The Dallas Business Journal's May 21-27 edition, in the commentary section, includes a straightforward, no BS piece by a couple of guys about the potential for serious Y2K impact on the airline industry.

Michael Baiada is an active United Pilot and Michael Boyd is president of the Boyd Group?ASRC Inc. in Colorado. The deeper into the article, the more interesting this gets.

The Journal's web address is here Under the headline of "Airlines, airports face Y2K costs of $400M," here is the text:

"Even if the air traffic control system works flawlessly Jan. 1, consumer uncertainty about Y2K could severely reduce airline passenger bookings in January, costing the top eight airlines $400 million in lost revenue.

"The reason: declining credibility of the FAA's efforts to address the Y2K problem.

"Yet, it may be much worse. If Y2K problems actually do manifest within the ATC system, airlines will face staggering financial losses.

"There is no question that consumer uncertainties about the safety of the ATC system will reduce passenger bookings in the first days of the new year. But if the ATC system actually experiences Y2K failures, airlines could see losses that shareholders will find quite unpleasant.

"Airline and airport revenue losses could easily exceed $400 million, and that's if the ATC system works normally. If the ATC system is partially shut down, however, passenger revenues could drop 25% or more, giving airlines and airports a financial hit to the tune of more than $1.5 billion.

"ATC failure scenarios range from nothing happening at all, on through to a complete failure of the host computer and back-up systems. This latter scenario is unlikely, but there is an even worse possibilty.

"It is doubtful that the ATC system will go dark on Jan. 1, but there is no guarantee Y2K problems will not result in faulty data being presented to the ATC controller.

"This raises the possibility of undetected errors working their way through the system representing unnecessary safety risks.

"Despite assurances to the contrary, the FAA has fallen behind in its Y2K/ATC efforts, and has attempted to deceive the public. Its contingency plan is one example. The FAA web site promised it by Aug. 30, 1998. Then the agency promised it by Dec. 31, 1998. What the FAA finally released in April, eight months late, was an outline of who the FAA will contact after a failure takes place.

"The FAA admits that problems will crop up with the ATC system, but they assure us they will be minor. Since they have no earthly idea of how much or where such problems will manifest, their claim that safety will not be compromised is questionable.

"Also adding to public reticence to fly immediately after Jan. 1 will be the concern that the FAA's Y2K program could mirror other major projects, most of which the FAA has completed late, or bungled completely.

"The complexity of the current ATC system, along with the FAA's past project performance, should be cause for concern on the part of Congress, the consumer, airports and the airline industry.

"In the past two months, two other major FAA projects (STARS and WAAS) were found to be well behind schedule, after FAA assurances to the contrary.

"With stakes this high, assuming that the FAA will suddenly become project-proficient is foolhardy. Although we hope we are wrong, Y2K is not likely to be any different.

"The air traffic control system already has operational errors 20 times higher than FAA's safety and regulatory division (Flight Standards) allows for airline flight critical functions. Y2K can only make this worse.

"Airline management is urged to aggressively get involved in pressuring the FAA in the ATC matter. We hope airline statements of confidence in the FAA are only sound bite deep. The industry must stop tolerating bad FAA management that translates into an ATC system that costs them hundreds of millions annually.

"Right now, the best we can hope for after Jan. 1 is that the ATC system operates only as badly as it does today. Chances are that such hope is optimistic."

-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), May 24, 1999

Answers

Though the link will take you to the URL, I couldn't find the commentary page.

-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), May 24, 1999.

The really, really sickening thing about all this is that the pollyannas are gleefully decrying "See! See! Rates for programmer's are still low!!! Y2K is overblown! HA HA HA!" Which is partially true. Programmers still make an average of around 30 bucks an hour, including benefits, such as shitty health insurance and easy access to the Coke machine.

Yet the lawyers will not agree to limiting their rates for anticipated y2k litigation to $1000/hour. Somehow, they feel they deserve more.

-- a (a@a.a), May 24, 1999.

"A"

Your right about the Programming rates - We need to unite and develope CODE FEVER.

As for the FAA - In April of '98, I'm sorry 1998, ABC World News ran a piece on the FAA and the airlines. In the story the report asked about the results of the test - all went well EXCEPT FOR A FEW MAINTENANCE ROUTINES - (this was the response from both the FAA and the airlines)

Since every industry that deals with human life are now required to have routines check which checks the DATE, that last maintainance was performed and if maintainence missed, shut it down. Well what do you think?

-- Lee Bickley (lbickley@netset.com), May 25, 1999.

From a thread here, 1999-05-07... <:)=

"They rushed this system into service, against our wishes, because they want to say we've got another 40 percent of our equipment Y2K compliant,"

New York Airport problems similar to Chicago...

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 25, 1999.

Lee: If you mean concerning maintenance checks specifically, I dunno. But the sheer number of failures in general will be unmanagable, and will cripple large parts of the world, that I can assure you.

-- a (a@a.a), May 25, 1999.

Thanks Vic,

as an airline guy myself I understand the possibilities and implications of what will inevitably happen.

Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines has ALREADY grounded his entire fleet for rollover.

Branson - despite claims to the contrary by Flint and Hoff - is no fool, this move is unprecedented in the aviation industry - it has NEVER been done before - the writing is on the wall.

Wanna be the first airline to have a jumbo crash?

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 25, 1999.

I'd place a bet on the likelihood of a major public relations campaign by the airline industry a la the banking industry's "don't worry, you can still give us your money" campaign.

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), May 25, 1999.