Jump to content

Airport Passenger Numbers Drop Again - And Again - And Again - And Again - And Again!


Recommended Posts

would anyone believe a word of ANY mhk or their servants ie mrs airport director,the thieving lying scum are taking us all for fucking mugs,quoting regs this regs that which we dont really need to comply with if the truth be fucking known,well i'll be voting UKIP or its manx equivalent at the next election,BASTARDS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The fact she is still in a job highlights, in a nutshell, everything that is wrong with this rock. Not even qualified for the job in the first place, makes a mess of it, gets a promotion and lives the

I keep air travel to a minimum (although my last flight c/o Easyjet was a much better experience than any with Flybe). THE SECURITY AT RONALDSWAY IS AN ABSOLUTE NONSENSE AND I STRONGLY OBJECT TO BEIN

We're clearly all panicking over nothing IMO.   The Directress long ago assured us and our Leaders who appointed her that next year there'll be 1,500,000 passengers a year passing through the hallow

Posted Images

 

Just pondering when someone will actually announce that the radar is basically useless, it is out of service now until the 31st January, presumably some major effort to fix it. It seems they figure if we keep it quiet then all is ok and no one need know that someone has wasted 3.5 million pounds. I wonder how the tender stacked up against others ? ............

Is it the old radar or the new radar which is out of service?

 

Definitely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NEW one, the old, 'we won't be allowed to operate if we don't upgrade now' radar is still the main work horse many years later! and we still operate!?? who'd have thought it? maybe a useless airport director??

So if its just the new one that isn't working properly then surely we can just still use the old one as its still seems to be turning where it always was down by Derbyhaven? The new one is still spinning too

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without wanting to interrupt a good lynching by WTF and hillshepherd (who seems to have been drinking a little early today), here's what was actually said in Tynwald when the scheme was approved

 

"Should no replacement secondary system be installed for use post 31st December 2011, then

Isle of Man Airport would be left with a primary radar server only, in effect turning back the clock

and providing a very much reduced air traffic control service. Although this would enable the

Airport to still operate a safe air traffic control service, the efficiency of this service would be very

much impaired and the likely subsequent air traffic delays would, I believe, not be acceptable.

Also the effect on the Isle of Man’s reputation as a forward-thinking, modern location would have

to be considered. Should no replacement primary radar be installed, then the old primary radar

would remain in use until either the type no longer remains serviceable or fails to maintain

approval to operate"

 

So no new regs, no lies and quite openly talking about reputation being a driver (with a soupcon of possible flight delays).

 

Obviously the reputational risk of buying a chunk of rubbish was something not considered!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

From Tynwald Dec 2013 (Cretney reply to Karran question) - is any of this incorrect?

 

The work involved in the installation of the new secondary radar and replacement primary

radar has not been without its challenges. These are primarily borne out by the fact that there

are three very distinct groups involved in the project: the UK regulator, who is overseeing the

engineering and safety case documentation; the UK arm of the contractor, who has provided all

810 bar the engineering work; and the Italian arm of the contractor, who has provided the

engineering and technology input for both the installation and the documentation.

The new radars are fully operational and have been for some considerable time. However,

the amount of observations and evidence required to secure approvals for a brand new system,

being the first in the British Isles for airport use, has been far greater and more detailed than

815 could have been foreseen.

I have been told that the observations are expected to be completed mid-2014, with the

granting of a full operating licence rather than a temporary licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From Tynwald Dec 2013 (Cretney reply to Karran question) - is any of this incorrect?

 

The work involved in the installation of the new secondary radar and replacement primary

radar has not been without its challenges. These are primarily borne out by the fact that there

are three very distinct groups involved in the project: the UK regulator, who is overseeing the

engineering and safety case documentation; the UK arm of the contractor, who has provided all

810 bar the engineering work; and the Italian arm of the contractor, who has provided the

engineering and technology input for both the installation and the documentation.

The new radars are fully operational and have been for some considerable time. However,

the amount of observations and evidence required to secure approvals for a brand new system,

being the first in the British Isles for airport use, has been far greater and more detailed than

815 could have been foreseen.

I have been told that the observations are expected to be completed mid-2014, with the

granting of a full operating licence rather than a temporary licence.

From staff at air traffic services "get rid its bloody useless !"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Should no replacement primary radar be installed, then the old primary radar would remain in use until either the type no longer remains serviceable or fails to maintain

approval to operate"

 

So what happens when the one that remains in use (and is running on some sort of end of life certificate process we believe which is why we had to buy a new one) fails to operate, and then the new one we bought still does not have a full license to operate? Do we then spend more millions to replace the one we replaced but which never worked, and have no ability for planes to land or take off in the interim? Surely the IOM cannot continue to operate indefinitely on a 'back up' system that it was suggested had to be replaced as a main system years ago because it was getting towards the end of its life?

 

Edited to add: Cretney said the decision would be mid-2014 so what happened?

