[interdoc-y2k 291] more on air traffic (losing) control

[Roberto Verzola <rverzola@phil.gn.apc.org>]

http://www.y2kculture.com/reality/19990308.travel.html

Air Travel Terror
By Declan McCullagh
March 8, 1999


One of the most cherished goals of every bureaucrat is to avoid public
scrutiny. Sure, adulatory press-release-driven media coverage is OK.
But any whiff of criticism? Time to head for the hills.

So it was with relish that we watched FAA bureaucrats sweat last
Friday before a hearing of Rep. Connie Morella's House Science
subcommittee.

They came to talk about R&D budgets. But in the last few minutes,
Morella grabbed the opportunity to quiz them about Y2K.

What kind of "Y2K remediation" progress on air traffic control systems
was the Federal Aviation Administration making, asked Morella, a
Republican from Maryland.

"We got a late start in FAA, a little bit. I'm very optimistic,"
stuttered Steven Zaidman, apparently unaware of the seeming
contradiction.

"Our schedule is, unfortunately, three months behind the [White
House's Office of Management and Budget's] suggested schedule... We
have 630 odd systems, 400 of which are mission critical. We have every
expectation that we will meet 100 percent of our verification and
testing goal by the end of March and our implementation goal by the
end of June," said Zaidman, an associate R&D administrator.

He reassured the committee that he had "personally attended" a Y2K air
traffic control simulation in January. Another will take place in
March in Atlantic City.

Hmmm.

What did an official in the FAA's inspector general's office -- aka an
internal auditor -- think?

Alexis Stefani was much less optimistic. Only 31 percent of the
agency's computers were completely fixed, she told the committee.

"FAA now faces an additional kind of problem. They're shooting for the
end of June to have all of their systems done, but it becomes an
implementation [problem]," Stefani said, noting that some systems are
scattered around dozens or even hundreds of locations. Technicans have
to travel to each of them.

Another problem? Some systems are customized. "There may have been
local adaptations at that facility... that will have to be dealt with
when they actually implement the Y2K fix at that location," Stefani
said.

