BA global IT system failure

[beorhthelm]

Therefore
Primary reason is poor hardware system design
Secondary reason: lack of or poor system acceptance testing

its deeper than that. what ties the IT system so tightly to the aircraft on the ground? do they have no regional or local IT systems capable of holding data (say passenger lists, something i suspect may be the cause of this), so that a failure in Heathrow doesnt ground aircraft in Australia. its sympomatic of attitude to IT, companies have reliance on IT systems then not recognised as core to the business - not just merely something that aids the business, but the tool that enables them to do what they do today.

 

[easynow]

How and earth did we manage to fly around the globe without computers back in the day ?

Radio, Maths and lots and lots buttons

 

[Dave the OAP]

Speaking as someone who works in the, what used to be called , DR, disaster recovery business, something doesn't quite fit here.

BA Have more that 1 backup site, in fact they have a series of failover sites that are tested to death on a regular basis.
All CER sites have N+1 as standard failover and in the case of the bigger sites, we have n+ 4 or 5 ( yes I know that is not a technical term but you know what I am getting at) depending on the generator capacity.
All cer sites are covered by UPS systems that are now linked to systems that monitor flow and report on power outages, spikes, blips or whatever you want to call them.
To suggest everything went down because one centre had a power issue I said nonsense.
To suggest it is cutting costs, is not wholly plausible. Yes they have outsourced to India, the Philippines and really really cheap places, but if it is a power issue, that is covered at th local site, let's say Didcot for example. Whilst the itSystems will be looked after by offshore companies, the power systems and CER maintanance wil all be done, and is, locally at the shop floor.
ALl engineers are highly trained and constantly undergo disaster scenario training so this must have been a hell of a catastrophic failure to take out as much as it did.

Something doesn't add up.

 

[Gwylan]

As for the BA CEO blaming a power failure ...

Comment from The Register. "It technically is a power supply issue: Alex Cruz should never have had any"

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I really don't get BA. Me and Mrs W needed flights to Oz, one way only, Emirates was £600 odd each, BA was £2k each! Both economy fares, and I understand that Emirates are subsidised but not to that degree. A basket case that can only go bust if it continues that pricing policy.

UK Airlines need to looking at pricing, the issue is the massive Tax - you can buy a ticket to Dubai for £40 - but with the tax it makes it £400

 

[ditchy]

I really don't get BA. Me and Mrs W needed flights to Oz, one way only, Emirates was £600 odd each, BA was £2k each! Both economy fares, and I understand that Emirates are subsidised but not to that degree. A basket case that can only go bust if it continues that pricing policy.

just as an interest .. what was Qantas ? i bet similar to BA ? .. shows you how much Emirates is subsidised .

 

[wellquickwoody]

just as an interest .. what was Qantas ? i bet similar to BA ? .. shows you how much Emirates is subsidised .

Emirates and Quantas are 'partner' airlines, so the price is identical.

 

[Postman Pat]

Agreed but too many companies amke the savings from their IT budgets. They see IT as an annoying expense when in reality it's what helps them still make money. If I had a pound for every IT Director that's asked me if DR and redundancy was really worth the cost I'd be retired. With their penny pinching they actually waste money by introducing single points of failure make any further investment in redunancy pointless.

I work in a company that supplies IT to airlines. Our company says that airlines don't realise they are IT companies that fly planes. They rely so heavily on IT but treat it so badly.

If Joe Public got to see how reservation systems 'worked' they would never book a flight again. They are completely archaic and fundamentally the same systems from the 70's!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Still an absolute mess today

 

[ozzygull]

Speaking as someone who works in the, what used to be called , DR, disaster recovery business, something doesn't quite fit here.

