FAA's system revamp still on the ground

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Y2K fixes on hook, but improvements to air-traffic control systems late

Last week, Federal Aviation Administration Chief Jane Garvey booked a New Year's Eve flight to illustrate her confidence in the agency's Y2K fix.

But Garvey's action was probably cold comfort to travelers who experienced delays as a result of two recent computer glitches in air-traffic control systems in the New York and Chicago areas.

Although the year 2000 problem will force the FAA to complete remediation work by year's end (the work is 90% completed and should be done by June 30), there's no finish line in sight for another key FAA project: deployment of new air-traffic control systems at 173 terminal radar facilities.

The Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS) is a complete replacement of the 15- to 25-year-old air-traffic control hardware and software systems. It was designed to improve system automation and speed, reduce redundancy and give controllers more information.

Boston's Logan International Airport, because of its proximity to Raytheon Co. in Lexington, Mass., was to have been the first site to migrate to the STARS system last year. Instead, early next year, the FAA will roll out the systems at several smaller commercial airports "to make the introduction easier," said FAA spokesman William Shumann.

Extensive design changes have slowed the project, which was launched in 1996 and scheduled to be completed in 2005. The FAA won't know the final schedule or cost, which was originally set at $1 billion, until summer's end, an FAA spokesman said. The FAA is moving more quickly to replace 1987-vintage IBM host computers used at its 20 regional air-traffic control centers. Those systems, especially the one in the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center in Nashua, N.H., were prone to crashing, controllers said. The hardware replacement project was begun in February at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center in Ronkonkoma. But that system crashed May 6.

During the New York test, officials had put the system in "dual mode" -- testing a new radar display workstation while running the old one. A software glitch caused the system that was supplying data to both display terminals to crash, leaving controllers to guide traffic with only limited information, said Barry Boshnack, the FAA's airways facility division manager. The problem caused significant delays.

A day earlier, a problem at terminal control center in the Chicago area also caused a control systems failure. Kurt Granger, who heads the Chicago-area chapter of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said the crash was triggered by a software upgrade.

The Airline Pilots Association in Washington wasn't alarmed. "Stuff happens ... [with] a system as big and as complicated as traffic," said spokesman John Mazor. He also said the association wasn't too worried about the delays in the terminal replacement program. The current system "has proven to be fairly reliant."

====================================================================

Not sure whether this was posted.

-- regular (zzz@z.z), May 18, 1999

Answers

Yeah - most of the airplanes will land okay, most of the time.

Actually, that's rather gloomy - let's rephrase it:

All of the airplanes will land, somewhere, eventually. (Some just might land harder than others.) No baggage will be lost (permanently) at 35,000 feet - it will all end up on the ground - somewhere. No airport will lose power, environmental systems or controls - they will know exactly where the power is, and where the control processes are. (They may not run, but the airports will know exctly where they are.) All fuel and security systems will be in place next year. (They may not be running, but they will be in place.)

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), May 18, 1999.


Jane Garbage (Garvey) will be on the same New Years flight as Fatso de Jager. NOT. Both of these shills know that planes won't fall from the sky because they won't be taking off.

-- Mr Adequate (mr@adequate.com), May 18, 1999.

Sure about that fuel part there, Robert? All of these damned refinery explosions lately, "having nothing to do with Y2K." Shuwt, we're going to be having enough problems with oil at this rate, even without Y2K. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), May 18, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