Slashdot Log In
Terminal Chaos
Posted by
samzenpus
on Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:10 PM
from the fly-the-confusing-skies dept.
from the fly-the-confusing-skies dept.
Ben Rothke writes "While
Terminal Chaos should be shelved in the current events or
business section of a bookstore, it could also be placed in the modern crime
section. After reading it, one gets the impression
that the state of air traffic today could only come due to criminal neglect
or mischief. If
one looks at pictures of airline flights from the 1960s, you will see
well-dressed passengers enjoying their flight. In
2008, barely a day goes by without an incident of air rage, from irate
passengers in the terminal, to those in the air causing flights to be
diverted. Today's airline traveler considers it a
near miracle if his flight arrives on time with his
baggage." Keep reading for the rest of Ben's review.
| Terminal Chaos: Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It | |
| author | George Donohue and Russell Shaver |
| pages | 240 |
| publisher | Amer Inst of Aeronautics |
| rating | 10 |
| reviewer | Ben Rothke |
| ISBN | 978-1563479496 |
| summary | Fascinating look at the current state and problems with the US air traffic system |
The
reasons for the meltdown in the air traffic system are
complex. The book names a number of reasons for
today's chaos.
Some of these include airline deregulation, multiple governmental
agencies with no central oversight or responsibility, multiple corporate
entities with conflicting agendas, an air traffic controllers union resisting
change, a technologically outdated air traffic control system, and
more.
While the public perception in the US is that somewhere out there, government officials are looking out for passenger's rights, the reality is there is no one looking out for them. Unlike their European counterparts, air travelers in the US have very few rights. This lack of passenger advocacy along with the other reasons has a huge impact on the economy, in addition to the costs that flight delays and cancellations cost U.S. travelers, which are estimated annually at over $3 billion.
Terminal Chaos: Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It is a fascinating book. The authors show a number of ways to fix the current problems. While the book is part case-study, it is also part tragedy, given the tragedy is that Washington lacks anyone with the pragmatism, willpower and audacity to stand up to the unions and powers that be to fix the system. The book lays out in 7 concise chapters the problems, ringleaders, obstacles and challenges that brought us to the state that we are in today.
The authors sum it up best when they note that the distance from New York to Chicago is 635 nautical miles, and when flown by a piston-powered DC-6 with a cruise speed of 315 MPH over 50 years ago, the scheduled flight time was a little longer than two hours. Today, scheduled airlines fly Boeing 737 turbofans at 511 MPH, but book this as a 3-hour flight.
In chapter 4, the authors note that while some flight delays are the result of post-9/11 security issues, the main reason why flying has become so arduous is that the air transportation system, as it is now structured in the US, is untenable from a fundamental business point of view. The government regulated business model is unstable and irrational and planes are purposely overbooked, flights are cancelled for no publicly explainable reason, and no one will offer the flier a sound reason for why these events occur.
Both authors are professors at the Center for Air Transportation Systems research at George Mason University. The book quotes from research done there, which includes suggestions such as to use larger aircraft (something Continental is doing at Newark), along with other market mechanisms. Other research shows that slot exemption, weight-based landing fees and other issues combine to lead to inefficient use of airport capacity, especially as slot-controlled airports, such as O'Hare, Kennedy, Newark, LaGuardia and Atlanta.
In chapter 6, the authors take a no-holds barred approach to NATCA, which is the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. They view NATCA as a stumbling block to modernization, and an organization whose goal is to protect their members, over the public they are supposed to serve. They also question how NATCA gets away with constantly stating that the US air traffic control system is the safest in the world, when it is actually behind Europe when it comes to safety metrics (Europe has .032 hull losses per 1 million departures vs. .049 in North America).
Ultimately, the book notes that the air traffic control problems exist in the fact that there is a perfect storm of airlines, airports, government agencies (FAA, DOT, OMB, DHS), White House and Congress, all of which seem to believe that they don't have the responsibility to fix the problem. Each seems to be waiting for someone else to take charge.
