<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title>Manchester Airport Blog</title>
	<subtitle>Manchester Airport</subtitle>	<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk"/>
	<updated>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:07:16 UTC</updated>
	<author>
		<name>Fubra Ltd.</name>
		<email>support@fubra.com</email>
	</author>
	<id>www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk</id>

	<entry>
		<title>Russian pilots breach alcohol limits at Manchester</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/11/russian-pilots-breach-alcohol-limits-at-manchester/" />
		<id>russian-pilots-breach-alcohol-limits-at-manchester</id>
		<updated>2008-11-14T10:07:16Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;Two Russian pilots working for the national carrier, Aeroflot, were fined last week for having drunk excessive alcohol the night before they were due to fly a plane back to Moscow from Manchester airport.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Captain Mikhail Danilstsev, aged 47, and co-pilot Andrey Lyubimov, aged 56, were arrested by police at the airport after a member of the airline staff smelt alcohol on their breath. She contacted her supervisor who in turn contacted the police in order that a breathalyser test could be carried out. Both tests were positive and revealed alcohol limits of 27 mg in 100 mls of blood, significantly greater than the permissible 20mg.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The men claimed that they had both drunk four pints of beer the previous evening but had judged the beer to be significantly less potent than the beer they drink in Russia. They therefore felt that they would be under the limit for the flight which was scheduled to leave at 4am the next day. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Admittedly the plane would not have been carrying any passengers since it was a “ferry flight” but this in no way diminished the culpability of the pilots who, the judge pointed out, could easily have compromised the safety of passengers on other flights. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In their defence, the men said that they had not anticipated that the flight would have taken off on time but acknowledged that they had broken the law both in this country and in Russia and also the company policy, which bans the drinking of alcohol in the 24 hours prior to flying. They were fined £2500 each, ordered to pay costs, and have been sacked by Aeroflot.&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<title>Manchester Airport expansion causes controversy</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/11/manchester-airport-expansion-causes-controversy/" />
		<id>manchester-airport-expansion-causes-controversy</id>
		<updated>2008-11-06T14:51:06Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;The Manchester Evening News has described plans drawn up by Manchester Airport to destroy a 400-year-old cottage as “cultural barbarism”. The airport is keen to make space for two large cargo warehouses and it hopes to be given permission to destroy Rose Cottage, a Grade II-listed building. The Wythenshawe area committee rejected the airport’s proposal but the plans are now going to be considered by town hall planners. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The planned extension to the airport’s freight terminal, estimated to be costing approximately £20 million, will be built on land near Runger Lane. The airport also wants to demolish several other historical properties located within close proximity of Rose Cottage. Manchester Airport believes that cargo making use of its World Freight Centre will increase from just over 165,000 tonnes to over 270,000 tonnes by the end of 2015. Furthermore, it has stated that the two new cargo units will create approximately 60 jobs. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Although the airport has made it clear that they intend on saving and subsequently storing all the historical features of the cottages and properties involved in the proposal, local residents have been quick to condemn the plans. These residents, along with local councillors and historians, have been upset further by news that a natural pond and numerous mature trees will probably be demolished along with the buildings.     &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Manchester Airport is the largest airport in the United Kingdom outside of London. It was officially opened in 1938 and last year it handled a total of 22,112,625 passengers.&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<title>Face scanning machines in UK airports take off</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/08/face-scanning-machines-in-uk-airports-take-off/" />
		<id>face-scanning-machines-in-uk-airports-take-off</id>
		<updated>2008-08-27T14:17:38Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;Once again, the world of science fiction merges into that of the real world and this time it’s immigration control at one of the busiest UK airports that is bringing us into the 21st Century. Where we once saw the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger having his faced scanned to identify him in films, now passengers passing through passport control will have their faces scanned for real and then have that image matched with the one on their passport. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The sheer number of people flying into the UK means there are often long queues but this new scanning system hopes to cut the checking process in half. The current time for ‘manual’ checks is just over 20 seconds but, with the two scanning machines being piloted at Manchester City Airport, it’s cut down to around 13 seconds, which may not seem like a lot but certainly adds up at peak times. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is backing the idea but there have been a few criticisms voiced already. A member of the anti big brother set, Guy Herbert, the general secretary of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.no2id.net/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;No2ID&lt;/a&gt; has raised concerns over the accuracy of the recognition. His concerns come at a time when there have been serious shake ups with passports and the news that by 2016 all UK residents will have to possess a biometric passport, which according to specialist hackers, can be cloned in an hour. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Heathrow has postponed the new finger-printing checks using the same passport because of security concerns. It seems science fiction might be remaining that way for the moment.&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<title>Manchester-bound &quot;flight from hell&quot;</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/08/manchesterbound-flight-from-hell/" />
