The Bastard Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 49 minutes ago, IOM said: Sorry I think it’s you that’s not getting it . I agree it’s not up to government to run every minutia on the island nor do I expect that . But I do think it’s fair and reasonable for everyone involved at the airport to make sure it all comes together and is fit for operation . I have worked in private large scale business which had multiple contractors each doing something to provide one customer service. And we would work together and check the end to end operation was all joined up and the batons handed over smoothly so nothing fell between the cracks and the customer was not impacted . I think it’s entirely reasonable to expect the same at the airport and for each relevant party to challenge another . You still don't get it, you have a simple viewpoint and think that a Nanny state runs the whole operation from end to end and has an onus on it to guarantee flights. The Airport isn't one business with multiple contractors like your example. It's like denationalised bus services in the rest of the world. The airport is in effect one business (like the bus station), the actual flight providers and ground services providers are other businesses that pay money for the facilities (like Arriva for the buses and their bus maintenance partners), and return money in tax. The airport pays to contract some of its core services out to providers (including Menzies), and seeks restitution if they don't perform as per the contract - BUT deicing aircraft is not one of those services, that's purely between airlines and service providers. Have a look at this article from Menzies : https://menziesaviation.com/news/menzies-aviation-announces-easyjet-contract-renewals-at-21-european-airports/ You'll see the responsibility for de-icing is contractual between Menzies and the airline. If the deicer breaks down and flights don't run, that's a contractual issue between two businesses. I imagine the relationship with the airport probably has contractual complexities of its own, but unless it's a safety violation, I see little need for anyone else to get involved. Edited January 18 by The Bastard 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Rushen Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Aircraft de-icing is a safety issue and that is why the ownership is with the airline to have it done. They are responsible for the contractor’s capabilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt_Mainwaring Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, Major Rushen said: Aircraft de-icing is a safety issue and that is why the ownership is with the airline to have it done. They are responsible for the contractor’s capabilities. Yes, in fact the ownership is actually with the pilot in charge. If they fail to de-ice properly and there's a crash, they're responsible. See Munich's original investigation outcome - pilot was blamed - although after a successful campaign the cause was changed to slush build up on the runway (which would be the airport's issue). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IOM Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 10 hours ago, The Bastard said: You still don't get it, you have a simple viewpoint and think that a Nanny state runs the whole operation from end to end and has an onus on it to guarantee flights. The Airport isn't one business with multiple contractors like your example. It's like denationalised bus services in the rest of the world. The airport is in effect one business (like the bus station), the actual flight providers and ground services providers are other businesses that pay money for the facilities (like Arriva for the buses and their bus maintenance partners), and return money in tax. The airport pays to contract some of its core services out to providers (including Menzies), and seeks restitution if they don't perform as per the contract - BUT deicing aircraft is not one of those services, that's purely between airlines and service providers. Have a look at this article from Menzies : https://menziesaviation.com/news/menzies-aviation-announces-easyjet-contract-renewals-at-21-european-airports/ You'll see the responsibility for de-icing is contractual between Menzies and the airline. If the deicer breaks down and flights don't run, that's a contractual issue between two businesses. I imagine the relationship with the airport probably has contractual complexities of its own, but unless it's a safety violation, I see little need for anyone else to get involved. Sorry I will repeat you don’t get what provides for a good customer service. I know exactly how the airport is set up and who is contractually responsible. The IOMG is responsible for the building providing the infrastructure ( baggage carousel etc ) air traffic control and fire services. The airlines are responsible for flying the planes , Menzies are the ground handlers who the airlines contract for collecting bags to and from the airport , pushing the planes back from stand , escorting people to the plane and deicing etc. That’s roughly how I think it splits out give or take . Yes you are right that the Airport director does not have direct responsibility for any of Menzies activities I have never disputed that- I get it . But and this is the but they all come together as one team to provide a service to the customer ( passengers) . What i am saying is I would expect all three parties ( airlines , Menzies and government) to be working together not constantly looking across the table and finger pointing. It’s called collaboration my friend and I can assure you it happens a lot in the best large organisations across the world to ensure the customer gets a seamless end to end experience. 