Chapter 7 lists a number of practical ways in which the air traffic control system can be modernized. Some of the suggestions would require significant financial outlays; others simply require all of the parties involved to play nicely together.
Overall, Terminal Chaos is a landmark book, in that it cuts through the complexity of the air traffic mess, and clearly lays out the problem, and possible solutions.
It is a very well-written and extremely well-researched book. It does have a few slight errors. Most noticeably on page 73 when it says that Continental has been in and out of bankruptcy court, while the table on the next page shows that Continental has been out of bankruptcy court for over 15 years. Also, one of the travel tips the authors give is to have a traveler consider using a private aircraft out of smaller, less congested airports. That is indeed a good suggestion, albeit extremely costly, and not financially feasible for most of the flying public.
Terminal Chaos is a book that should be required reading for anyone involved in air traffic and aviation, from passengers to every employee at the FAA. The authors have innovative ideas that should be listened to and implemented; from holding the government decision-makers responsible, to realistic ways to modernizing the air traffic control system. The book is a fascinating overview of what goes on in the skies above us, and in the air traffic control towers around us.
Ben Rothke is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know.
You can purchase Terminal Chaos: Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
While the public perception in the US is that somewhere out there, government officials are looking out for passenger's rights, the reality is there is no one looking out for them. Unlike their European counterparts, air travelers in the US have very few rights. This lack of passenger advocacy along with the other reasons has a huge impact on the economy, in addition to the costs that flight delays and cancellations cost U.S. travelers, which are estimated annually at over $3 billion.
Terminal Chaos: Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It is a fascinating book. The authors show a number of ways to fix the current problems. While the book is part case-study, it is also part tragedy, given the tragedy is that Washington lacks anyone with the pragmatism, willpower and audacity to stand up to the unions and powers that be to fix the system. The book lays out in 7 concise chapters the problems, ringleaders, obstacles and challenges that brought us to the state that we are in today.
The authors sum it up best when they note that the distance from New York to Chicago is 635 nautical miles, and when flown by a piston-powered DC-6 with a cruise speed of 315 MPH over 50 years ago, the scheduled flight time was a little longer than two hours. Today, scheduled airlines fly Boeing 737 turbofans at 511 MPH, but book this as a 3-hour flight.
In chapter 4, the authors note that while some flight delays are the result of post-9/11 security issues, the main reason why flying has become so arduous is that the air transportation system, as it is now structured in the US, is untenable from a fundamental business point of view. The government regulated business model is unstable and irrational and planes are purposely overbooked, flights are cancelled for no publicly explainable reason, and no one will offer the flier a sound reason for why these events occur.
Both authors are professors at the Center for Air Transportation Systems research at George Mason University. The book quotes from research done there, which includes suggestions such as to use larger aircraft (something Continental is doing at Newark), along with other market mechanisms. Other research shows that slot exemption, weight-based landing fees and other issues combine to lead to inefficient use of airport capacity, especially as slot-controlled airports, such as O'Hare, Kennedy, Newark, LaGuardia and Atlanta.
In chapter 6, the authors take a no-holds barred approach to NATCA, which is the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. They view NATCA as a stumbling block to modernization, and an organization whose goal is to protect their members, over the public they are supposed to serve. They also question how NATCA gets away with constantly stating that the US air traffic control system is the safest in the world, when it is actually behind Europe when it comes to safety metrics (Europe has .032 hull losses per 1 million departures vs. .049 in North America).
Ultimately, the book notes that the air traffic control problems exist in the fact that there is a perfect storm of airlines, airports, government agencies (FAA, DOT, OMB, DHS), White House and Congress, all of which seem to believe that they don't have the responsibility to fix the problem. Each seems to be waiting for someone else to take charge.
Chapter 7 lists a number of practical ways in which the air traffic control system can be modernized. Some of the suggestions would require significant financial outlays; others simply require all of the parties involved to play nicely together.
