Jump to content

Airport “forgot” to open?


Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, lcd said:

Contacts within the airport tell me that the director has issued an email to all airport staff basically exonerating the management team of any responsibility and slapping the blame firmly on Aurigny. What's the betting that behind  closed doors, the fuel landing fees and handling charges at Manchester will be refunded to Aurigny by the Department of Enterprise? 

Whoever is responsible for the original issue (and it is probably likely that the fault lies somewhere between both sides) does not excuse the lack of a timely public response from IOMG/Ronaldsway. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 294
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're having a laugh! Because bad organisation always starts at the top. IOMG is the epitome of the expression "over managed and under led" and that's how they like it....

Blowing in the wind by now, Gladys. Along with any other truths about what goes on over here half the time, due to a total culture of unaccountability and responsibility within certainly, the upp

Contacts within the airport tell me that the director has issued an email to all airport staff basically exonerating the management team of any responsibility and slapping the blame firmly on Aurigny.

Posted Images

8 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Whoever is responsible for the original issue (and it is probably likely that the fault lies somewhere between both sides) does not excuse the lack of a timely public response from IOMG/Ronaldsway. 

I find it impossible to believe that an airliner crew would set off without having read the latest weather and notams for their destination and alternates ! absolutely basic stuff, which would be presumably in addition to their ops having planned the flight too ! I smell a long fella ! which I suspect is mitigation as we are going to have to put our hands in our pockets for the additional fees I suspect !

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NoTailT said:

City isn't going. Apparently Aurigny wanted to do Gatwick on top of easy, that won't go down well. Aurigny is a nutcase and the longer Brian Kelly of Richmond / MannLink / whatever else keeps pushing that Agenda the more dangerous it becomes. Aurigny has a stack of £100m worth of losses. Its a basket case.

It's only a basket case because they're operating with aircraft type well beyond their financial means and demand. Having a jet is all very well but is expensive to operate. They should trade in the Embraer & ATRs for half dozen of Dash 8-400s.. Standardising the fleet also bring economies of scale for maintenance.

And it doesn't help that they continue to allow other operators to compete against them on the same routes. That's just plane (pun intended) bonkers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

It's only a basket case because they're operating with aircraft type well beyond their financial means and demand. Having a jet is all very well but is expensive to operate. They should trade in the Embraer & ATRs for half dozen of Dash 8-400s.. Standardising the fleet also bring economies of scale for maintenance.

And it doesn't help that they continue to allow other operators to compete against them on the same routes. That's just plane (pun intended) bonkers.

Well that's not QUITE true. They are a basket case because they chose to compete agains Flybe and drive up huge losses rather than looking after the interests of their Island and then the Gov had the audacity to hand Flybe £800k subsidy to fly to Heathrow at the same time.

Aurigny's job should be to serve important routes for the Balliwicks of Guernsey and Alderney that are not able to be served by other operators.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Where do you find this info?

That must be quite new. An email I've seen from her in the past week clearly states:

ANN REYNOLDS

Director of Ports    

Department of Infrastructure

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Where do you find this info?

By inference:-

https://www.gov.im//harbours

Mark Kenyon

Director of Harbours

Sea Terminal Building

Douglas

IM1 2RF

 

Or is a Director of Ports AND a Director of Harbours needed? Think not -

Though perhaps she's kept the same title (and pay scale) 

Or perhaps forgotten to update email sig.

Edited by b4mbi
Link to post
Share on other sites

Musical Management Chairs?

A Rolling Stone gathers no shit from the Fan?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gladys said:

Does it really take an FOI request to find out the management structure at the airport?

Most likely.

Jez's title is Deputy Airport Director which would imply there was a Head Airport Director of some description, no?

Edited by NoTailT
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

Most likely.

Jez's title is Deputy Airport Director which would imply there was a Head Airport Director of some description, no?

Or is he AOM? Rather than DAD?

Is DAD a bit like his Doctorate, an honorary title?

AOM -

Airport Operations Manager

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, asitis said:

I find it impossible to believe that an airliner crew would set off without having read the latest weather and notams for their destination and alternates ! absolutely basic stuff, which would be presumably in addition to their ops having planned the flight too ! I smell a long fella ! which I suspect is mitigation as we are going to have to put our hands in our pockets for the additional fees I suspect !

The IOM Airport NOTAM listed with the opening hours of Sunday 11:00 to 20:45 is for a wide period of time (14 June 2020 to 12 Sept 2020). Aurigny had apparently "agreed" with IOM Airport to open early especially for this flight, so the NOTAM may not necessarily be updated to reflect a single change in date. Equally as its a 90 minute flight (it was an ATR rather than the Jet which does it in 60 minutes), then ATC wouldn't have been open before the flight took off in Guernsey. As such I can see why the pilot ignored the NOTAM as they were told something different was happening.

I understand that it was only when the flight was around Liverpool area that they realised it was still shut. As such they diverted to Manchester airport (where Aurigny also fly to pre covid and so have handling agents etc) and sat there on the apron (to avoid Covid issues). I assume once they sorted the issues then a new flight plan had to be filed, a take off slot at Manchester sorted and then they could fly from there to the IOM.

So it seems that Aurigny had "agreed" with someone at IOM Airport that it would open early. Aurigny took that as definitely happening, whereas IOM Airport seemed to be awaiting something else which they never got and so didn't arrange for ATC, Fire Service and Airport staff to be there early, however never went back to Aurigny. As such a communications error on both parts (but more so IOM Airport!).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andrew said:

The IOM Airport NOTAM listed with the opening hours of Sunday 11:00 to 20:45 is for a wide period of time (14 June 2020 to 12 Sept 2020). Aurigny had apparently "agreed" with IOM Airport to open early especially for this flight, so the NOTAM may not necessarily be updated to reflect a single change in date. Equally as its a 90 minute flight (it was an ATR rather than the Jet which does it in 60 minutes), then ATC wouldn't have been open before the flight took off in Guernsey. As such I can see why the pilot ignored the NOTAM as they were told something different was happening.

I understand that it was only when the flight was around Liverpool area that they realised it was still shut. As such they diverted to Manchester airport (where Aurigny also fly to pre covid and so have handling agents etc) and sat there on the apron (to avoid Covid issues). I assume once they sorted the issues then a new flight plan had to be filed, a take off slot at Manchester sorted and then they could fly from there to the IOM.

So it seems that Aurigny had "agreed" with someone at IOM Airport that it would open early. Aurigny took that as definitely happening, whereas IOM Airport seemed to be awaiting something else which they never got and so didn't arrange for ATC, Fire Service and Airport staff to be there early, however never went back to Aurigny. As such a communications error on both parts (but more so IOM Airport!).

Not really material the main issue (other than the fact that the flight actually arrived 1hr 25 minutes after Ronaldsway actually opened), there are no "take off slots" required for departure at Manchester Airport due to the significantly reduced traffic situation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gladys said:

Does it really take an FOI request to find out the management structure at the airport?

I am sure it will be getting reduced in line with most other airports around the world in view of reduced demand ?

of forgot its IOM where we never cut civil servants even when they don’t have any work!

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...