BAA Told to Stop Sucking
 

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2183188,00.html

Here's something I didn't know:

Somehow I doubt those rebates are passed on to the consumer. In fact that makes it seem like the airlines have a vested interest in the lines being long...

Probably not. The airlines don't want to have to reaccommodate pax who miss their flights due to security wait times. They also don't want to have people showing up many hours early and clogging up their checkin facilities, lounges, etc. It's unlikely that whatever little payment they may get from BAA is worth the trouble.

Wasn't the strict 1-bag rule supposed to help reduce security screening times? I really hope this doesn't mean that they're going to try to put in a "0.5 bag" rule now (i.e. shrink the allowable size significantly).

I do have to say that a 10 minute upper limit is pretty tough. I doubt many U.S. airports, even smaller ones, could meet that requirement all the time. A 5-10 minute average time and maybe a 25-30 minute max might be more reasonable based on peaks of passenger traffic at various times during the day. I'd be willing to accept that as long as there were significant consequences for exceeding the max time so that it didn't happen very often.

Aha -- I'm sure the rebates are what made BAA insist that UK airports allow only one carryon bag per passenger. It takes less time to tell someone to check a bag than to screen an extra bag. :td: to BAA.

How strict is BAA about the 1-bag rule these days? When I went to London a year ago, they were claiming 1 bag but they were pretty lax about it in the business class security line. I've heard other FT'ers talk about the 1-bag rule being pretty strict, but I haven't heard whether they've tightened up on first & business pax, too.

They were very strict about it on business passengers in March when I last went through LHR. Definitely forcing you to put 1 bag inside another. They were also measuring bags after you had done this...

Wow, good to know. In the past, I've never seen anyone measure a bag that was even moderately close to the allowed size.

The 1-bag limit was enacted to save BAA money (employ fewer screeners). The max bag size has already been effectively reduced.

I've discovered that I really have no need to use BAA airports. @:-)

I was in the UK about six or seven times in the last year including trips departing through LHR, LGW, and STN. All were extremely strict with regard to the bag size and quantity. The LGW folks offered me the choice between checking my bag or the camera that was around my neck.

In answer to the thread title, BAA will never stop sucking.

BAA is owned by Spaniards. Well, by a Spanish-registered company. They bought BAA in a highly-leveraged deal and now all they can do is pay the whopping interest on their debt. They have no money for improvements in service or infrastructure.

Meanwhile, in Spain, the airports authority is controlled by the Spanish State. Things work pretty well and security check queues are nothing like LGW or LHR.

Its enough to make a Socialist out of you!

...which is counterproductive if your objective in making the one-bag rule was to speeds things up.

"BAA told to stop sucking"?

That's like telling a fish to quit swimming. It just comes naturally.

Yes, but queue monitors are cheaper (and you need fewer of them) than security staff.

I'm just about to move from Tokyo to London which will make my home airport Heathrow instead of Narita. This is one of the aspects about moving which I am least happy with.

Heathrow is just going steadily downhill. I wonder if they can renationalise the airport - can't be any worse.

I don't know about that...

They're building T5 which is opening next year. I don't think it's built out of mud and straw; although it doesn't look as nice as that new airport in China that Foster designed.

Once T5 is open they're going to knock down T2, move those flights to T1 and move all BA flights from T1 to T5. I hope that makes sense.

People are going to love the fingerprinting for domestic flights from T5.

They want to fingerprint everyone in the country eventually. This gets them a long way there.

They were even trying to fingerprint kids when they pick up their school provided lunches but that is now not-compulsory (but still being done).

Only if they are willing to visit the UK.

I'll give them 1 finger from France or Spain.

I can remember an occasion a couple of years ago when the BA check in broke down and when they fixed it, they flooded security with people, BAA couldnt cope and ended up paying the fine. I asked if there was an arrangement in place for when the airlines disrupt security, but apparently not, so in theory the airlines could earn money out of this.
The 10 minute queue is checked every 15 minutes and BAA were allowed to fail 45 times in a month. Im not sure if this is still the rule.
I went through LGW at 9.30am on a friday recently and the queue took about 10 minutes.

If you are moving to metropolitan London (as opposed to the general "Greater London" region), I see no reason why you'd use anything apart from LCY. A dozen key European destinations are served from there, plus many domestic flights, and there are connections to everywhere via AMS.

T5 funding was well in place, and the design had been finalised, and the place was well advanced in construction before BAA was sold.

don't know about that...

They're building T5 which is opening next year. I don't think it's built out of mud and straw; although it doesn't look as nice as that new airport in China that Foster designed.

Once T5 is open they're going to knock down T2, move those flights to T1 and move all BA flights from T1 to T5. I hope that makes sense

Right you are. Ferrovial just took over the bond obligations (read: debt). That was one of the conditions of the sale. They are in no more condition to improve the traveller experience at LHR than I am to purchase a first class ticket on BA.

Another goodie about UK airports others may not know.

For UK Immigrations, the Home Office established some type of rule that immigration queues are no longer than 30 minutes. The "penalty" from what I understand was handled internally within immigrations.

I know someone who used to work for the Home Office, which is how I found this out. OTOH, it is possible things may have changed over the past couple of years.

I've known about the BAA line fines for some time. That is why the BAA would often direct non-premium pax into the FastTrack line (at LGW S, at least). As a result, I would often be holding a NW WBC ticket which means I paid the ++ tax for travelling in a higher level of service. I would get into the LGW S FastTrack security line with a Fast Track sticker on my ticket jacket and be surrounded by folks with EasyJet boarding passes.

The result, the FastTrack line at LGW S was just as long as all of the other queues. When I spoke to a NW agent at LGW about this, they explained the max wait time rule and told me how security was doing everything, including opening the flood gates for Fast Track, to keep the time down.

I haven't been back to the UK since the liquid rules and 1 bag rule went into affect.

Against my better judgement (I got a good deal) and now have my status with OW, I'll be transfering at LHR late this month and again next month.