Overall, Terminal Chaos is a landmark book, in that it cuts through the complexity of the air traffic mess, and clearly lays out the problem, and possible solutions.
It is a very well-written and extremely well-researched book. It does have a few slight errors. Most noticeably on page 73 when it says that Continental has been in and out of bankruptcy court, while the table on the next page shows that Continental has been out of bankruptcy court for over 15 years. Also, one of the travel tips the authors give is to have a traveler consider using a private aircraft out of smaller, less congested airports. That is indeed a good suggestion, albeit extremely costly, and not financially feasible for most of the flying public.
Terminal Chaos is a book that should be required reading for anyone involved in air traffic and aviation, from passengers to every employee at the FAA. The authors have innovative ideas that should be listened to and implemented; from holding the government decision-makers responsible, to realistic ways to modernizing the air traffic control system. The book is a fascinating overview of what goes on in the skies above us, and in the air traffic control towers around us.
Ben Rothke is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know.
You can purchase Terminal Chaos: Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Related Stories
[+]
Zero Day Threat 264 comments
Ben Rothke writes "Zero
Day Threat: the Shocking Truth of How Banks and Credit Bureaus Help Cyber
Crooks Steal Your Money and Identity is an
interesting and eye-opening look at how banks and credit card companies make
ID theft and fraud rather elementary. But with all
that, this book must be read in the larger context of how today's society
deals with, and is often oblivious to, risk. When is
comes to risk, American society tolerates tens of thousands of drunk-driving
deaths, gives millions in federal tobacco subsidies, and is oblivious about
near-epidemics such as heart disease, obesity, and diabetes. With
all that, it is doubtful that the myriad horror stories Zero Day
Threat details will persuade Congress or the other players to do anything
to curtail the problem with identity theft and internet
fraud." Keep reading for the rest of Ben's review.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Back in the day... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
High fuel prices will keep the riff-raff out.
Seriously, the week after the grounding of all flights, the air was clearer than it has been in decades. We really have to cut back on useless air travel - it's a "luxury" our children will be paying for, and cursing us for. Take a train, take a boat, take some TIME and enjoy it - getting there is supposed to be half the fun.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoever said that never traveled through the midwest or the great plains. Or across an ocean.
My time is a severely limited quantity; taking a week for a trip which would take a day (on both ends) by air means a lot less time at my destination. Taking a boat across the Atlantic or Pacific is right out; even when there was still regular passenger service, it took more than a month to cross the Atlantic.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Insightful)
indeed. I don't understand this face-meeting obsession by air-mile-obsessed execs.
Ok, I'm a small fry business, but I have contracts with companies all over the world, and I've never met anyone from any of them. My biggest partners have worked with me for a year and we never even spoke on the phone.
Business people need to get over this prehistoric desire to go pick fleas off fellow apes if they want to sign deals with them. We have broadband, phones, and webcams, you should be flying much less now for business than you did 10 years ago.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's quite simple. It's called "junket." They're not just meeting with the other execs. They're getting an international vacay in on the company dime. It's pretty standard practice to screw your shareholders whenever you get the chance.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Insightful)
Business people need to get over this prehistoric desire to go pick fleas off fellow apes if they want to sign deals with them. We have broadband, phones, and webcams, you should be flying much less now for business than you did 10 years ago.
Yes, because all those other mediums replace the need to meet face-to-face. Right. Just like the Internet will destroy the parcel post (it did the opposite) and the computer will eliminate paper. (we use more now than ever before)
I have a heavily distance-based business. I routinely deal with people hundreds of miles away, I do remote desktops and virtual trainings as a matter of course. My laptop is my office, my phone is my lifeline. Does this mean I fly less than ever before? Quite the opposite - I fly rather frequently, despite the virtual sessions, webcams, conference calls, email, and remote desktop support sessions.
