Just saw an intresting Article, apparently some American Airlines staff were informing there customers at the gates that Y2K testing and system changes were responsible for flight delays. Apparently the FAA was so spooked they made a press release refuting the statments made by American personnel saying (in an almost desperate tone) that Y2K wasn't the reason and that customers should ignore such statements. Article as follows;

By Stewart Deck 06/21/99 Next January, the year 2000 bug will get blamed for plenty of slowdowns and equipment failures, but some U.S. airlines are already blaming Y2K systems testing for flight delays.

Don't believe it.

"I have no idea why airlines would say that. It's completely false," said Paul Takemoto, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration. "All of our [Y2K] systems testing was completed last March."

Nonetheless, at least two airlines have told fliers that Y2K testing delayed their flights.

Last Monday, American Airlines gate agents in Chicago told passengers headed to Providence that nationwide ground stoppages were being caused by Y2K testing. But Elizabeth Cory, the FAA's deputy of public affairs for the Great Lakes region, said, "That's not true. It appears that we have some ground agents giving out inaccurate information. There is no Y2K testing taking place."

John Hotard, a spokesman for American, said gate agents often look for a quick, convenient answer to give harried passengers. "Y2K testing can be an easy answer to give for delays when they really don't know," Hotard said. "We need to do a better job of giving accurate information to agents."

Several FAA insiders tell of FAA Administrator Jane Garvey's flight last month on US Airways that was ostensibly held up by Y2K air-traffic control systems testing. Garvey called her control center to check the excuse and was told it was a fabrication. Chagrined US Airways Group Inc. officials have since acknowledged the importance of being accurate with customers.

One air traffic official conceded that there have been more flight delays recently but said they are attributable to systems upgrades, not Y2K testing. Ken Kluge, an air traffic controller and the safety representative for the National Air Traffic Controllers Association in the Great Lakes Region, said the FAA is replacing the 1970s-vintage workstations in each of the 20 national Air Route Traffic Control Centers with new radar tracking equipment and color monitors [CW, Feb. 1].

Recent installations in Cleveland, Chicago and New York have required some restrictions on air traffic so the controllers could become comfortable working on the new consoles. That has slowed down air traffic, he said.

Michael Motta, president of the Seattle branch of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, said airlines are using Y2K to deflect blame from their own problems.

Reporters Patrick Thibodeau and Kathleen Ohlson contributed to this story.

-- slammer (Slammer@Nomail.please), June 21, 1999

Answers

never believe a rumor until it's officially denied........

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), June 21, 1999.

Could you please furnish the link to the original story? I want to post it elsewhere.

Thanks!

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), June 21, 1999.

Maybe upgrading systems because they need to be Y2K compliant?

Y2K -- it's in the air ...

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), June 21, 1999.

It's here:

FAA: Don't Be Fooled By Airlines' Y2K Claims

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), June 21, 1999.

I've said it before, but it is worth repeating: If a component MUST be replaced in the near future - either because it will fail due to year 2000 interfaces, problems, or operating limits, or if it must be replaced because it is "old" and breaking down (as many FAA traffic control computers, screens, and radar displays are failing) - it IS a Y2K problem.

Why? Because the "date-related" problems must be solved on a strict deadline, they are behind schedule and remain behind schedule. Anything affecting that schedule has y2K implications - even though the FAA doesn't want to admit it. (These are the guys who claimed 99% compliant last September, then been going downhill with less complete percents ever since!)

Now, since the FAA administratively cannot afford to admit it is (and has before) lied to the public, they can be expected to "lie" (though they would prefer to use a half-truth if possible) now.

Therefore, since they MUST replace these old IBM computers, controllers and radar screens immediately (before year 2000 since the op system is expected by IBM to fail); and since they can claim "upgrades" are responsible (not Y2K directly); and since they have accepted up to 20% delays while the controller become trained in the new displays; these 20% delays (as explained by the airline as Y2K testing) - are really Y2K repairs and training.

Therefore, the FAA is (by the administration's version of what "is" is) not really liars - again. The delays are due to Y2K-related equipment training, not Y2K equipment "testing".

