On 28.05.17 21:39, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 28.05.17 20:44, Recliner wrote:
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

We obviously don't know the full story yet, but this certainly sounds like
the result of a cost cut too far (and �lex Cruz does seem to have been on a
quest to turn BA into Vueling UK).

I can't help but wonder if this was a targetted virus attack of some sort.

For what it's worth, that's been denied.

They would do.

And this isn't how viruses usually
manifest themselves.

I think that you are a computer engineer, whereas I am not. I did
mention targeted attack, however.



I also read a note, stating that BA could face a £100 million bill over
this. I wonder what IAG's balance sheet indicates.

I've seen an estimate of £150m. That would have bought BA another 787-9.

New, I'm assuming?

wrote:
On 28.05.17 21:39, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 28.05.17 20:44, Recliner wrote:
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

We obviously don't know the full story yet, but this certainly sounds like
the result of a cost cut too far (and �lex Cruz does seem to have been on a
quest to turn BA into Vueling UK).

I can't help but wonder if this was a targetted virus attack of some sort.

For what it's worth, that's been denied.

They would do.

And this isn't how viruses usually
manifest themselves.

I think that you are a computer engineer, whereas I am not. I did
mention targeted attack, however.



I also read a note, stating that BA could face a £100 million bill over
this. I wonder what IAG's balance sheet indicates.

I've seen an estimate of £150m. That would have bought BA another 787-9.

New, I'm assuming?

Yes, with plenty of cash left over.

In article ,
wrote:
I can't help but wonder if this was a targetted virus attack of some sort.

I doubt it. History suggests this is what happens when cost cutters
keep asking why we need all those useless redundant systems and links
that just sit there doing nothing.

R's,
John

On 28.05.17 22:32, John Levine wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
I can't help but wonder if this was a targetted virus attack of some sort.

I doubt it. History suggests this is what happens when cost cutters
keep asking why we need all those useless redundant systems and links
that just sit there doing nothing.

R's,
John

How very short-sighted. Even if nothing never happens, it would give
some piece of mind.

It's similar to AWS or TPWS; Most drivers will respond to and obey
signal aspects, though in the even that they do not ...

I wonder if either BA's or IAG's insurance will help out, considering
the circumstances under which this happened.

John Levine wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
I can't help but wonder if this was a targetted virus attack of some sort.

I doubt it. History suggests this is what happens when cost cutters
keep asking why we need all those useless redundant systems and links
that just sit there doing nothing.

Extracts from
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ba-faces-150m-loss-after-chaos-at-heathrow-skn5df2p9?shareToken=eda797f212af8616c748134ddb1b0 3b0:

British Airways is facing losses of more than £150 million after the most
serious IT failure in UK aviation history.

…

The airline said that a power failure took down servers hosting the “Fly�
system, which controls everything from bookings to baggage-tracking and
passport checks. BA systems collapsed last year on June 19, July 7 and
again on July 13.

Critics blamed cost-cutting by the chief executive, Alex Cruz, and
outsourcing of IT roles to India. They also said statements yesterday that
most services had returned to normal were “dishonest�. Passengers described
conditions in Heathrow as “third-world� and many could not access
information by phone or online.

…

Howard Wheeldon, an aviation analyst, said that predictions of a £100
million bill for compensation and recovery costs could be an under-estimate
because of the “incalculable� loss of future business owing to damage to
BA’s reputation. “It isn’t only two days,� he said. “It’s the impact on
people’s confidence.� Other experts mooted near-term losses above £150
million once the airline had paid the statutory compensation of £225 to
£540 per passenger.

BA said that the problems had started with a power failure, not a
cyberattack. The Fly system, which was introduced last year is unpopular
with staff, who find it slows down under pressure. A union survey of 700
staff last summer found that more than 90 per cent believed it was unfit
for purpose. It was unclear yesterday why a power failure could knock out
the system, but sources indicated that BA did have back-up power supplies
that failed too.

Alex Macheras, an aviation analyst, said: “I was disappointed when British
Airways claimed things were back to normal early Saturday morning. This was
simply an attempt to distract the media. In fact, Sunday was described as
‘far worse’ by airport staff I spoke to.�

A BA spokesman said: “We would never compromise the integrity and security
of our IT systems. IT services are now provided globally by a range of
suppliers and this is very common practice across all industries We are
extremely sorry for the disruption.�

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew
out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on
Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and
Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

We obviously don't know the full story yet, but this certainly sounds like
the result of a cost cut too far (and �lex Cruz does seem to have been on
a
quest to turn BA into Vueling UK).

but it's far from clear that the problem here is the offshoring

it seems to be entirely down to insufficient redundancy in their systems,
and any decision to dispense with (whatever is) industry standard redundancy
is going to have come from someone much higher up than an offshore bod.

tim

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 May 2017 18:32:08 +0100, e27002 aurora
wrote:

On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew
out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on
Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and
Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

Are they not claiming it's a power supply issue? Is the hardware
offshore as well?

according to El Reg

"BA has a very large IT infrastructure; it has over 500 data cabinets spread
across six halls in two different sites near its Heathrow Waterside HQ"

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 20:10:12 on Sun, 28 May 2017, Recliner
remarked:

That's why it's not wise to make precise accusations at this stage. Of
course, any professional data centre shouldn't collapse for most of a day
if there's a power supply problem. It should have UPS

But unlikely to have hours worth of UPS.

and ample backup power, plus, perhaps duplicated grid connections.

Yes, they should have duplicated grid connections, although that ca be
challenging if the reason the datacentre has been located where it is
results from a local power source (a hydro dam is a common example).

But even with all the precautions, it's well nigh impossible to exclude
every single-point-of-failure, which can easily be in the equipment
which manages the redistribution of power during an outage.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 29 May 2017 07:50:51 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 28 May 2017 18:32:08 +0100, e27002 aurora
wrote:

On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew
out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on
Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and
Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

Are they not claiming it's a power supply issue? Is the hardware
offshore as well?

according to El Reg

"BA has a very large IT infrastructure; it has over 500 data cabinets spread
across six halls in two different sites near its Heathrow Waterside HQ"

The obvious question then is whether any other part of the Heathrow
area suffered power supply problems.

On 29/05/2017 10:20, Scott wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 07:50:51 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 May 2017 18:32:08 +0100, e27002 aurora
wrote:

On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:15:25 +0100, "
wrote:

On 27.05.17 16:26, Recliner wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/british-airways-chaos-computer-systems-crash-across-world-causing/

I'm certainly glad I wasn't flying today! All was smooth when I flew
out
from Heathrow on Wednesday, and I hope it will be back to normal on
Friday.
But I wonder what effect it's had on trains serving Heathrow and
Gatwick?


Possibly longer dwell times at Gatwick Airport as people turn back home
when they either give up or realise that they are not going to fly out
today? This might have a knock-on effect on schedules into and out of
London.

I think that the effects would be as bad at Heathrow as Piccadilly Line
trains have extended dwell times at all the stations, IIRC. The same
goes for HEX trains, yes?

So cheap offshore IT work has gone well for BA? :-)

Are they not claiming it's a power supply issue? Is the hardware
offshore as well?

according to El Reg

"BA has a very large IT infrastructure; it has over 500 data cabinets spread
across six halls in two different sites near its Heathrow Waterside HQ"

The obvious question then is whether any other part of the Heathrow
area suffered power supply problems.


Heathrow Waterside is a separate industrial estate just off the A4 to
the north west of the airport (roughly where they want to put the third
runway! Apart from BA the only other occupants appear to be a branch of
Waitrose and a hair dressers.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.