The Senate report that will be released soon, confirms that the FAA is way behind and will almost certainly not be Y2K-compliant by January 1, 2000. They have disproved the lie that Jane Garvey, the FAA Administrator, told last year. She said that they had fixed all their systems by September 30, 1998.

If no airlines can fly on January 1, they will have to take their planes out of service considerably before that date. There is not enough space at the airports to hold all the grounded planes. They will have to be flown to remote military airports and towed to areas off the tarmac. I expect the great American deserts to become the repositories. If flights can be resumed after the grounding, it will also take a considerable amount of time to move the planes back to the remote airports' tarmacs and prepare them to resume service.

This whole process will probably bankrupt the airlines. Uncle Sam, if he has the money, will have to bail them out.

I would appreciate your comments on my thoughts.

Thanks.

-- Incredulous (ytt000@aol.com), February 25, 1999

Answers

Will have to read exactly what Senate report has to say about FAA
Not that we'll believe what they say ...
Grew up in Tucson, knew folks at DMAFB. There were many planes of all vintage stored in the desert at that time.

This will all be very interesting, unsettling, depression causing.

Know some ppl who believe they incarnated now just to watch it all unravel, because their minds were too attracted to the doings of this world.

Have always wanted out anyway, don't want to see it collapse; was convinced a long time ago that there's better places worth working for. Out, out, out, for good!

But did sure enjoy flying ... high ... the take-off especially ... then the wonderful view, and soaring above the clouds and seeing the sun and blue sky, up there all that time ... will miss that.

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), February 25, 1999.

Let's not forget all the businesses that are dependent on airline travel, & particularly the global travel/entertainment/resort industry, which is absolutely mammoth. Cutting off their main source of income at the holiday season would throw millions of people into unemployment/bankruptcy. A minor recession all by itself.

Are people going to drive their cars to all those Mexican resorts...? ...What about Hawaii?

-- pass (the@peanuts.please), February 25, 1999.

What a goofy leap in logic you have made incredulous.

Even assuming they are not 100% compliant and also assuming that they do not get 100% compliant by the end of the year: This does not mean that NO planes will fly silly. Looking for places to park them...........heeheeheeheeheeheehee............

Perhaps a reduced number of flights might be a realistic consequence. Perhaps more congestion at airports etc.

Nah.........this is typical of your can't see the forest for the trees mindset. With you guys everything is either 100% white or 100% black. In the real world however, we function in many shades of gray.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), February 25, 1999.

I don't know Craig. If the FAA isn't working on 1/1, how many airlines would take the chance of flying due to insurance problems? How many planes can be up there at once, safely? <:)=

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

The airline industry is leveraged to the hilt. The Senate report talks about "rationing" airline flights.

A 10 to 15% reduction in traffic will bankrupt all the 2nd tier carriers. The big guys can handle this for a limited time.

A 20% reduction in traffic bankrupts entire industry.

At the 10% level for 3 months, and nobody makes a profit, and lots of layoffs.

How long can we sustain this? I agree with incredulous in that this is a recession all by itself.

Not so Jolly

-- Jollyprez (Jolly@prez.com), February 25, 1999.

JollyPrez.......

Where do you get your stats that a 20% reduction in traffic bankrupts the entire system.

This is ludicrous. If one company went under, then the demand for flight space would be reduced, making it less likely that other carriers would be restricted in making their flights.

Again, your leap in logic that it's all or nothing.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), February 25, 1999.

Craig, rather than a can't-see-the-forest-for-the-trees-mindset, I think you mean here to be accusing doomers of a Can't-see-the- trees-for-the-forest-mindset, where "the forest" is a general global gloomy picture, and "the trees" are data points such as this one which supposedly don't jibe with such a general global gloomy picture.

While Incredulous' reasoning that non-compliant FAA = NO planes flying in U.S. for a while may be an exaggeration, (and it may not be too,) your reasoning ain't flawless either. You argue that there will be some - probably most - planes flying therefore the idea of having to store the planes somewhere is laughable. But really, they would have to store them somewhere if there was a 10%+ decline in possible flights due to FAA problems. It would NOT require TOTAL shutdown of flights for Incredulous' interesting planes-in-the-desert scenario to materialize, contrary to your unspoken premise. But the problem .."With you (middle-of-the-y2k-road)guys everything is either 100% white or 100% black. In the real world however, we function in many shades of gray." Touche, ole, oy vey!

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), February 25, 1999.

No, Craig, you appear to be so eager to jump onto this board in order to attack someone that this time you forgot to put your brain in gear before you put your finger to the keyboards.

Try this as an analogy --

Two people each require 1000 calories daily to survive. The pair are given 1600 calories a day, so that each of them go 20% below the survival level. Now, several things can happen. One can die off quickly and the survivor can eat 1600 calories a day. Or, they can die together. Or, both get so weak that even after the first dies the second is unable to recover. Works the same with businesses.

I'm not saying that all the airlines are down to the survival level now ...... low oil prices have made things cushy for them over the past year. But, if you toss sharply reduced oil imports into the equation, they all could go belly up real fast.

-- better (think@beforeu.talk), February 25, 1999.

