At first, I just saw this as a logistical nightmare. First Southwest, then Delta experience debilitating fleetwide cancellations due to ground computer network meltdowns. People are stuck safely on the ground. Not a safety issue.
But what happens next? A great backlog of flights. Enormous pressure to get everything back on track as soon as possible. How does that effect pilot rostering? Turnaround times? MEL issues? How much stress and pressure are flight and ground crews under to get it all back to normal? What is the leading cause of accidents? Stress, pressure, fatigue, shortcuts, bad decisions based on get-there-itis, questionable dispatches, a lack of contingency for safety reasons, back office pressure...?
The way I see it, such events DO heighten the risk of something going wrong. So shouldn't these systems—a relatively new but essential component of aviation—have FAR certification standards as well. Shouldn't these systems be required to conform to "aircraft-grade' reliability and proven redundancy requirements? Both Southwest and Delta have stated that they have back-up systems in place, but in both cases these systems failed to work. Flimsy stuff.
Well, maybe simple economics will take care of it. I can well imagine the airlines not caring to invest in better back-up systems before such an event happens, but now Southwest is looking at "tens of millions" of dollars in damages. Perhaps better back-up systems are looking more appealing now...
Still, it's the 21st century. Everything depends on these networks. Why isn't this a safety issue? Shouldn't we have FAR's for this?
But what happens next? A great backlog of flights. Enormous pressure to get everything back on track as soon as possible. How does that effect pilot rostering? Turnaround times? MEL issues? How much stress and pressure are flight and ground crews under to get it all back to normal? What is the leading cause of accidents? Stress, pressure, fatigue, shortcuts, bad decisions based on get-there-itis, questionable dispatches, a lack of contingency for safety reasons, back office pressure...?
The way I see it, such events DO heighten the risk of something going wrong. So shouldn't these systems—a relatively new but essential component of aviation—have FAR certification standards as well. Shouldn't these systems be required to conform to "aircraft-grade' reliability and proven redundancy requirements? Both Southwest and Delta have stated that they have back-up systems in place, but in both cases these systems failed to work. Flimsy stuff.
Well, maybe simple economics will take care of it. I can well imagine the airlines not caring to invest in better back-up systems before such an event happens, but now Southwest is looking at "tens of millions" of dollars in damages. Perhaps better back-up systems are looking more appealing now...
Still, it's the 21st century. Everything depends on these networks. Why isn't this a safety issue? Shouldn't we have FAR's for this?
Comment