Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
White House pushing for answers to airline industry woes
The Obama Administration is taking a closer look at the airline industry with the hopes that something can be fixed. Transportation Secretary Roy LaHood is pulling together a panel that will investigate the problems the industry faces and hopefully come up with a solution. But, I don't think anyone's breath is being held.
The airlines are always swamped with criticism, with consumers unhappy about customer service levels, on-time arrivals and departures, the shrinking list of amenities and increasingly cramped conditions. Now, shareholders are speaking louder about declining revenues and profits. Employees are losing their jobs, and regulators and industry observers worry about continued safety violations, including drunk and distracted pilots.
Ultimately, LaHood's goal is for the panel to put together "a road map for the future of the aviation industry." The panel is being convened thanks in part to a push from the airline unions, the stakeholders worried most by the layoffs that have now become routine. According to The Associated Press, they believe the industry is "dysfunctional."
Of course, it didn't take the airlines to offer their thoughts ask for money -- lots of it. They claim that radar technology that dates back to World War II isn't as effective as a GPS-based alternative. The industry would love to see this upgrade ... as long as the government writes the check. The FAA is already prepared to spend $15 billion to $22 billion on this effort, but there is an additional $14 billion to $20 billion currently sent over to the airlines. The upside would be reductions in airport congestion, fuel consumption and carbon emissions.
The Air Transportation Association (shockingly) thinks the taxpayers should pay the bill because the system would benefit the whole country. US Airways CEO Doug Parker wrote a letter to LaHood saying that the airlines simply don't have the cash to meet their end of this.
Unfortunately, the airline industry has once again asked for money and not offered any solutions of its own. No suggestion was offered as to any of the other difficulties pertaining to the industry, and I tend to become suspicious when there is only one problem identified. It implies that everything could be fixed, in this case, with the replacement of radar air traffic control systems with GPS technology. We're dealing with an industry that has lost credibility rapidly, so even if this one grand move would address ever gripe, large and small, a willing audience is unlikely to take shape.
[Photo by extremeezine via Flickr]
Filed under: North America, United States, Airlines
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Matt Nov 14th 2009 9:23PM
Increasingly cramped? Airline seats have been the same width since 1958. If "personal space" had a 5 year moving average, it would be absolutely flat.
Joe Nov 16th 2009 10:59AM
This is not true. Seats have been getting narrower on each generation of aircraft. For example a 727 seat is 34" wide. A 777 is 33". A A319, I believe is 28". A longhaul aircraft will certainly be more comfortable than a shuttle (airlines aren't immune to class action cases of DVT) . Boeing believes that 32" is the optimal width. But people are willing to put up with less if they can pay less.
Also keep in my mind that things can be perceived. More seats per per row "feels" more cramped even if the width hasn't changed. Manufacturers have lightened aircraft over time (thinner shells, thinner bulkheads) and the airlines have put more seats in the resulting space. Seat material has gotten lighter and thinner. So more room for more seats. Even though you're seat width hasn't changed much, you are sitting much closer together than 20 or 30 years ago.