Sometimes, there simply is no replacement for meeting face to face. Yeah, phone calls work for things like talking through a problem, but there is no replacement for being there in the flesh, with all the innuendo, sideways glances, winks, and hand-gestures that webcams approximate but ultimately fail to deliver.
So despite investing heavily in technologies to reduce our travel budget, and despite the effectiveness of these tools, our travel budget remains hefty. Showing up in person is like wearing nice clothes to work - it shows that you are serious, and that your intention is to make things work. And so we show up, and our company continues to grow profitably.
And seriously - what difference is a $250 airline tickets, $150 hotel, and $75 car rental fees for a $50,000/year contract going to make? Given that choice, you sit back and enjoy the (prehistoric) flight!
Parent
Screwed up priorities? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
If by "heavy obligations" you mean, "graduate school" then yes.
My family lives in Brazil (I'm a dual citizen), if it would take me a month each way, (two weeks being generous) to get me from nashville, TN to Rio de Janeiro, I would never get to see my family.
>> getting there is supposed to be half the fun
When you're flying to Rio de Janeiro, I'd much rather be there and on the beach with family/friends than sitting on a boat.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
They don't have the money to get the trans-american highway to be passable throughout central/south america, what makes you think they will be able to engineer a high speed rail line that works right?
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Insightful)
Time is money.
Taking that much travel time would mean I would be unable to travel to visit my family or convince my employer to send me to a conference... simply because the lost income (for myself or my employer) corresponding with the travel costs in question would be too great to justify the expense.
You say "obsessed with productivity"; I say "rational".
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, the week after the grounding of all flights, the air was clearer than it has been in decades. We really have to cut back on useless air travel - it's a "luxury" our children will be paying for, and cursing us for. Take a train, take a boat, take some TIME and enjoy it - getting there is supposed to be half the fun.
No air travel for me would mean...
No vacations further than 2 days car/train travel.
No conferences or meetings further than 1 day car/train travel.
Many fewer visits to my parents (although my wife might consider this a good thing).
That's not to say if prices go way up, people won't adjust. People flew much less in the 60's. Although I don't think we'll get to that point, we will surely see people fly less as costs go up. To expect people to take a major step backward and give it up completely is ridiculous.
Also, note that air travel fuel efficiency is about 50-100 mpg per passenger. So, having everyone drive around in cars doesn't save anything. Trains, boats, and buses are indeed more efficient.
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Informative)
That is SO bullshit. If you're traveling less than 4 hours by air, you're quicker to take a train in any place that has a modern transit system (like europe), because of the hassles at the terminals, etc.
Sorry, but you are wrong. I used to live in Copenhagen - my family lives in Aalborg (both cities in Denmark, Europe). Driving from Copenhagen to Aalborg: 5 hours if you don't hit any congested roads. By train: 4,5 hours. Flying: 30 minutes (+ 30 minutes at the airport prior to departure). That killed your theory right there.
Because of my work, I traveled to other European countries almost weekly. It takes considerably less time to fly from Copenhagen to Berlin, Cologne, Paris, Zurich, London, Amsterdam, Barcelona and most other cities I frequent. And in none, and I repeat NONE, of those cases would it be faster to go by train, car, bus or stand in the backyard and hope to be magically transported there.
I was born and raised in Europe and there are many things about the region that I love. But traveling is not easier or different across Europe, than it is for me now that I live in the US and travel just as much. You could in some cases have a point with national travel in some European countries - but not cross border.
Parent
Traveling (Score:4, Interesting)
I personally don't enjoy the actual act of riding/driving/flying from point A to point B in most cases. I consider it a waste of my time and hence my life. If I want to stop a bunch of places along the way I'd prefer it be intentional. You may feel differently and that's fine. I would like to spend my life doing the things I enjoy, not the things you think I should enjoy. Riding a vehicle somewhere is not what I personally enjoy.
