Y2K: impending doom or super hype?

Wednesday, June 2, 1999

BY CHIP JONES Times-Dispatch Staff Writer

Computer sleuth Toni Vanderspiegel knows all the places the millennium bug could be hiding on her turf at Richmond International Airport.

"Your crash phone, your emergency 911, your one-on-one communications," Vanderspiegel says, just scratching the surface.

Walking into the airport terminal, she checks out an arrival-and-departure board and sees a computer warning: "This program has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down."

Uh-oh. Could the dreaded Year 2000 computer bug be mounting an early sneak attack?

Vanderspiegel, who has been debugging the airport's computers and equipment for more than a year, thinks not. It's a routine computer glitch, though she admits, "That's

what you don't want to see."

The message is a reminder that when machinery and mankind meet, mistakes happen.

Most transportation experts feel confident the nation will keep on trucking, flying and riding trains when Jan. 1, 2000 arrives.

Short for "Year 2000," the Y2K issue revolves around the fact that some computers were designed to view dates in a two-digit format. There is concern that when the date changes from "99" to "00," some computers will read that as 1900 instead of 2000 -- and won't work.

"There's two schools of thought on Y2K," said Charles W. Moorman, vice president, information technology, at Norfolk Southern Corp., the nation's fourth-largest railroad.

School One: "It will be the end of the world

as we know it."

School Two: "It's the single most overhyped event in recent times."

Moorman, who has led Norfolk Southern's preparations for three years, subscribes to the second school.

Why does he feel OK about Y2K? "We've done a whole lot of work to make it a nonevent," he said.

Most Richmonders feel the same way. According to a March poll for The Times-Dispatch and WWBT-Channel 12, only a small percentage of people were concerned about end-of-century computer glitches affecting transportation.

There's related concern about failures in the nation's power supply, communications and other utilities. All of this has put backup plans on the front burner.

At the airport, for instance, Vanderspiegel said a loss of electrical power "will have no impact on security and safety." Richmond International has a backup generator and other power protectors.

The Y2K preparations have helped the airport double- and triple-check everything from radio communications to fire safety readiness, she said.

"It's the additional contingency plans on day-to-day items you take for granted."

Nationally, concern about outmoded air traffic control systems has abated after a successful test this spring of the air traffic control system at Denver International Airport.

The system reportedly ran smoothly in early April as the clocks in radar centers around Colorado rolled over from Dec. 31, 1999, to Jan. 1, 2000, in a dress rehearsal for New Year's Eve.

"Happy New Year! It worked!" proclaimed Jane Garvey, the administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, at a news conference at the Denver Terminal Radar Approach Control, just outside the airport.

Garvey said the FAA's test showed the system "worked as it should, smoothly, efficiently and safely."

While all airline flights in the region were handled by the usual computer system running the real date, a backup system, advanced to New Year's Eve, shadowed each move to assure that it could track everything in flight and perform all other critical functions.

In addition, an FAA plane was under the guidance of an air traffic controller whose radios and radar screens were controlled by the system that rolled over to 2000.

Sophie Bethune, press spokesman for the Aviation Millennium Project, called the Denver test "flawless." More than 100 airlines in the United States and Canada are confident in the air safety control and other safeguards, she said.

The traveling public appears unfazed. "Bookings are fairly steady" over the Christmas and New Year holidays, Bethune said.

At US Airways, Richmond's most-used carrier, spokesman Rick Weintraub said his airline's computer systems are ready for the new century after an expensive upgrade.

"In the long run, we expect it to save us tens of millions of dollars" because of more efficient computers, he said.

Other computer experts and aviation officials have warned against international travel Jan. 1 out of concern about air traffic systems outside the United States.

The only airline that has publicly said it won't fly Jan. 1 is Virgin Atlantic Airways, a small international carrier. Virgin Atlantic said it will ground its 25-plane fleet on New Year's Eve to give its employees a special night off, not out of byte fright.

Virgin Atlantic flies to London from New York, Washington, Miami and the West Coast.

A spokeswoman for the International Air Transport Association downplayed the issue, saying "most carriers want to maintain the maximum service they can."

Living out your historical fantasy won't come cheap, though. Travel agents said many consumers are stunned to hear the high cost of bringing in the new century in glitzy spots such as Las Vegas or London.

Tour operators "are charging three times what they normally would," said Lisa McGeorge of Travel Agents International. "A lot of people are getting sticker shock."

A four-night stay in New York during the New Year's holiday costs $2,700, not including air fare. The same trip normally costs around $1,000, she said.

