others try...engineers do!
As most will have divined from some of my posts over the months, I am from an engineering background. I started as an apprentice, got my hands dirty as well as, at times, extremely calloused and tired. As my CV would show, I progressed through the world of heavy engineering to run projects large and small; from cooling a diamond-cutting workshop to cabling a power-station switchyard. I have watched as buildings rose around me, and I have watched with a certain pride as my work made the buildings work. From a South African Casino to a Thames-side Sewage Pumping Station I have literally pushed things and people to get the job done, commissioned and completed, because I know how things, machines and motors, as well as people, can be made to mesh and work together like a finely-made watch.
So it was with resignation that I heard and saw the debacle unfolding around Terminal Five, and the hordes of British Airways' passengers as they either flew out without any luggage, or stood and watched as their flights get cancelled because some fool who has never heard of 'Murphy's Law' decided to move 320 flights from the other Heathrow Terminals to T-5 on the same day; namely opening day! When my eldest son was talking to me recently about the state of British Engineering, he made a truly telling remark; he said, "Dad, they all want to be managers!" Despite never having formed a thread upon a steel bar, or wired up a motor starter, or even dug a foundation trench themselves, these clowns all believe that, by virtue of a so-called degree or course in 'Management' they are empowered to tell skilled people how and when to do or complete an engineering task.
Time and again, I have watched with horror as some idiot who was still literally clad in nappies propose an construction engineering timescale, and further down the line watched and listened as that same clown tried to blame everyone else but himself for the delays and costly over-runs. Many years ago, I helped equip, test and commission an un-named installation. When I attended the sign-over, I was asked by the senior consultant engineer to perform only four of the thirty-five different criteria which he could have asked to see. Whenb later I asked him why only four, he replied, "We know how many hours you've spent getting things correct, and we also know you don't take prisoners. So if you put your name on the line, we as the client's representative know that you are giving us a smoothly working installation!"
So now turn to Terminal Five, and the ongoing technical and financial disaster which has spanned the escalators and desks of that unfortunate structure. I would place good money betting on the things which went wrong; like the hand-held computers which told the baggage-handlers to go to the wrong stations, like the lines of cars of workers denied access because they couldn't raise a parking bay security barrier, hadn't been tested and tested, and tested again! It must have felt really great to be Willy Walsh, C.E.O. of B.A., as he shook hands, camera-centre of course, with a bleary-eyed bunch of passengers off the first 747 from Hong Kong as they debouched into his shiny new Terminal Five. I really wouldn't like to have been in his mind as he started to hear of the shambles which commenced about half-an-hour later, and it was significant that he was nowhere around for the first five hours as the insults and anger poured down on the uinfortunate heads of the few BA staff members who dared show their head above the check-in parapets!
The insults were of course aimed at the wrong people, but the architects of this particular disaster will probably never be named and shamed, as the decisions were probably taken by and in a 'committee', and not many of those individuals will stand up and be counted. As I posted a few days ago, I like Terminal Five, because although it has it's faults, it is a typically British building, and we shall get there in the end, but only after an Engineer has finally fixed things!
Mike Cunningham
5 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (5)
Mike,
A great post. Tell me are the problems at Terminal Five anything like the Denver Baggage Handling fiasco?
Alan,
No, the baggage system itself works, it's just that the people weren't given the chance to get themselves at the correct positions before the luggage started pouring down the lift systems. and once the baggage queues started building, there was never enough time to clear the backlog; consequently they didn't stand a chance!
Great post. I loved your opening paragraph.
Mike,
Great stuff!
One thing though...
I don't think you should make fun of incontinence. It's no laughing matter, and certainly not to those who suffer from it, as does a great-aunt of mine.
would it not have been more sensible to graduate the opening of the terminal? this is not too dissimilar to an New Product Introduction (NPI) in manufacturing. Where you dont EVER jump feet first into full production. The entire process is tested rigourously with small pilot builds each week and increased as process and technical glitches are ironed out.
Capacity of Terminal= 30,000,000 passangers per year
30000000/365/126=652 flights per day
126 equals average no of passengers per flight at heathrow today, according to HACAN[1]
Assuming this to be a good average they opened at 50% capacity. Thats arguably too great a percentage to open on. As a test specialist id probably have recommended 25%. Unlikely to prevent all the problems from happening, but would have atleast reduced the effects and allowed the snag teams more time and oppurtunity to tackle the problems as the came in.
what a bunch of dicks. im with you mike, good post.