Airlines say they are 95% ready for Y2Kgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
Airlines say they are 95% ready for Y2K WASHINGTON (AP)- U.S. and Canadian airlines reported Thursday that they are 95% finished with their Y2K computer repairs.
The announcement came at a news conference attended by John Koskinen, chairman of President Clinton's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, who said he was pleased by the news.
''The airline industry is moving forward at a rapid pace,'' Koskinen said, speaking six months before the start of 2000.
The Y2K, or Year 2000, problem is a glitch that may cause computers to malfunction next Jan. 1. Some computer software was written to recognize years in a two-digit format, such as ''99'' for 1999. There is uncertainty about what will happen when the year changes to 2000, since some computers may misconstrue the ''00'' for 1900 instead of 2000.
The airline systems that have been repaired and tested include everything from computerized reservations to crew scheduling and aircraft operating systems.
The announcement of airline readiness was made by the Aviation Millennium Project, a $16 million group organized by U.S. and Canadian airlines to ensure airline, airport and air traffic control readiness.
The group estimates that the airlines will spend over $750 million solving the problem.
Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
-- Sista In 'Da Hood (Sista@Da.Hood), July 04, 1999
Less than 6 months to go and they are Still Working On It. Real Hard. Outstanding, just outstanding. Oh, and after the airlines become compliant, there are also all of those pesky non-compliant airports that all have to be ready. Don't tell me, let me guess: Still-Working-On-It-Real-Hard...
-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), July 04, 1999.
It's always nice to hear good news. Still, I wonder what percentage of airports are compliant at this point. Will fuel be readily available and affordable next year? And, we're still waiting for an auditor's report to verify the FAA's claim that they think they are compliant.
-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), July 04, 1999.
Read the CIA report about the FAA, ATC in England, Airports in Saudi Arabia, Branson and Virgin not flying, other airlines shutting down for 12 hours over rollover, BALPA the UK Pilots' union threatening to boycott non-comp airports - then we have the insurance question, fuel, radar, gps, runway lights, beacons, electricity, infrastructure, the human factor....an absolute shambles, and that's an understatement...
-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 05, 1999.
I like dogs and I like cats I eat butter sticks So they make me really fat.
-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), July 05, 1999.
oh dear, School's out ...
-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 05, 1999.
actually Andy, I've always suspected he suffers from progressive symptoms of gonorhea.
-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 05, 1999.
kids these days start young... :)
-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 05, 1999.
I worked on avionics at the depot level of maintance for many years. I think the airlines, military and the FAA are arrogant an irresponsible if the dont ground all absolutely non essential air traffic for at least 5 days after the century date change. Then I would only let a small precentage back up in the air at a time until the full ramifications of y2k are accessed. I share a story with you in 1985,I approached lockeed with a design concept that would enable airlines to more effectively combat the threat of terrorism or hijacking. the system would only cost a few 10s of thousands of dollars to install in commerical aircraft and would offer greater passenger safety then what is currently in use. They said that they wont consider it because they have insurance for those risks. Dollars vs potential cost of lives. Cheaper to go with the insurance I guess. Ill bet it is their same mind set for y2k. Just hope your not on the plane that didnt get fixed right. y2k aware mike staying on the ground and out of the air from dec 1 1999 until may 2000
-- y2k aware mike (y2k aware mike @ conservation .com), July 05, 1999.
Oh my, do my feet stink!
-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), July 05, 1999.
The real Y2K Pro would never miss an opportunity to make fun of either witless Andy or poor illiterate Will Not Think.Another fraud...yawn... "So, of course I want to see y2k bring down the system, all over the world. I have hoped for this all of my adult life." -- Gary North
Do I wish to see the present Federal governmnet completely disemboweled? Yes, absolutely
-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), July 05, 1999.
-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), July 05, 1999.
didn't the FAA say they were 99% done about 6 months ago?
-- sarah (qubr@aol.com), July 05, 1999.
: http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/COMMENT/t000060154.htm... Comment: This appeared in the Letters to the Editor column of the LOS ANGELES TIMES (July 5).* * * * * * * * * * * *
Special Report: Y2K Survival Guide" [June 21] posed the question, "Is It Safe to Fly?" The real answer, regardless of the Federal Aviation Administration's unending political spin, is that no one, including the FAA, knows.
I am a captain for a major airline and have been involved in air traffic control issues for 20 years. Contrary to the FAA, there is no way it can guarantee the safety of the air traffic control system past Jan. 1, 2000.
While the FAA's theory that the Y2K computer problem alone represents little risk to our nation's air traffic control system is correct, the reality is something quite different. The basic problem is not Y2K but the fragile nature of the present ATC software and system design. Y2K certainly cannot improve the ATC system. Unfortunately, Y2K will make it worse.
Second, when the ATC system experiences Y2K disruption, the FAA's contingency plans amount to parking aircraft.
The 30-year-old design and single-thread structure of the ATC system make it impossible for the FAA to fully validate the data presented to the controller. The potential of an undetected error moving through the system is significantly higher than the FAA allows airlines in their critical aircraft navigation systems. Finally, in the last 20 years, the FAA has never met an ATC-related deadline. To trust it to do so now, especially with a deadline that is unmovable, is not only unsafe, it is just plain dumb.
R. MICHAEL BAIADA
Link: http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/COMMENT/t000060154.htm...
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-- the voice of Gary (!@!.!), July 05, 1999.
I'll change my previous take on this. Sista isn't Poole. IT"S MUTHA!!!And I'll also bet that certain false messages are coming from someplace closeby.
WW
-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), July 05, 1999.