Parent
Trains don't have to take time (Score:4, Insightful)
Taking a train need not take time. Using the example in the article, if Chicago-New York is 635 nautical miles (=1,175km) then modern trains like the TGV can travel that distance in 4 hours (that is assuming the operating speed of 320km/h, not the max speed of 574.8 km/h). If current flights are scheduled at 3 hours then in this case a train would be far faster since there is no need to arrive 1-2 hours beforehand for your body cavity search plus you start and end at stations which, at least for Chicago, are in the city centre. Other advantages are onboard power, WiFi, cellphone coverage, something to look at out of the window etc.
It's true that the monetary cost of setting up such a network is not trivial but if you factor in the environmental cost of planes the question you might want to ask is can you afford not to?
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Back in the day... (Score:4, Informative)
No!!
those were the days when the unions were not as corrupt as they are know.
buddy of mine works in a ny building. he has almost been killed for the crime of... turning on a router. It was a union ship.
Today's unions are corrupt.
Parent
yep (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's [verizon.net] an amusing site y'all can slashdot, comparing flying the 1960s to the present. A few points the guy makes:
Flying was expensive. For example: A round trip ticket between Cleveland and Washington D.C. was about $75. This doesn't sound like a bad deal, until you adjust the fare for inflation: That's over $400 in today's dollars! By contrast, I recently paid less than $100 for a round trip between Cleveland and Washington on one of today's low-cost deregulated carriers.
There was no point in shopping around for the best deal, because all airfares were controlled by regulation. If a roundtrip ticket between Cleveland and Washington was $75 on one airline, it was $75 on all the airlines.
The vast majority of the passengers were businessmen. White male businessmen. Occasional families. Very few minorities, and virtually no women travelling independently.
Food and drinks were almost always served, no matter how short the flight. Because there was no price competition, the airlines had to compete based on service. It was amazing to watch the stewardesses hustle to serve everyone on a quick trip, while constantly tugging at their skirts to retain some modesty.
Sure, that sounds high-class, I guess, if you were a member of the flying aristocracy.
Parent
Despite this "Terminal Chaos" (Score:5, Insightful)
Air flight is cheap enough that it has become the trailways bus of today. The reason everything was so nice and dressed up because it was so expensive it selected out the riff-raff.
I know it doesn't fit the current lefty memes, but deregulation made air flight the everyman's mode of transportation.
Re:Despite this "Terminal Chaos" (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not just that. For those who have no idea what an absolute mess our airline system is, you can read this book, but for more entertainment value, I also recommend Airframe by Michael Crighton. Yes, it's Crighton's usual stuff -- heavy on technical details, some of which may be flubbed. But he does grasp the complexities of air travel in the U.S. today.
We have deregulation, which lead to more passengers, more airlines, more competition, cheapter flights, etc. -- but at the same time, we failed to upgrade our infrastructure in a timely fashion. This includes our airports and the planes themselves -- many of which have been in the sky more than twice their intended service life. On top of that, our air-traffic control system is so out of date, it is being featured on an episode of Cavemen.
Anyway think of it like this: you have a system now that only upper management (aobut 100 users) uses. Now, you intend to open up the system for all 30,000 users in the entire enterprise. But instead of upgrading, management hems and haws about the cost and so you don't upgrade anything except to add couple of new front-end servers, and the backend servers don't get upgraded at all.
That's what's happened to the airline industry.
Parent
Re:If that was the case... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:If that was the case... (Score:5, Insightful)
Most airlines I've flown with show higher "on time" numbers than the Dutch railways (they are now but have been struggling to reach the mandated 86% while we are repeatedly mentioned to have one of the world's most efficient networks).
It happened to me once, to Moscow. I was offered a replacement flight the same day and only because my visum was about to expire I had not a single hour to spare - our fault (business trip). It happened to a friend of mine once - we rebooked the flight to another BA one ten minutes later.
You don't want to know how often I've had a scheduled train exceed that amount of delay or not even showing up at all. The same for metro, tram or bus services. Obviously I travel more by "regular" public transportation than plane, but I'm really not convinced there's a huge difference per mile/km travelled.