3 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bastard Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 9 minutes ago, IOM said: Sorry I will repeat you don’t get what provides for a good customer service. I know exactly how the airport is set up and who is contractually responsible. The IOMG is responsible for the building providing the infrastructure ( baggage carousel etc ) air traffic control and fire services. The airlines are responsible for flying the planes , Menzies are the ground handlers who the airlines contract for collecting bags to and from the airport , pushing the planes back from stand , escorting people to the plane and deicing etc. That’s roughly how I think it splits out give or take . Yes you are right that the Airport director does not have direct responsibility for any of Menzies activities I have never disputed that- I get it . But and this is the but they all come together as one team to provide a service to the customer ( passengers) . What i am saying is I would expect all three parties ( airlines , Menzies and government) to be working together not constantly looking across the table and finger pointing. It’s called collaboration my friend and I can assure you it happens a lot in the best large organisations across the world to ensure the customer gets a seamless end to end experience. Nah, you're living in your own little naive world. It's wasn't a large-scale failure of customer services. The airport already manage what they can, but this was a broken de-icer. That's a mechanical failure, not a cultural one. You seem to be talking this up into some kind of failure that could be managed out of by just getting around a table and talking about it. It isn't. That's just stupid. The only way to fix it was to fix the de-icer. That needs parts or engineering, ironically not a load of hot air being blown in a meeting room. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IOM Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 minute ago, The Bastard said: Nah, you're living in your own little naive world. It's wasn't a large-scale failure of customer services. The airport already manage what they can, but this was a broken de-icer. That's a mechanical failure, not a cultural one. You seem to be talking this up into some kind of failure that could be managed out of by just getting around a table and talking about it. It isn't. That's just stupid. The only way to fix it was to fix the de-icer. That needs parts or engineering, ironically not a load of hot air being blown in a meeting room. I can assure you I don’t live in a little naive world and certainly don’t believe in a nanny state . And if you bothered to understand my argument you would realise I am not saying it’s all down to the government. For example where were the airlines in the matter ? They have people on the ground they could have asked the right questions too . Sorry i don’t think it’s about sitting around a table but all three parties could have said to one another “ hey it looks like it’s going to snow has anyone checked the deicer let’s not get ourselves in a situation where the airport cannot operate ? It’s as simple as that . I just don’t believe anyone checked the equipment was working when it was very clear there was going to be snow . And I would not mind betting if I checked any number of years back the deicer always has a mechanical fault the day it snows !!!!! In the end its you who has too simplistic a view because you live in a world where you don’t get what the customer wants and instead want to see it all through a contractual lens . Well my friend I can assure the passengers don’t think like that ! 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bastard Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 minute ago, IOM said: I can assure you I don’t live in a little naive world and certainly don’t believe in a nanny state . And if you bothered to understand my argument you would realise I am not saying it’s all down to the government. For example where were the airlines in the matter ? They have people on the ground they could have asked the right questions too . Sorry i don’t think it’s about sitting around a table but all three parties could have said to one another “ hey it looks like it’s going to snow has anyone checked the deicer let’s not get ourselves in a situation where the airport cannot operate ? It’s as simple as that . I just don’t believe anyone checked the equipment was working when it was very clear there was going to be snow . And I would not mind betting if I checked any number of years back the deicer always has a mechanical fault the day it snows !!!!! In the end its you who has too simplistic a view because you live in a world where you don’t get what the customer wants and instead want to see it all through a contractual lens . Well my friend I can assure the passengers don’t think like that ! Where have you got your information that the de-icer didn't work simply because it hadn't been tested ? Did you read the maintenance schedules ? Did you talk to the service manager ? No ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IOM Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 minute ago, The Bastard said: Where have you got your information that the de-icer didn't work simply because it hadn't been tested ? Did you read the maintenance schedules ? Did you talk to the service manager ? No ? Of course not. But the thing did not work the chances are it didn’t because it hadn’t been used for such a long time . Generally when machinery has been out of action for any length of time it tends to fail . I may well be wrong and am happy to be proven so if you want to share the maintenance schedules with me ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt_Mainwaring Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 6 minutes ago, The Bastard said: Where have you got your information that the de-icer didn't work simply because it hadn't been tested ? Did you read the maintenance schedules ? Did you talk to the service manager ? No ? I'm with you on this. Surely the airlines would be speaking to their contracted deicing partner when snow and ice were forecast, asking them to ensure things were ready and working? As they would at any other airport where they may need de-icing rigs? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 As I recall, on one previous occasion Menzies blamed the equipment but it later transpired that they ran out of de-icer (or had gone past its useful shelf life) and had to wait for it to be delivered by IOMSPCo. They have form/history. So it's not something new but could be avoided if somehow it was managed properly. Who manages the managers and their contracts? Shirley there has to be some coalescence by all the parties to make it happen? 