upwards of 60,000 people without the servers to handle it (which I can well believe, we have some "interesting" issues emailing Yahoo people en-masse for instance). SD said a statement will come pretty sharpish tho.
7. I'll be having discussions with Snappy Designs about the future of Fotopic.net, but please remember that myself and Nicky have been away
   from the front-line since May (with the exception of assisting with the odd support mail nobody else could answer, or when I've tried to assist with things they didn't understand yet). So please, please, please, the "Mr Angry" emails have to stop or I'm going to have to put this down again. I'm just trying to help here.
   

UNQUOTE
I think Joel is a star, but the fact that someone who is no longer has any formal connection to the Company has out of a sense of loyalty to his former customers performed the Customer Support task that was the responsibility and indeed duty of the current owners, I find frankly almost beyond belief.

Snappy Designs are going to have to answer questions which are going to be a lot harder to answer than providing the technical explanation of the problem.

Fotopic Disappears - followed by a Deafening Silence

Please Note: There is now a follow up to this post here:
Fotopic Disappears - But the Silence is broken:

Fotopic is one of the most popular photo sharing gallery sites especially for transport enthusiasts, which by 2007 hosted 76,400,000 Images from users in 204 Countries.
The site disappeared from the internet early on the 2nd January 2009 and at time of writing is still down!

There has been NO information from the UK registered owners of the company Snappy Designs Limited, their parent company Any-Web, and as for the Media, not even the specialist Internet/Computing Sites have picked up on what should be a major story!

The result has been Fear Uncertainty and Doubt across the Fotopic user community, with rumours and speculation rife.

This Deafening Silence is amazing when in normal times a two hour outage for one popular site results in stories appearing across the Internet News Pages with quotes from Company Representatives, Network Operator and a complete list of previous problems.
So why this time around nothing?.
Many Blogs are carrying the latest rumours, speculation and unverifiable comments from ex-Fotopic staff, but nothing concrete.

Someone somewhere MUST know the situation, but in the meantime, one place any Fotopic User should keep an check-on is the Former Fotopic Users Group on Google, which in the absence of anything useful from the Company, or Media is trying to keep people informed.

Even if Fotopic magically reappears, as David Beilby says in the Support group:
Quote:
If the Fotopic service resumes, there has been a loss of confidence which will take some restoration. In particular the complete lack of communication during an outage in excess of forty-eight hours is not good customer service.

If the business model is proving to be a bit shaky this affair will not do anything to make it
more robust. A single e-mail to all subscribers explaining what was going on would have been enough for most subscribers, although there are those who use it for business who will expect something more.
Unquote
Which summarizes the entire appalling lack of Customer Care and Service Extremely well!
But the question is why haven't the Media, or at least the specialist Media taken this sstory up?

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?