In other words, even though the planes and computers owned by private
companies should be fine, the government-controlled air traffic system
may not be. No wonder the airline industry is so spooked.

~~~


  Y2K news from Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM


The Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM Daily Report
Daily Y2K news and analysis, free of charge.

3/18/1999 - FAA only 31% done

FAA ONLY 31% DONE SAYS INSPECTOR GENERAL

Brief summary of FAA-related Y2K events and compliance claims:

*On September 29, 1998, FAA administrator Jane Garvey says the FAA is
99% complete.

*In November, 1998, Garvey retroactively says the FAA was actually
100% done on September 30, 1998.

*The December 31, 1998 deadline comes and goes without a word from the
FAA.

*In March, 1999, an FAA spokesperson said the agency would be 65% done
by March 31.

*March 5, 1999: FAA inspector general says only 31% of the agency's
computers are fixed.

*Also on March 5, 1999: FAA spokesperson, Paul Takemoto, claims all
FAA systems will be compliant by June 31 -- a day that does not exist
(there are only 30 days in June).


"WE'RE 99% DONE!"

On September 30, 1998, the FAA's administrator, Jane Garvey,
proclaimed the agency was "99% done!" This quote has become legendary
-- a reminder of how easy it is to lie to the public and yet how
difficult it is to actually get compliant.

A few weeks later, Garvey claimed during a television interview that
the agency had actually made the September 30, 1998 deadline. She
claimed they were 100% finished and implied that only the testing
phase remained.

Last week, a spokesperson from the FAA's inspector general office
revealed something quite different: only 31% of the FAA's systems are
fixed. That spokesperson, Alexis Stefani, explains, "[the] FAA now
faces an additional kind of problem. They're shooting for the end of
June to have all of their systems done, but it becomes an
implementation [problem]..."

Rep. Stephen Horn (R-Calif.) adds to the description with this:
"Although the problem of converting these systems to the year 2000 was
recognized long ago, its lack of attention... has turned this
manageable problem into a potential crisis."

Story at:

http://www.y2kculture.com/reality/19990308.travel.html [copied above]



FAA SPOKESPERSON CLAIMS AGENCY WILL BE READY ON A DAY THAT DOESN'T
EVEN EXIST

FAA spokesperson Paul Takemoto offers a frightening quote in this CNET
story: "By June 31 all of our testing of the computers will be done,
along with the implementation of the computers as well."

June 31, of course, does not exist. And neither, it seems, does any
remnant of credibility from the FAA. While Jane Garvey claimed 100% of
the FAA's systems were repaired on September 30, 1998, Takemoto now
says that on March 31, 65% of the FAA's computers will be ready, with
the remaining systems to be ready by "June 31."

Story at:

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33379,00.html?st.ne.87.head


We, the public, are being lied to again and again by people from an
agency that seems unable to get their claims straight. They are so
confused about which date represents the latest false claim, they're
shooting for dates that don't even exist. Why not just say they'll be
compliant on December 32nd?

Claims from the FAA are, at this point, simply irrelevant. The agency
has lost any remaining credibility on Y2K, and now, the public is
rightly afraid of putting their lives on the line. Currently, polls
show approximately 50% of the public will refuse to fly on 1/1/2000.
You can bet the other 50% aren't aware of the facts presented in this
report.


CAUSE / EFFECT LOGIC IN DANGER AT THE FAA

"We got a late start in FAA, a little bit. I'm very optimistic," said
Steven Zaidman, an associate R&D administrator at the FAA. Analyze
this for a moment:

"We got a late start" means you're behind schedule. It's an
understatement, of course, because shooting for June 1999 instead of
September 1998 is more than just a late start, it's a project
disaster. But in the eyes of FAA bureaucrats, this is cause for
optimism. "I'm very optimistic..." said Zaidman.

There's an implied cause / effect relationship here. Semantically,
what Zaidman is saying is this: "I'm very optimistic because we got a
late start." As any person can tell, the reasoning is hogwash.

Only in a federal agency can a late start be cause for great optimism.
But it would certainly explain the recent bout of naive optimism:
everybody is late, therefore, optimism must be widespread. The later
you get, the more optimistic you become, too. Why? Because you have to
have more optimism to overcome your lateness. It all makes sense to
these people, see?

NO CONSEQUENCES FOR LYING

With all the deception going on at the FAA, there have been no
consequences for lying. None. Garvey hasn't resigned, and nobody is
threatening to fire her. Where are the Congressional investigations?
Air traffic is not a small deal. We deserve to know the truth.

It's real simple: tell the truth, Garvey. Give us the bottom line, the
straight dope, the skinny. Will the radar work or won't it? And are
you going to retract your "99%" statement, or are you going to stick
by it?

Stop telling us planes won't fall out of the sky and start proving it.

###

Join the Y2K On-Line Preparedness Community
Our research library has expanded to become an entire community for
Y2K preparedness. Members share tips, offer solutions, rate food
suppliers, and more. Now on-line: 'Bartertown' on-line swap center,
research areas, how-to reports and more. Everything you need to
prepare for Y2K is right here, on-line, with 24-hour access. Read
about the Y2K On-Line Preparedness Community.

Tell a friend about the free, daily Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM report:
http://www.y2knewswire.com/tellafriend.asp

If you have a hot tip for us (anonymity assured):
tips@y2knewswire.com

Sign up for a free daily e-mail alert that brings you the summary of
each day's Y2K report:
Click here to find the signup form on the main page.

Read user comments

This page is subject to the following disclaimer:
http://www.y2knewswire.com/Index.asp?pageid=disclaimer
All statements made herein, and made since August of 1998,
are Year 2000 Statements and are retroactively protected
as Year 2000 readiness disclosures under the Good Samaritan Act

Copyright © 1999. All rights reserved.



------------------------------------------------------------------------