		<id>manchesterbound-flight-from-hell</id>
		<updated>2008-08-20T14:27:19Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;If your holiday plans this summer include a flight with budget carrier Jet2, it is probably best to look away now. The Yorkshire based leisure airline, which until 2006 operated out of Bournemouth, has had to issue an apology to furious passengers for the &amp;quot;flight from hell&amp;quot; which they endured at the beginning of Aug. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Passengers due to fly home from Rome Fiumicino airport were already feeling disgruntled when they boarded the plane three hours later than expected. They then had to sit on board in sweltering temperatures of over thirty degrees for three hours, during which time they were served just one complimentary soft drink. The plane was then unloaded and passengers sat in the terminal building for another two and a half hours before receiving the bad news that they would not be flying back to Manchester that night since the flight had now been cancelled. The airline booked overnight accommodation in local hotels but what they were less successful in doing was arranging transport, with some passengers having to foot taxi bills of £80 because there was simply no room for passengers and their luggage on the transport provided by Jet2.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Matters in the transport department were no better the next morning, with a coach, which was already half full, turning up to ferry 140 passengers to the airport for their flight home. One passenger described the free-for-all which ensued, with women and children being pushed off the bus. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A spokesman for the airline has explained that the root cause of the debacle was a small technical fault and that the situation was exacerbated by the fact that Jet2 has no ground staff at Rome. He has promised an investigation to ensure that better service will be provided the next time there is an incident of this sort. One rather suspects, however, that for many of the passengers there simply will be no next time with Jet2!&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<title>Collision at Manchester Airport</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/08/collision-at-manchester-airport/" />
		<id>collision-at-manchester-airport</id>
		<updated>2008-08-20T14:11:28Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;An investigation is under way to discover why a minor collision between two aircraft happened last week at Manchester airport. A Futura Boeing 737 bound for Tenerife hit a Lufthansa Airbus A320 headed for Frankfurt. Both planes were due to take off within minutes of each other from Terminal 1. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Almost three hundred passengers were on board the planes but fortunately no-one was hurt and, after the aircraft had been inspected by the fire services, the passengers were able to disembark in the normal way, hoping to be able to get on with their holidays later in the day.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The collision happened between the wing tip of the Futura plane and the tail of the Lufthansa aircraft and both ended up with structural damage which will cost millions to repair. Although costly in terms of economics, it seems that airport officials were relatively unconcerned by the collision, describing it as “a fairly minor incident”.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The airport is said to be arranged in such a way that this sort of incident should not have happened and it is hoped that the investigation will get to the bottom of the cause quickly. There have been reports that one of the pilots was instructed not to proceed but ignored the warning. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A similar incident happened at Manchester in 2004, again when both planes were getting ready for take-off.  David Learmount of Air Transport Intelligence said that incidents of planes clipping each other at airports were relatively common, although injuries as a result are thankfully extremely rare.&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<title>Workers at Manchester Airport cancel strike</title>
		<link href="http://www.manchester-airport-guide.co.uk/blog/2008/08/workers-at-manchester-airport-cancel-strike/" />
		<id>workers-at-manchester-airport-cancel-strike</id>
		<updated>2008-08-11T15:10:55Z</updated>
		<summary type="html">
&lt;p&gt;Workers at Manchester Airport cancelled a strike this month after they were offered a pay rise just before the strike was due. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Cleaners at the airport had previously been offered a 2% pay rise but rejected the increase, vowing to strike from 17th July through to 6am on 20th July. But at the eleventh hour airport employers Initial Air Services announced a 3.5% pay rise which 78% of union members accepted. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Spokeswoman for union group Unite explained that the airport employees had wanted to avoid taking industrial action and were glad when a resolution was offered. She said: “We want to send a clear message to contractors at Manchester Airport: if they choose to impose a non-negotiated pay deal, then we will retaliate.”&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Although cleaners at Manchester Airport did go into work on 17th July, thousands of local authority and public sector employees took industrial action causing disruption across the country. In Manchester more than 84 schools were forced to close after cleaning staff, teaching assistants and midday staff staged a walkout and many of its libraries, museums, town halls and leisure centres were also shut. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;With 750,000 employees protesting, the strike was hailed as the biggest walkout since the General Strike in 1926. According to Jack Dromey, national organiser of the Transport and General Workers Union, the strike reflected a general mood of dissatisfaction with poor pay and hoped it would send a powerful message to local councillors, adding: “Our members want fair pay, decent treatment and, quite simply, respect.”&lt;/p&gt;

</summary>
	</entry>
</feed>