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 21, 1999.

"All of our [Y2K] systems testing was completed last March."

Really!?!?!?!?!? <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 21, 1999.

Robert, you have been the rock-solid anchor of reason and logic for months. Thank you.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), June 21, 1999.

Thanks, Lane...

And NO, I haven't forgotten about getting you some info. We've just been REALLY busy lately...

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), June 21, 1999.

Let's see, who should I believe, American Airlines or the FAA. We'll I better talk to Hoffmeister first before I make any rash decision here. Hoffmeister, are you there? Need some advice here. The FAA says American Airlines is L**** ( the L word ). who should I believe?

Anxiously awaiting your reply,

Your Pall, Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.coom), June 21, 1999.

Rayray,

The article says a 'gate agent'. This is like a clerical position. I doubt very seriously that the clerical staff for a major airline is privvy to Y2K test schedules. More than likely an employed doomer making a wishful thought.........

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), June 21, 1999.

I cannot verify the accuracy of the original claim, but on Monday, June 15th (the day in question) I was flying (or attempting to fly) on American from Orange County, CA to Knoxville, TN via Dallas, TX. Let's just say it was quite evident that American was having a bad day everywhere. My flight from CA to TX was cancelled 5 hours in advance (they even tracked me down by telephone to tell me) and the flight immediately preceding that one already had serious delays. I ended up getting stuck in Dallas for the night along with many people from other flights as well.

-- Chris Tisone (c_tisone@hotmail.com), June 21, 1999.

Deano, well you had to take your foot out of your mouth didn't you. Do you suppose the Gate Agent(s) have a supervisor? Is it possible that this supervisor discussed the reason for these delays with the Gate Agent(s)?

Now, back to the more important question, who do we believe American Airlines or the FAA? And your answer it appears is the "FAA". Congratulations Deano, you get the WATER BOY of the year award for carrying the most water for this Administration. Back to the well now !!

Your Pal, Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 21, 1999.

At de Jager's Year2000 press clippings page, there's an article in June 8th's offerings entitled "Is FAA beta-testing Air Traffic Systems on Public", but the link is wrong. The Times Of India is the site pointed to.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), June 21, 1999.

Rayboy

Waterboy of the year award for ME???? I'm........well, I'm touched... deeply touched and honored.

Yes Rayboy, I recon that is POSSIBLE that the supervisor told the staff to tell the public that it was Y2K related failures that were causing their delays. But I very seriously doubt it. Again, this is a common-sense thing and you're just simply not equipped for it.

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), June 21, 1999.

"Nonetheless, at least two airlines have told fliers that Y2K testing delayed their flights.

Last Monday, American Airlines gate agents" - Note the S - agentS.

Sounds like a little more than a doomer employee to me. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 21, 1999.

Couple of points here:

"Gate agents" are the first, most well-informed, and most "official" spokemen any airline has - they are the point men (direct contacts) with the public. They DO speak as officials of the airline. Ain't "clerks" people, they get the airlines sued if they pass on known "lies" - unlike the FAA who don't seem to get any penalities for lying, but are rewarded for doing so. They (the gate agents) are required to know what is delayed, why, and what the passengers have to do (if anything) or can do (if anything) to get the problem resolved.

FAA lying about testing? Let's see: <<"I have no idea why airlines would say that. It's completely false," said Paul Takemoto, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration. "All of our [Y2K] systems testing was completed last March." >>

But the FAA was not only still "testing" in April - they were making a big deal about testing in April and May. They, in fact, are going to still be testing through June, July, August, and September as more facilites are brought on-line with the revised operating system(s) and consoles. Further, unless you prefer they bring on these new 4500-odd y2K compliant systems deaf, dumb, and blind - they BETTER still be testing for a while.

"Testing complete in March" - another FAA lie, in another press release, by another FAA administrator confirmed. (Oops - "systems upgrade verification", not "testing.")

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 21, 1999.

Bought an airline ticket today to visit my parents for the last week in July. I thought it would be prudent to make the trip before August 22nd. Now I'm hoping I didn't wait too long!

-- dakota (none@thistime.com), June 21, 1999.