Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to groupPost Subject:
Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
exactly one year's time.
Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
The new terminal, a new home for British Airways, will serve around 30
million passengers a year.
The first flight to be served by the new terminal will be a BA service
from Hong Kong. The passengers arriving from the Far East will be the
first of around 40,000 to go through the terminal on its first day of
operation.
Work on the terminal began in 2002 after a lengthy, record-breaking
four-year public inquiry.
It has been built on a former sewage works at the western end of the
airport. It will have platforms to serve both the Heathrow Express and
London Underground's Piccadilly line. There will be two platforms to
serve any future new Heathrow rail link to the west.
Shops at the terminal include a Harrods, and celebrity chef Gordon
Ramsay will open his first airport-based restaurant there.
Heathrow chief executive Tony Douglas said: "London is a world city, a
global financial centre and needs a world-class airport.
"T5 is already a testament to the skill and hard work of the thousands
of people, including architects, planners, construction workers,
airport and airline staff, who have together made the building happen.
Mr Douglas said 68 million passengers would fly through Heathrow this
year "in ageing terminal facilities designed to accommodate around 45
million".
Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
exactly one year's time.
Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
The new terminal, a new home for British Airways, will serve around 30
million passengers a year.
The first flight to be served by the new terminal will be a BA service
from Hong Kong. The passengers arriving from the Far East will be the
first of around 40,000 to go through the terminal on its first day of
operation.
Work on the terminal began in 2002 after a lengthy, record-breaking
four-year public inquiry.
It has been built on a former sewage works at the western end of the
airport. It will have platforms to serve both the Heathrow Express and
London Underground's Piccadilly line. There will be two platforms to
serve any future new Heathrow rail link to the west.
Shops at the terminal include a Harrods, and celebrity chef Gordon
Ramsay will open his first airport-based restaurant there.
Heathrow chief executive Tony Douglas said: "London is a world city, a
global financial centre and needs a world-class airport.
"T5 is already a testament to the skill and hard work of the thousands
of people, including architects, planners, construction workers,
airport and airline staff, who have together made the building happen.
Mr Douglas said 68 million passengers would fly through Heathrow this
year "in ageing terminal facilities designed to accommodate around 45
million".
Rubba Luva wrote:
> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>
> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>
> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
> exactly one year's time.
>
> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
volunteers to check it out?
> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>
> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>
> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
> exactly one year's time.
>
> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
volunteers to check it out?
Mike Hunt wrote:
> Rubba Luva wrote:
>
>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>
>>
>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>
>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>> exactly one year's time.
>>
>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>
>
> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
> volunteers to check it out?
Lab rats are rarely professional.
Mike Hunt wrote:
> Rubba Luva wrote:
>
>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>
>>
>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>
>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>> exactly one year's time.
>>
>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>
> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
> volunteers to check it out?
Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make
the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
--
Stephen
Have you tried jamming your head in the tumble-drier and switching on?
> Rubba Luva wrote:
>
>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>
>>
>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>
>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>> exactly one year's time.
>>
>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>
> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
> volunteers to check it out?
Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make
the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
--
Stephen
Have you tried jamming your head in the tumble-drier and switching on?
Stephen Farrow wrote:
> Mike Hunt wrote:
>
>> Rubba Luva wrote:
>>
>>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>>
>>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>>> exactly one year's time.
>>>
>>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>>
>>
>> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want
>> non-professional volunteers to check it out?
>
>
> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make
> the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>
>
> Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
>> Mike Hunt wrote:
>>
>>> Rubba Luva wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>>>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>>>
>>>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>>>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>>>> exactly one year's time.
>>>>
>>>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>>>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>>>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>>>
>>>
>>> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want
>>> non-professional volunteers to check it out?
>>
>>
>> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they
>> want the people testing the facility to behave like everyday
>> travellers, rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size
>> of the building - and given things like the much-publicised teething
>> troubles with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok
>> - it's an approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site.
>> If the terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new
>> facility from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous
>> problems. Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake"
>> travellers to make the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>>
>
> I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
Method acting has its place, but there are circumstances in which it can
be taken a little too far.
--
Stephen
I've Googled till I just can't Google no more.
>
>
> Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
>> Mike Hunt wrote:
>>
>>> Rubba Luva wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>>>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>>>
>>>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>>>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>>>> exactly one year's time.
>>>>
>>>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>>>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>>>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>>>
>>>
>>> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want
>>> non-professional volunteers to check it out?
>>
>>
>> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they
>> want the people testing the facility to behave like everyday
>> travellers, rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size
>> of the building - and given things like the much-publicised teething
>> troubles with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok
>> - it's an approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site.
>> If the terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new
>> facility from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous
>> problems. Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake"
>> travellers to make the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>>
>
> I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
Method acting has its place, but there are circumstances in which it can
be taken a little too far.
--
Stephen
I've Googled till I just can't Google no more.