Edited by Wankleaks
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without wanting to interrupt a good lynching by WTF and hillshepherd (who seems to have been drinking a little early today), here's what was actually said in Tynwald when the scheme was approved

 

"Should no replacement secondary system be installed for use post 31st December 2011, then

Isle of Man Airport would be left with a primary radar server only, in effect turning back the clock

and providing a very much reduced air traffic control service. Although this would enable the

Airport to still operate a safe air traffic control service, the efficiency of this service would be very

much impaired and the likely subsequent air traffic delays would, I believe, not be acceptable.

Also the effect on the Isle of Man’s reputation as a forward-thinking, modern location would have

to be considered. Should no replacement primary radar be installed, then the old primary radar

would remain in use until either the type no longer remains serviceable or fails to maintain

approval to operate"

 

So no new regs, no lies and quite openly talking about reputation being a driver (with a soupcon of possible flight delays).

 

Obviously the reputational risk of buying a chunk of rubbish was something not considered!!

So when the "new" system becomes operational then it will already have been sat on top of that hill, spinning away for around 3 years? Lets hope they went for the Currys/PC World extended warranty or it will probably need replacing again soon

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are serious questions which need asking to ascertain why we are in the position we are currently in "Why did we feel it necessary to purchase a non UK approved radar system, when the subsequent approval workup was well known and the requirements to get it fully licensed were always going to be onerous" .... " what other tenders were considered " ...... " why were those discounted" ....... " who was responsible for taking the decisions and who had the technical expertise to make those decisions" .... " why have air traffic services staff been instructed not talk about it" ..... " lots of additional costs have been incurred on island trying to get the system up to spec, which entity is bearing those " ?

I could go on but then again its only public money !!!

Edited by asitis
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without wanting to interrupt a good lynching by WTF and hillshepherd (who seems to have been drinking a little early today), here's what was actually said in Tynwald when the scheme was approved

 

"Should no replacement secondary system be installed for use post 31st December 2011, then

Isle of Man Airport would be left with a primary radar server only, in effect turning back the clock

and providing a very much reduced air traffic control service. Although this would enable the

Airport to still operate a safe air traffic control service, the efficiency of this service would be very

much impaired and the likely subsequent air traffic delays would, I believe, not be acceptable.

Also the effect on the Isle of Man’s reputation as a forward-thinking, modern location would have

to be considered. Should no replacement primary radar be installed, then the old primary radar

would remain in use until either the type no longer remains serviceable or fails to maintain

approval to operate"

 

So no new regs, no lies and quite openly talking about reputation being a driver (with a soupcon of possible flight delays).

 

Obviously the reputational risk of buying a chunk of rubbish was something not considered!!

Whilst I laugh at the line "Isle of Mans reputation as a forward thinking etc" my argument is not about why we have had a new radar, that may be supportable (unlike the rest !), it is simply about why we purchased what we did, which professionals who I speak to regularly scratch their heads about ! and the manner in which whoever was responsible has managed to reduce us to another laughing stock and waste further public funds. There is no SSR at the moment nor is there predicted to be for another month at least. Clearly the shrouded in secrecy bit is designed to protect the process under which this system was purchased whilst we all are incurring further charges on almost a weekly basis. This government will never make serious savings on major projects and purchases until those responsible are made acutely aware that they are responsible, and that public money is hard earned by those who do, and not something to be played with on a whim or risked on the advice of shiny suited salesman!

Edited by asitis
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Without wanting to interrupt a good lynching by WTF and hillshepherd (who seems to have been drinking a little early today), here's what was actually said in Tynwald when the scheme was approved

 

"Should no replacement secondary system be installed for use post 31st December 2011, then

Isle of Man Airport would be left with a primary radar server only, in effect turning back the clock

and providing a very much reduced air traffic control service. Although this would enable the

Airport to still operate a safe air traffic control service, the efficiency of this service would be very

much impaired and the likely subsequent air traffic delays would, I believe, not be acceptable.

Also the effect on the Isle of Man’s reputation as a forward-thinking, modern location would have

to be considered. Should no replacement primary radar be installed, then the old primary radar

would remain in use until either the type no longer remains serviceable or fails to maintain

approval to operate"

 

So no new regs, no lies and quite openly talking about reputation being a driver (with a soupcon of possible flight delays).

 

Obviously the reputational risk of buying a chunk of rubbish was something not considered!!

Whilst I laugh at the line "Isle of Mans reputation as a forward thinking etc" my argument is not about why we have had a new radar, that may be supportable (unlike the rest !), it is simply about why we purchased what we did, which professionals who I speak to regularly scratch their heads about ! and the manner in which whoever was responsible has managed to reduce us to another laughing stock and waste further public funds. There is no SSR at the moment nor is there predicted to be for another month at least. Clearly the shrouded in secrecy bit is designed to protect the process under which this system was purchased whilst we all are incurring further charges on almost a weekly basis. This government will never make serious savings on major projects and purchases until those responsible are made acutely aware that they are responsible, and that public money is hard earned by those who do, and not something to be played with on a whim or risked on the advice of shiny suited salesman!

 

A major capital purchase of that magnitude would have to be signed off by the department minister, wouldn't it?

 

Who was the DOI (or it's predecessor) minister responsible at the time of the purchase?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...