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxweegie Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 6 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: Shirley there has to be some coalescence by all the parties to make it happen? You would think so, and don't call me Shirley. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bastard Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 16 minutes ago, IOM said: Of course not. But the thing did not work the chances are it didn’t because it hadn’t been used for such a long time . Generally when machinery has been out of action for any length of time it tends to fail . I may well be wrong and am happy to be proven so if you want to share the maintenance schedules with me ! Thing is, you're blaming it on somehow the airport not getting involved in the day-to-day operations of a completely separate business. You admit you have no idea why the de-icer didn't work, but you're ready to attribute it to a systemic failure anyway, where the airport is somehow responsible. Even if it just turns out that no deicing fluid was available, that would be unfortunate, but none of the airport's business. They don't provide the deicing service, they provide the runway. Again, deicing is strictly a contractual business between the airline and Menzies. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IOM Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 8 minutes ago, The Bastard said: Thing is, you're blaming it on somehow the airport not getting involved in the day-to-day operations of a completely separate business. You admit you have no idea why the de-icer didn't work, but you're ready to attribute it to a systemic failure anyway, where the airport is somehow responsible. Even if it just turns out that no deicing fluid was available, that would be unfortunate, but none of the airport's business. They don't provide the deicing service, they provide the runway. Again, deicing is strictly a contractual business between the airline and Menzies. Goodness me can you actually read ? I am not solely blaming the airport I have said the airlines are culpable as well ! And yes if there was no deicer then of course that’s a complete failure by Menzies but honestly what does it take for someone / anyone to ask the question ? It’s you that’s naive going around saying I don’t get how the airport works and I have repeatedly demonstrated I do . Or I want a nanny when I don’t believe in that at all you just make it all up as you go along ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmanxpilot Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 (edited) 31 minutes ago, The Bastard said: Thing is, you're blaming it on somehow the airport not getting involved in the day-to-day operations of a completely separate business. You admit you have no idea why the de-icer didn't work, but you're ready to attribute it to a systemic failure anyway, where the airport is somehow responsible. Even if it just turns out that no deicing fluid was available, that would be unfortunate, but none of the airport's business. They don't provide the deicing service, they provide the runway. Again, deicing is strictly a contractual business between the airline and Menzies. All aircraft must have their critical structures free from contamination prior to take off. This because it can have a massive impact on aerodynamic performance if not removed. In times of active snow or other frozen precipitation , after de icing with a thin fluid, a thicker mix is applied to stop further accumulation. This second step comes with a hold over time which is calculated using information about the type of fluid, the type and heaviness of the precipitation and the temperature. The holdover time is the time from when this second application started to the time when the aircraft must be airborne. If that time is exceeded, and the weather is unchanged, the aircraft should return to stand and start the whole de icing process again. In the air, any ice will build up on the leading edges, and aircraft have systems to deal with that in all bar the most severe cases. My experience of the de icing arrangement here is pretty much as per @Andy Onchan has said above. De icing fluid isn’t cheap, and has a defined (short) shelf life. Unlike milk at the supermarket, a sniff test is not allowed!. I have also experienced the entire stock of de icing fluid being used on one business jet, leaving absolutely none for the commercial aircraft sitting covered in snow and ice. That was quite some years ago though, and nothing to do with Menzies. The other issue is that last I heard there is only one de icing rig, and it is very rarely used thanks to our maritime climate. As we know, machines that aren’t used regularly tend to develop technical issues more than those that are in frequent use. The bottom line as usual comes down to cost. Menzies would be taking a massive risk on their own part if they ordered massive quantities of de icing fluids on the chance that they would be required, not to mention the hundreds of thousands a new de icing rig would cost. As the airport is supposed to be a critical part of our infrastructure, perhaps this de icing function should be funded by the government to ensure its provision. However, with the head on drive into commercialisation of the airport underway at the moment, that is extremely unlikely to happen. Like the southern pool - the cost of everything is known (or guessed at in that case) and the value of things is ignored. Edited January 19 by madmanxpilot 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Rushen Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 The night before: If it’s needed in the morning fill the de-icing unit with fluid plug it in make sure it is heating. If there is a back up tank make sure it is topped up and heating. - End of shift. To minimise cost Airlines buy de-icing fluid and ship to bases that need it. The contractor then charges for storage heating and application. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.