"We've had a few calls for people wanting to do something for the millennium," but when they see the price, they decide to stay home, McGeorge said.

Clay Shepherd, manager of Worldwide Travel, said he has seen rooms in Las Vegas going for $3,000 -- per night. That requires a three-night minimum and nonrefundable deposit.

"Most people are smart enough not to pay anything that outrageous," Shepherd said.

"If you're smart," he advised, "you'll never travel on a holiday. If it can go wrong, it will go wrong on Thanksgiving and Christmas."

Most people want to go on a cruise, but cruises to favorite spots such as the Caribbean Sea have been sold out for months, said Tammy Melchert, an agent at International Travel. Airline connections to sunny vacation spots are hard to get, too.

There are some deals left, though. McGeorge said she has seen reasonably priced trips to New Orleans (four nights, $1,100 per person, not including air).

It helps to know how to navigate the World Wide Web.

Michael Hoffer, a student at Mills Godwin High School in Henrico County, said he has been finding lots of enticing deals online. The offers generally come for fall and winter travel, said Hoffer, an airline and travel buff.

He cited Delta's recent offer of a $170 round-trip flight from Richmond to Chicago, one of the cheapest fares to the Windy City he's ever seen. The offer quickly sold out.

The millennium may have sparked price-gouging, but a recent projection by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP said 10 million people are expected to travel during the 1999 holidays.

Vanderspiegel, Richmond International's Y2K coordinator, wouldn't mind flying her way into the New Year and new century.

"If someone will give me a ticket, sure," she said. "I prefer Hawaii."

-- Norm (nwo@hotmail.com), June 02, 1999

Answers

cool

-- cool hand luke (hand@luke.luke), June 02, 1999.

Interesting - she's responsible for Year 2000 repairs and compliance at the airport - see's a failure in the single "most obvious" easiest visible place (flight schedule monitor screen) and then shrugs it off.

But she's willing to trust her life (and the other passenger lives) to the "feeling" that no other mistakes were made?

Yet the reporter again tries real hard to show that "no problems will take place" by distracting the reader with stories of how much peopel are spending to go places. How much they are spending doesn't mean anything - other than confirm the perception that the public at large has been lulled into complacency by the administration.

The fact that people have spent money to go places that holiday doesn't have anything to do with whether they can actually get there, or get back, or have food, power, phones, and (safe) water, or do anything once there......

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 02, 1999.

Just two schools of thought on Y2K...End of the World or Super Hype. Pick one or the other 'cause those are the only choices.

Just another straw man. Thanks for a typical non-contribution, Norm.

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), June 02, 1999.

Norm,

I've only recently discovered this site, and generally am just lurking, but I want to try to clear something up.

I think maybe the reason you have such a hard time accepting that others have a different perspective on y2k than you do is demonstrated by the fact that you posted this piece. Maybe you see things as black or white, as does Mr. Mormoon:

"There's two schools of thought on Y2K," said Charles W. Moorman, vice president, information technology, at Norfolk Southern Corp., the nation's fourth- largest railroad.

School One: "It will be the end of the world

as we know it."

School Two: "It's the single most overhyped event in recent times." I'd like to tell you that there are more than two schools of thought on this issue. I personally don't subscribe to either of these two philosophies. I believe that it's almost impossible to predict exactlyh what's going to happen because of y2k. I acknowledge that there is a lot of hype, but on the other hand, there is a lot of denial. I believe it is only prudent to take at least some precautions, even if it's only a few days worth of food and water set by.

Even the folks you quote in this posting are taking precautions. For instance:

"At the airport, for instance, Vanderspiegel said a loss of electrical power "will have no impact on security and safety." Richmond International has a backup generator and other power protectors.

It's obvious that Vanderspiegel doesn't believe that "it will be the end of the world as we know it". Yet the airport "has a backup generator" How come you seem to think it's ok for the airport, and presumably other businesses, to have backups and contingency plans, but when other people have backups and contingency plans, they arouse your verbal abuse?

Why not let's all be respectful of others' opinions, and share information, rather than having these pointless chest-thumping posting battles?

-- malcolm drake (jumpoff@echoweb.net), June 02, 1999.

Let's see Norm. Impending doom or super hype...hmmmmmmm Tough choices and so many of them....hmmmmm. Flint, I need your help over here!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 02, 1999.

Norm- Richard Branson is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful people on the planet. He has stated his airline won't fly as a courtesy to his employees. The real courtesy is that he is trying to prevent a tragedy. He provided an example that other other airlines could have followed if they were more interested in people than money. Nuff said.

-- Gia (Laureltree7@hotmail.com), June 03, 1999.