BA Have more that 1 backup site, in fact they have a series of failover sites that are tested to death on a regular basis.
All CER sites have N+1 as standard failover and in the case of the bigger sites, we have n+ 4 or 5 ( yes I know that is not a technical term but you know what I am getting at) depending on the generator capacity.
All cer sites are covered by UPS systems that are now linked to systems that monitor flow and report on power outages, spikes, blips or whatever you want to call them.
To suggest everything went down because one centre had a power issue I said nonsense.
To suggest it is cutting costs, is not wholly plausible. Yes they have outsourced to India, the Philippines and really really cheap places, but if it is a power issue, that is covered at th local site, let's say Didcot for example. Whilst the itSystems will be looked after by offshore companies, the power systems and CER maintanance wil all be done, and is, locally at the shop floor.
ALl engineers are highly trained and constantly undergo disaster scenario training so this must have been a hell of a catastrophic failure to take out as much as it did.

Something doesn't add up.

Exactly, I don't know anything about the BA infrastructure, but having systems that can cause that much trouble susceptible to a power failure, is either rubbish or irresponsible.

 

[Ernest]

Emirates and Quantas are 'partner' airlines, so the price is identical.

By the time you ACTUALLY go it would have been QUICKER to have walked there

 

[Rod Marsh]

Speaking as someone who works in the, what used to be called , DR, disaster recovery business, something doesn't quite fit here.

BA Have more that 1 backup site, in fact they have a series of failover sites that are tested to death on a regular basis.
All CER sites have N+1 as standard failover and in the case of the bigger sites, we have n+ 4 or 5 ( yes I know that is not a technical term but you know what I am getting at) depending on the generator capacity.
All cer sites are covered by UPS systems that are now linked to systems that monitor flow and report on power outages, spikes, blips or whatever you want to call them.
To suggest everything went down because one centre had a power issue I said nonsense.
To suggest it is cutting costs, is not wholly plausible. Yes they have outsourced to India, the Philippines and really really cheap places, but if it is a power issue, that is covered at th local site, let's say Didcot for example. Whilst the itSystems will be looked after by offshore companies, the power systems and CER maintanance wil all be done, and is, locally at the shop floor.
ALl engineers are highly trained and constantly undergo disaster scenario training so this must have been a hell of a catastrophic failure to take out as much as it did.

Something doesn't add up.

I would suggest they are not testing failover scenarios on a regular basis at all. If they did, this sort of event would not occur.

 

[wellquickwoody]

By the time you ACTUALLY go it would have been QUICKER to have walked there

And cheaper!

I will PM you from above the Indian Ocean to let you know when you can relax :

 

[Dave the OAP]

I would suggest they are not testing failover scenarios on a regular basis at all. If they did, this sort of event would not occur.

Experience will tell me that you are wrong old chap!

 

[dazzer6666]

Speaking as someone who works in the, what used to be called , DR, disaster recovery business, something doesn't quite fit here.

BA Have more that 1 backup site, in fact they have a series of failover sites that are tested to death on a regular basis.
All CER sites have N+1 as standard failover and in the case of the bigger sites, we have n+ 4 or 5 ( yes I know that is not a technical term but you know what I am getting at) depending on the generator capacity.
All cer sites are covered by UPS systems that are now linked to systems that monitor flow and report on power outages, spikes, blips or whatever you want to call them.
To suggest everything went down because one centre had a power issue I said nonsense.
To suggest it is cutting costs, is not wholly plausible. Yes they have outsourced to India, the Philippines and really really cheap places, but if it is a power issue, that is covered at th local site, let's say Didcot for example. Whilst the itSystems will be looked after by offshore companies, the power systems and CER maintanance wil all be done, and is, locally at the shop floor.
ALl engineers are highly trained and constantly undergo disaster scenario training so this must have been a hell of a catastrophic failure to take out as much as it did.

Something doesn't add up.

Agree with you........something catastrophic has happened. Inconceivable that a 'power failure' would have this impact on something so critical.

 

[Rod Marsh]

Experience will tell me that you are wrong old chap!

My experience says otherwise!

 

[Weststander]

Radio, Maths and lots and lots buttons

Is that the brand new Aeroflot airliner?

 

[The Spanish]

Is that the brand new Aeroflot airliner?

Aeroflots fleet is much much younger than BAs overall.

 

[e77]

That's what happens when you make your IT department redundant and outsource to save a couple of bob.

 

[ditchy]

Emirates and Quantas are 'partner' airlines, so the price is identical.

I thought BA was on the same code share as Qantas , not Emirates