Stephen Farrow wrote:
> Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Stephen Farrow wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Hunt wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rubba Luva wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>>>>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>>>>
>>>>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>>>>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>>>>> exactly one year's time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>>>>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>>>>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want
>>>> non-professional volunteers to check it out?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they
>>> want the people testing the facility to behave like everyday
>>> travellers, rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size
>>> of the building - and given things like the much-publicised teething
>>> troubles with new airport facilities in places like Denver and
>>> Bangkok - it's an approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very
>>> cramped site. If the terminal opens and problems are discovered that
>>> present the new facility from operating at optimum efficiency, it
>>> will cause enormous problems. Makes sense to test the building now,
>>> using "fake" travellers to make the tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>>>
>>
>> I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats
>> and awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>>
>
> Method acting has its place, but there are circumstances in which it can
> be taken a little too far.
>
I don't know. The only way to test the efficacy of the signage might be
as I suggest. I suspect that the drugs necessary to get the effect
would be illegal.
"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
>
> Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
(cut)
>>
>>
>> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
>> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
>> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
>> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
>> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
>> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
>> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
>> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
>> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
>> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>>
>
> I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> (cut)
>
> >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
queue.
The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
is but
how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
> "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> (cut)
>
> >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
queue.
The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
is but
how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Mar 29, 12:02 am, whitely...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> > > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> > (cut)
>
> > >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> > >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> > >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> > >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> > >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> > >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> > >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> > >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> > >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> > >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> > An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> > often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> > minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> > heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
>
> Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
> queue.
>
> The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
> is but
> how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
>
>
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
Terms 1,2,3 are shite and the once new Term 4 is now jaded, so Term 5
will at least be better for the cattle.
But if you want to see a decent airport come to Brussels.
> On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> > > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> > (cut)
>
> > >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> > >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> > >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> > >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> > >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> > >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> > >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> > >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> > >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> > >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> > An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> > often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> > minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> > heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
>
> Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
> queue.
>
> The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
> is but
> how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
>
>
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
Terms 1,2,3 are shite and the once new Term 4 is now jaded, so Term 5
will at least be better for the cattle.
But if you want to see a decent airport come to Brussels.
On 29 Mar, 08:03, "ocelot" <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 12:02 am, whitely...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> > > > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> > > (cut)
>
> > > >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> > > >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> > > >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> > > >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> > > >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> > > >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> > > >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> > > >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> > > >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> > > >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > > > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > > > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> > > An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> > > often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> > > minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> > > heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
>
> > Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
> > queue.
>
> > The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
> > is but
> > how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
> > > --
> > > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> Terms 1,2,3 are shite and the once new Term 4 is now jaded, so Term 5
> will at least be better for the cattle.
> But if you want to see a decent airport come to Brussels.
Been there. Somehow I have forgotten it.
Berlin Tegel is drab, but the distances are much shorter. Basically
like a
bus station. Newark is a boot camp, 'Guantanamo Bay Lite'. All the
hubs are
much of a muchness, prone to turn into hell-holes in case of bad
weather.
- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
> On Mar 29, 12:02 am, whitely...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> > > > Stephen Farrow wrote:
>
> > > (cut)
>
> > > >> Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
> > > >> the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
> > > >> rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
> > > >> building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
> > > >> with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
> > > >> approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
> > > >> terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
> > > >> from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
> > > >> Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
> > > >> tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>
> > > > I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
> > > > awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>
> > > An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
> > > often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
> > > minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
> > > heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
>
> > Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
> > queue.
>
> > The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
> > is but
> > how much time will it really save passengers..?
>
> > > --
> > > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> Terms 1,2,3 are shite and the once new Term 4 is now jaded, so Term 5
> will at least be better for the cattle.
> But if you want to see a decent airport come to Brussels.
Been there. Somehow I have forgotten it.
Berlin Tegel is drab, but the distances are much shorter. Basically
like a
bus station. Newark is a boot camp, 'Guantanamo Bay Lite'. All the
hubs are
much of a muchness, prone to turn into hell-holes in case of bad
weather.
- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
whitely525@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 29 Mar, 08:03, "ocelot" <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 29, 12:02 am, whitely...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On 28 Mar, 11:11, "RAK" <rakn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatth...@houston.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:4609a094$0$17162$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>
>>>>>Stephen Farrow wrote:
>>
>>>>(cut)
>>
>>>>>>Yes. They need people to act as, essentially, human lab rats - they want
>>>>>>the people testing the facility to behave like everyday travellers,
>>>>>>rather than travel industry professionals. Given the size of the
>>>>>>building - and given things like the much-publicised teething troubles
>>>>>>with new airport facilities in places like Denver and Bangkok - it's an
>>>>>>approach that makes sense. Heathrow is a very cramped site. If the
>>>>>>terminal opens and problems are discovered that present the new facility
>>>>>>from operating at optimum efficiency, it will cause enormous problems.
>>>>>>Makes sense to test the building now, using "fake" travellers to make the
>>>>>>tests as "lifelike" as possible.