One of the fallouts from the recent American Airlines strike was that as time went on, planes weren't at the airports they needed to be to pick up on regularly scheduled flights. If SOME of the airports are knocked out, I believe this logistical problem will resurface and cause major problems for the airline industry. There was also a near riot at the Miami airport because of the strike. And noone has mentioned the inability to predictably move first class mail and courier shipments.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), February 25, 1999.

Y2K TRUTH FINALLY EXPOSED! Airports and Air Traffic Control Systems Will *Fall* From The Sky!

Airplanes, on the other hand will be safely parked to await a better day.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), February 25, 1999.

What about throwing into the mix the amount of people that just might decide not to set their trembly feet onto planes at the end of the year and the beginning of the next year. If there was a big drop off in passenger activity that would hurt.

-- Aint (flying@anycost.com), February 25, 1999.

***Y2K TRUTH FINALLY EXPOSED! Airports and Air Traffic Control Systems Will *Fall* From The Sky! Airplanes, on the other hand will be safely parked to await a better day.

WW*****

Love this wild one....Cracks me up that that the naysayers are still doing the "planes won't fall from the sky" crud. Heard it on the radio just yesterday, with no mention of the absence of compliant airports.

***************************************************** Where ignorance is bliss, 'Tis folly to be wise." Thomas Gray (1716-1771) *****************************************************

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), February 25, 1999.

The secondary effects will get the airlines. The air traffic control system could be fixed (not likely but possible) but the straw that breaks the camels back will be things like a shortage of fuel due to embedded systems issues, high fuel prices caused by reduced fuel supplies, reduced demand for flights due to layoffs caused by recession due to supply chain problems, undependable electric power due to oil shortages and the inability of trains to haul coal to some of the big power plants. The number of flights could decline significantly over a two month period causing financial problems for the airlines, layoffs, and cascading effects to the rest of the economy such as the tourist industry. It is more than airline computer systems that will cause the problems.

-- Steve (sfennel@nettally.com), February 25, 1999.

"There is not enough space at the airports to hold all the grounded planes."

This I don't believe! Take every airport capable of landing a 727 or larger aircraft. Calculate the area of all runways and hardstand pavement, including concourse areas. Subtract one runway and one taxiway to allow traffic. Somebody do that (I don't have the information needed) -- and I'll bet there's plenty of room to park everything, plus a few visitors from other countries.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 26, 1999.

Tom - Not enough space to park the planes?

It's true in one sense. Something like half the world's civil aviation fleet is in the air right now. There's not enough space to put them all ready to go at a gate at a major airport. They'd have to be parked in out-of-the-way places: military airstrips, rarely used bad-weather-fallback airports, places out in the boonies that normally see one 737 a day ... whereas the airlines really just want them safe on the tarmac for a few hours, then resume normal service. (Wishful thinking!)

As for how business works, when the going gets tough the weakest business folds, taking some pressure off the rest. This continues until supply falls to meet demand; the survivors rebuild their reserves by increasing their prices. Sometimes it's a rank outsider that does best, by buying up bankrupt assets, but usually it's the strongest player already in the business.

Flying without insurance? Of course, if there's any demand for it. Which there will be. In a state of emergency, governments can and will suspend any laws which it's no longer possible to comply with; in fact, much regulatory legislation has this already written in.

-- Nigel Arnot (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), February 26, 1999.

No place to park - I have a feeling that any pilot NOT parked will find a place to land and walk away from the airplane safely. Not a realistic problem - until you try to resume service by finding all the planes and resuming the hourly "shuffle" of planes, money, landing slots, airport fees, money, baggage, money, baggage and airport service people, money, passengers, money, crews, money, fuel, money, mechanics, money, flight reservations and rental cars, money, credit cards, money, and security, money and x-ray machines. Parking lots, money, taxes, money, subway or in-airport shuttle services, money, baggage handling carosels.

Did I mention power was required for the above? (At SFO, when the power was out for the morning, they did not let new people enter the secure area because they could not use thexray machines. )

Fuel? Good question - its fuel handling and financial (money) transactions that good throw another monkey wrench in the above fouled works.

Landing lights. Fire fighting trucks and stations - does each have its emergency generator? Meals? Will anybody actually miss them - if they can't be delivered?

Coffee? Probably more fatal than parking spaces.

So - we have established (by case example) that the airport transportaion SYSTEM cannot work if power is lost even for a short time. Could emergency procedures be used if power were out for a longer time - 2-3 days? Possibly, But only at a greatly reduced rate - 10-20% current levels - and if the entire process at the "other end" were operating correctly. And, if so, then

If it (power at ANY part of the process) were lost for a longer time, or if computer scheduling and management systems are lost for significant periods (2 days - 2 weeks) - forget it, can't be recovered. Example: The new Denver airport and the new Hong Kong (Perhaps it was Singapore's new AP in Malaysia ?) airport were unusable until ticketing and bagge handling service sworked perfectly.

If only a few airport transportation systems were working, so at Cleveland and Chicago, but not elsewhere - then you'd have successful flights into Cleveland, but not able to leave to other spots. Very shortly, like after a severe storm clobbers one region, the rest of the network - even between unaffected areas - slows up, then jams solid.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.R@csaatl.com), February 26, 1999.