 |
| Courtesy: Essex Fire & Rescue Service |
Julian Bray Aviation Security Expert writes: Yet again the focus is on Stansted, and for all the wrong reasons. This time an airport car park extra-long bendy shuttle bus burst into flames, alarmingly just yards from the entrance to the one and only air terminal building, and on Good Friday one of the busiest days/ weekends of the year....
Brad Miller the Chief Operating Officer jumped to the defence of the airport staff, but in reality Stansted has a fraction of the floating customer care support staff directly employed by the airport that Heathrow has. It chiefly relies on the - at arms-length - goodwill of airline employed or airline sub contracted ground crew.
Clearly this time the major emergency plan was severely compromised - and for good measure recorded by television for posterity - as passengers still with their luggage (why?) fled from the enclosed smoke filled terminal breaching security areas to escape the acrid smoke caused by the fire from one overworked and decidedly ancient shuttle bus. I know as I've experienced them...
Fire sale?
Transport for London phased out their bendy buses as they kept breaking down and prone to fires...
The problem is compounded as Stansted is supposed to be the UK's top security airport - hijacked and intercept suspect aircraft are sent/forced down here for police and military inspection, but time and time again we hear of passenger handling problems. Last time it was the raft of Ryanair cancellations and backing up of flights unleashing opposing sets of passengers all trying to get to opposite ends of the same corridor.
At the time CEO Brad Miller said they would learn lessons, so perhaps the next review needs to be much wider and some significant money spent on it? The airport is owned by the Manchester Airport Group and when we last suggested Manchester might like to send some experts in to sort out Stansted, you would have thought the roof had fallen in, there were howls of derision from Stansted press officers. This time, well over a 100 flights diverted or cancelled and thousands of passengers of all ages, subjected to possible smoke inhalation from a burning bus that could not be moved.
I guarantee if this had happened in any other major airport that burning wreck would have been contained and moved much, much sooner. Some other airports employ heat/cctv activated 'halo' drenching systems that would automatically douse any flaming object in high security risk areas.
The smart money might suggest, why was the defective shuttle bus routinely allowed so near a high density enclosed terminal building? Simply the airport in volume terms has grown but some legacy facilities are still back in the stone age, not fit for current and future volumes of expected traffic and increased passenger flows. Clearly to reroute the bus lanes would temporarily interrupt lucrative revenue and passenger flows from traditional long established parking areas.
Accepted hindsight is a great thing, but it cannot be beyond the wit of wo/man to install a weather covered travellator (moving walkway) so buses can safely offload and load at a 'satellite' station? Well away from the major security risk that is Stansteds only air terminal, hemmed in on all sided by motorised highly combustible equipment...
As before there will be an enquiry, but once the dust has settled, and a few tweaks made, Stansted will relapse into the cash cow it has now become. Clearly some may opine the current head of public safety needs an urgent career change? Possibly a refresher course? Even a quick move into a less stressful occupation? possibly ensuring the sand is at the correct level in red painted fire buckets and the hand operated stirrup water pumps are all lined up like soldiers...who knows?
What will it take for Stansted to take ownership; of this appalling lapse of security and basic operations? Will, the bus company have its maintenance records checked? Why did the bus burst into flames? Why were passengers decanted airside? Why was no clearly defined emergency plan in place? If it was, how did they allow all (or was it some?) passengers to take their luggage into a secure airside area? Should the cases not have been dumped passenger side on security grounds?
Then its a matter of catch up, airline staff tasked with rebooking or dealing with stressed out passengers. Clearly Stansted is chronically understaffed (they will dispute this, but people cost money and that affects profitability). Hopefully Mr Miller will share with us the answers, before the airport slips down the favoured list, and airlines come to a like conclusion...
Could it be the Stansted bus company acquired some of these ex TFL bendy-bus disposals at a knock-down price ???
The problem is compounded as Stansted is supposed to be the UK's top security airport - hijacked and intercept suspect aircraft are sent/forced down here for police and military inspection, but time and time again we hear of passenger handling problems. Last time it was the raft of Ryanair cancellations and backing up of flights unleashing opposing sets of passengers all trying to get to opposite ends of the same corridor.
At the time CEO Brad Miller said they would learn lessons, so perhaps the next review needs to be much wider and some significant money spent on it? The airport is owned by the Manchester Airport Group and when we last suggested Manchester might like to send some experts in to sort out Stansted, you would have thought the roof had fallen in, there were howls of derision from Stansted press officers. This time, well over a 100 flights diverted or cancelled and thousands of passengers of all ages, subjected to possible smoke inhalation from a burning bus that could not be moved.
I guarantee if this had happened in any other major airport that burning wreck would have been contained and moved much, much sooner. Some other airports employ heat/cctv activated 'halo' drenching systems that would automatically douse any flaming object in high security risk areas.
The smart money might suggest, why was the defective shuttle bus routinely allowed so near a high density enclosed terminal building? Simply the airport in volume terms has grown but some legacy facilities are still back in the stone age, not fit for current and future volumes of expected traffic and increased passenger flows. Clearly to reroute the bus lanes would temporarily interrupt lucrative revenue and passenger flows from traditional long established parking areas.
Accepted hindsight is a great thing, but it cannot be beyond the wit of wo/man to install a weather covered travellator (moving walkway) so buses can safely offload and load at a 'satellite' station? Well away from the major security risk that is Stansteds only air terminal, hemmed in on all sided by motorised highly combustible equipment...
As before there will be an enquiry, but once the dust has settled, and a few tweaks made, Stansted will relapse into the cash cow it has now become. Clearly some may opine the current head of public safety needs an urgent career change? Possibly a refresher course? Even a quick move into a less stressful occupation? possibly ensuring the sand is at the correct level in red painted fire buckets and the hand operated stirrup water pumps are all lined up like soldiers...who knows?
What will it take for Stansted to take ownership; of this appalling lapse of security and basic operations? Will, the bus company have its maintenance records checked? Why did the bus burst into flames? Why were passengers decanted airside? Why was no clearly defined emergency plan in place? If it was, how did they allow all (or was it some?) passengers to take their luggage into a secure airside area? Should the cases not have been dumped passenger side on security grounds?
Then its a matter of catch up, airline staff tasked with rebooking or dealing with stressed out passengers. Clearly Stansted is chronically understaffed (they will dispute this, but people cost money and that affects profitability). Hopefully Mr Miller will share with us the answers, before the airport slips down the favoured list, and airlines come to a like conclusion...
@JULIANBRAY +44(0)1733 345581, Journalist & Broadcaster, Aviation Security & Airline Operations Analyst/expert, ... http://feeds.feedburner.com/BraysDuckhouseBlogwww.aviationcomment.com, ... http://www.freelancedirectory.org/user.php?user=8121 ...
www.freelancedirectory.org?name=Julian.Bray.aviation.comment ...
Aviation / Travel / Maritime & Cruise Industries, NUJ, EQUITY, LIVE ISDN LINK, Broadcast ISDN COOBE ++44 (0)1733 345020 ... SKYPE: JULIAN.BRAY.UK e&oe Old faithful NOKIA: 07944 217476
No comments:
Post a comment