>>
>>>>>I wonder if they are going to keep a bunch of them in cramped seats and
>>>>>awake all night before the tests? That's 'lifelike'.
>>
>>>>An hour on London Transport getting to LHR should be a good substitute. I
>>>>often arrive off 15-20 hours trips feeling quite OK, then the last 90
>>>>minutes getting from LHR to my house finishes me off, especially if I have a
>>>>heavy bags and the escalators are broken on the tube etc..
>>
>>>Thank your self lucky you are not hiring a car with 1 person in the
>>>queue.
>>
>>>The real question is not how aesthetically pleasing the new terminal
>>>is but
>>>how much time will it really save passengers..?
>>
>>>>--
>>>>Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com-Hidequoted text -
>>
>>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>Terms 1,2,3 are shite and the once new Term 4 is now jaded, so Term 5
>>will at least be better for the cattle.
>>But if you want to see a decent airport come to Brussels.
>
>
> Been there. Somehow I have forgotten it.
>
> Berlin Tegel is drab, but the distances are much shorter. Basically
> like a
> bus station. Newark is a boot camp, 'Guantanamo Bay Lite'. All the
> hubs are
> much of a muchness, prone to turn into hell-holes in case of bad
> weather.
>
>
There are hubs and hubs. A hub which draws in a lot of local traffic
and short hop feeders is a lot simpler from a place like Newark where a
lot of the service is from other hubs. In any case size appears to make
a negative impact.
Make credence recognised that on Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:36:41 -0700, Mike
Hunt <postmaster@localhost> has scripted:
>Rubba Luva wrote:
>
>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>
>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>
>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>> exactly one year's time.
>>
>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>
>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>volunteers to check it out?
Mr Kunt, there is not such thing is a negative photon gun, or a
non-professional volunteer.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--
Hunt <postmaster@localhost> has scripted:
>Rubba Luva wrote:
>
>> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/27032007/344/heathrow-terminal-undergo-tests.html
>>
>> Heathrow terminal to undergo tests
>> The Press Association Tuesday March 27, 08:01 AM
>>
>> Thousands of people will act as passengers to test out a new £4.3
>> billion terminal which will open at the UK's biggest airport in
>> exactly one year's time.
>>
>> Around 16,000 volunteers will be used to check facilities at
>> Heathrow's Terminal 5 (T5) which will undergo six months of proving
>> trials before its March 27 2008 opening.
>
>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>volunteers to check it out?
Mr Kunt, there is not such thing is a negative photon gun, or a
non-professional volunteer.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--
Deeply Filled Mortician wrote:
>>
>>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>>volunteers to check it out?
>
>
> Mr Kunt, there is not such thing is a negative photon gun, or a
> non-professional volunteer.
I see. I disagree. I think there are a lot of non-professional volunteers.
>>
>>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>>volunteers to check it out?
>
>
> Mr Kunt, there is not such thing is a negative photon gun, or a
> non-professional volunteer.
I see. I disagree. I think there are a lot of non-professional volunteers.
In message <LvudnV7M1_MXVJXbnZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@comcast.com> Mike Hunt
<postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>volunteers to check it out?
So they should -- In fact, there should be a system like this at all
airports, including a cash reward for anyone that can sneak anything
through (obviously some controls will need to be in place, both to
ensure that the tester doesn't get detained)
I'd imagine a system where you apply in advance, on the day of your
flight, and get a sticker placed on the item you're going to take
through security, the item is photographed and documented, then if you
get it through you go to a security desk on the other side and turn in
the item and they mail it to your house, along with a cash reward.
If security finds the item, you hand over your "I'm testing airport
security" and you pay to have it returned home, or security discards it.
Your boarding pass would be flagged electronically so that if neither
security finds it, nor you check in with security, you get flagged
attempting to board.
This has the nice side effect of not opening up any security holes
(since if you could already sneak through items anyway, why would you
bother applying for a permit to sneak items through?), and would help
build confidence in the system since people could see first hand that
security works.
If it works.
--
Insert something clever here.
<postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>They spent 4.3 BILLION POUNDS on the terminal and want non-professional
>volunteers to check it out?
So they should -- In fact, there should be a system like this at all
airports, including a cash reward for anyone that can sneak anything
through (obviously some controls will need to be in place, both to
ensure that the tester doesn't get detained)
I'd imagine a system where you apply in advance, on the day of your
flight, and get a sticker placed on the item you're going to take
through security, the item is photographed and documented, then if you
get it through you go to a security desk on the other side and turn in
the item and they mail it to your house, along with a cash reward.
If security finds the item, you hand over your "I'm testing airport
security" and you pay to have it returned home, or security discards it.
Your boarding pass would be flagged electronically so that if neither
security finds it, nor you check in with security, you get flagged
attempting to board.
This has the nice side effect of not opening up any security holes
(since if you could already sneak through items anyway, why would you
bother applying for a permit to sneak items through?), and would help
build confidence in the system since people could see first hand that
security works.
If it works.
--
Insert something clever here.
