KARFA

To be fair, what florens posted was the forecast for today. The airport forecast doesn't cover Monday yet, however looking at the general forecast I can see that it is going to warm up over the weekend with temperatures on Monday up to 8C. Snow is very unlikely on Monday so you shouldn't be worried, enjoy your flights.

mcgol

So I tried rebooking that flight but as I clicked the "alternative flights" button I just had a message pop up saying "It is currently not possible to do this online, please call BA customer service rep"

DYKWIA

So, you can't back up your assertion from upthread? Or you're refusing to do so?

corporate-wage-slave

That indeed is a common outcome unfortunately. I think they had that cleared on Monday but that wasn't any good to you. You may need to be a bit persistent, and the change to CE could complicate matters, but I would claim for it, along with the diversion expenses. For unrelated reasons I was looking at that flight a few days back and CE was available as a redemption, which is always worth checking in these circumstances.

Porky Speedpig

BA has in excess of 20 rigs available at LHR these days

Porky Speedpig

This made me smile as the Managing Director of BA Operations is indeed Canadian.

mcgol

ok will go through their normal claim forms them. Would you suggest filing this as one big compensation claim or as several individual ones? Like the diversion as one, the cancellation as an other etc etc.


Thanks

corporate-wage-slave

Just put it in as one, using their new portal:
https://www.britishairways.com/trave...portal/public/

Andriyko

Yes, I refuse to point out the same information over and over; after all, all of us are reading the same thread, but some of us only see 'BA did not have a sufficient number of de-icing machines.' If someone wants to believe that it was all down to the de-icing capability then it's their prerogative to do so. If some people choose not to notice that there was freezing rain in the morning, which prevented airlines from de-icing their aircraft then, again, it is their prerogative to do so. However, ice accretion rates due to freezing rain is much greater than those associated with other forms of winter precipitation, which means that a typical hold over time can be very little, which in turn means that it is not possible to receive treatment and then take off within the allowable time frame. Those morning conditions alone would have created a huge problem for airlines, as aircraft could not vacate the stands. I wonder what use tens of additional de-icing machines would be in those conditions. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything; I am merely trying to point out that it is not all black and white. People are free to view the events however they want and to ignore whatever information they want. The freezing rain has been mentioned quite a few times, and yet we've been stuck in the 'if only BA had more de-icing machines' loop. Continuing this discussion is simply a futile exercise. After all, people will believe and do whatever they want.

I wonder how successful AC would have been with the number of flights that BA had at LHR. Surely, it is easier to dispatch three flights a day than a few hundred? How can anyone seriously compare the operations of these two airlines at LHR and say that they are equal?

lotus918

Okay, I'm going against the grain, but here we go. Planned to arrive T5 ~8:00AM on Sunday 10th for 281 to LAX. Figured nice breakfast in GF, catch up on some work and a leisurely stroll to the C gates via the tunnel were all in order. Then the snow came down and near chaos ensued on the roads. Made it to T5 about 8:30AM. First Wing was empty, but warned 281 was going to be late as delayed from BWI. 12:30 departure turned into 14:10 and I boarded about 13:40. CW was mostly empty, I think ~5 people in the forward 787-9 CW cabin.

After everyone was onboard and doors closed, captain comes on to announce 2+ hour delay waiting for deicing and a tug. Start talking to 2 passengers by me, and we soon all end up in the galley with a bottle of champaign talking to the crew. I can honestly say it was the oddest and most enjoyable 4+ hour delay I've ever had! A lot of the CW passengers were hanging out chatting, having a laugh while a crowd formed by the door trying to get a glimmer of a signal from the terminal WiFi. Kudos the CW CC on 281 as they did an awesome job of making us laugh, and this flight remains one of my most memorable and favorite in a long time due to the crew and passenger I meet. I suppose had I been in the last row of WT it may have been a different story.

nallison

I am also interested in where this authoritative information comes from? If they know this perhaps inform the forum to save people time in court?

It seems very worthwhile to me to let a court, with access to all the information , decide whether BA did in fact take reasonable measures, as the outcome certainly suggests that is possible. I don't think many are suggesting it is certain that BA are culpable, but there's a case to answer.

I'm impressed by how some posters have such certainty that BA was perfectly prepared and could definitely have done nothing more without even knowing any of the facts (none of us do). We do know BA was giving out misleading information which angered ATC - not a group you imagine taking to twitter to voice its displeasure without considerable cause. So I wouldn't put trust any of their statements on the matter, let he court sort it out.

Andriyko

To be honest, this is not how I view 'reasonable measures,' I was certainly not saying that BA was 'perfectly' prepared (I don't think anyone was so not sure where you got that). I believe that 'reasonable' for LHR is having enough infrastructure to allow a reduced flying schedule in wintry conditions rather than full one because having enough equipment/staff as if de-icing were required almost every day would be impractical and prohibitively expensive. Of course, for an affected passenger 'reasonable' would mean something very different - anything, no matter the cost, to avoid a cancellation. Even if it means that the equipment/staff are needed only 2 or 3 days a year, 'Reasonably' prepared and 'perfectly' prepared are two very different things.

Orange.Man

I believe it was a tweet from an "aviation analyst" with no aviation knowledge or experience and is widely known within the aviation community as being a total... tool?

Jagboi

They do it every winter in places like YYZ and YUL. It's called being prepared. BA clearly wasn't prepared, either from an equipment or people point of view.

Andriyko

You are comparing apples and oranges here. The question is would AC have the required infrastructure at LHR. We're not talking about YYZ or YUL. I am not sure why you are bringing those airports as an example. It is not about whether it can be done, but more about whether it makes sense to do it for something that happens 3 or 4 days a year (as opposed to every day in the airports you mention). It's the same as people talk about MUC where they apparently have de-icing equipment right next to the entrance to the runway - something that was said to be impossible at LHR due to space constraints, and yet, people keep bringing it up and refuse to accept the reality. Sure, it is easy to mention other airports with no regard to whether it is possible or makes sense to have at LHR. Following your logic, LH, LX, KL were not prepared either at LHR. Surely, with BA being the biggest operator at LHR the biggest share of cancellations would have fallen on it, would not it? Are we talking about what is reasonable to have at LHR or what is possible to do in general?