I hardly know of any business that doesn't attempt some sort of useless loyalty programme. And frankly, usually I am disappointment when none is available.
I'm sorry to hear that. I make at least twenty different legs a year and maybe one or two of them cause me a delay. Most of my time wasted travelling by plane is by getting there too early because I don't trust getting there on time - blame that on the other forms of transportation.
If you book your entire flight at once, most airliners offer you compensation. I must admit I'm specifically lucky here, my bank/creditcard company insures me against delays, I get a huge (more than enough) compensation in case I am forced to get a hotel or buy new clothes and toiletries in case of luggage delay. But I must concede the authors could be right here, I believe this is a good European law where airliners are required to compensate you.
Never have I felt this way, except maybe when a combined fire and late arrival delayed a flight of mine after stores had closed at the gate (11pm-ish) and we weren't allowed back to the terminal for refreshments even with the two-hour delay. I filed a complaint and got 50% of my total fare back - the full 100% share of that return leg.
Maybe there's US companies are allowed to treat customers as crap at greater liberty (pun intended), but I seriously doubt it is typical of air travel alone. (Our national railways are required to give refunds as well in case of severe delays. I tried but failed when my 10pm Amtrak train showed up in South Carolina three hours late.)
(Sidenote: I miss the days when travelling to the US was something one would do for fun, in my case 1997/2001/2002. Continental didn't give me my luggage in 2002 when transferring in Atlanta and entering the country, nobody at customs gave me a hard time for entering the country for three weeks without any luggage and in San Francisco it took me all of ten minutes to asked what to do because it also wasn't there. Actually I pretty much assumed that I could just report it, go to my friends and have it deliver ASAP, which is indeed how these things work.
"Terminal chaos" has nothing to do with airliners and airports but much more with those inhabitants of this planet who are so braindead to cause a riot when they aren't sure whether they packed a toothbrush while they really aren't going anywhere where they couldn't buy a new one in virtually every street.
Remember this every time you hear "Mr. Bla, you must board immediately, we're already offloading your luggage" through the terminal speakers, look around you, and then be amazed how airports can function so well with all the idiots using them.
Parent
Fixed that for you (Score:5, Funny)
The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Informative)
The reason there are so many problems is that the cost is too cheap.
The price per ticket isn't enough to cover the cost of doing business, so more and more items get cut.
Boarding because a cattle car types of efficiency, service goes down, everybody becomes rushed, the aircraft become packed, and so on.
Don't get me wrong, flying 1000 miles for 3 hundred bucks round trip is great, but lets not kid ourselves. If we want service to go back to the 1960s level of service, the costs should at least be as much as it was in 1960s plus inflation and fuel cost increases.
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
If we want service to go back to the 1960s level of service, the costs should at least be as much as it was in 1960s plus inflation and fuel cost increases.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:4, Interesting)
The train from Bellingham, WA to Portland, OR (Google Maps informs me it's 262 miles) takes about seven hours and you need to show up at least twenty minutes early. Call it 7 and a half hours.
On the other hand, I recently flew from Sea-Tac to Chicago O'Hare (~2,000 miles) in about four hours, plus two hours early for checkin = about 6 hours.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Informative)
1. Check yourself in electronically - print out your boarding pass at home. That bypasses 30 minutes, easy.
2. Check your baggage AT THE CURB. Pretty much every major airport in the US will let you check your baggage at the curb. Yes, it costs an extra $3 per bag to do so, but that saves another 15 minutes.
3. No metal in your pockets, no liquids in your bag. Yes, you can survive without that bottle of water for 10 minutes.
4. Always choose the security lane with the fewest number of families and old folks. Even if it's longer, you'll get through faster.
I rarely show up more than 30 minutes before my boarding time, and have yet to NOT be at the gate prior to the start of boarding.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Check yourself in electronically - print out your boarding pass at home. That bypasses 30 minutes, easy.
Another business frequent flyer here (about the same frequency as you cited), and I can say I did this and loved it until my name landed on the no-fly list in October of last year. I've been trying to get off the list since then, with no luck, and have to check in with a live person for every single flight! I can't even use the automated kiosks.
Arbitrary governmental action has made my work significantly more cumbersome and troublesome for no real benefit, and that has been the single largest impact I've seen.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but rail systems rarely made money on moving people. Every long distance hauler is really a way to move cargo, with the government mandating they throw on x number of passenger cars or something. And if you have a good enough system of long-haul, light rail, commuter bus and taxi service, not to mention new things like rentable bikes and publicly shared cars, all synchronized with our brand new internet, then you could get from here to anywhere in a minimal number of hops and cost, while also assuring fairly managed resources. So, like routing packets on the internet.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Informative)
First, nobody said get rid of the automobile.
Also, high speed rail (300km/h) is already widely deployed in Europe and Japan. And time is where they do shine. I can go from Central Paris to Central London (465) in less than 3 hours. I can board the train 15 minutes before it leaves. To fly, it's an hour to the airport, plus I'd have to arrive at the airport 2 hours early, wait in 3 different queues (check-in, security, boarding) fly for an hour, arrive, wait for my luggage(at least half hour), and then an hour into the city.
Obviously this is different going from NY to LA, but amongst denser areas of the US (north-east, california) this is feasible within 1000km distances.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
I have my doubts. Rail systems are expensive, and they don't bring the same value to the table as aircraft do. Namely, time.
They also don't bring to the table what the automobile does. namely, freedom.
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:The explanation is obvious (Score:5, Funny)
"A modern airliner costs about the same as a skycraper."
Wow, that's a deal. Most airliners have 2 or more skycrappers in them.
Parent
union problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I don't dispute that unions are sometimes a problem, I wonder how much the union is to blame in this case. One hears regular reports of understaffing and impossible work conditions for air traffic controllers, and these seem quite plausible given what an intricate and high-stress job it is together with the antiquated computer systems they have to use, which don't provide very good support. Back in 1980 the main issue in the air traffic controllers' strike was working conditions, not wages and benefits. When Reagan broke the union and fired the air traffic controllers, wasn't that a huge blow to reform?
Re:union problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Union is not and was not the problem in this case. In 1981 the Union was right and Reagan was very lucky that there wasn't a major air disaster because of his actions. As was the case for basically every action of that Administration, ideology triumphed over both reality and common sense.
Parent
Re:union problem? (Score:4, Informative)
The Union is not and was not the problem in this case. In 1981 the Union was right and Reagan was very lucky that there wasn't a major air disaster because of his actions. As was the case for basically every action of that Administration, ideology triumphed over both reality and common sense.
Are we rewriting history again?
1) Federal Employees, which Air Traffic Controllers are, cannot legally strike.
2) There wasn't a disaster because Reagan shifted Military Controllers into the FAA positions. Supervisors and non-striking controllers took up the rest of the slack.
3) I would say a $30 billion a year tax generating revenue stream triumphed over the ATC Union desire of a 32-Hour work week for more money.
Just like the Soviets, the ATC Union thought Reagan was bluffing. He wasn't.
Enjoy,
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Back in 1980 the main issue in the air traffic controllers' strike was working conditions, not wages and benefits. When Reagan broke the union and fired the air traffic controllers, wasn't that a huge blow to reform?
Seems like it might've been, yup.
They also question how NATCA gets away with constantly stating that the US air traffic control system is the safest in the world, when it is actually behind Europe when it comes to safety metrics (Europe has .032 hull losses per 1 million departures vs. .049 in North America).
They get away with it because it's a tradition that practically no-one questions. All you have to do is say "The US is the bestest in the world when it comes to [x]" and few people bother checking. (Except "America-haters", of course.)
Re:union problem? (Score:4, Informative)