Thinking Airline Future? Think Alliances, Not Mergers

I'm a sucker for Mike Boyd's grouchy but always incisive weekly commentary at the Web site of his airline forecasting company, Boyd Group International.


Today, Boyd points out something that pilots and even travelers are seeing more of. Airlines branded by international alliance, rather than airline company. If you've looked out an airplane window and seen a widebody on the apron with livery that says oneworld, rather than an actual airline name, that's what I'm talking about.

From the Boyd commentary today:

"It seems every law firm and one-man consulting shop in America is now confidently pontificating on the outcomes of the Continental/United merger.

The combined entity will cut capacity by 5%. Or was it 8%? Or was it none? The merged carriers have too many hubs. Or, not enough. We only need three US airlines, is the new mantra. Low cost carriers will find a bonanza in the routes that the new merged airline will drop. Regional airlines - a term defined differently by various sources, sometimes dumping SkyWest and Southwest in the same category - will see a resurgence. Or, maybe a financial Waterloo. Or, they're all headed for the 'loo. Fares will go up. Or, was that down?

... For example, back in the day, [Boyd Group told Pittsburgh International Airport] that if US Airways pulled its hub, it would drop to under 40 nonstop destinations. Nonsense! was the response from the usual suspects. It'll never happen... other carriers will rush in to fill the gap. Today, it's about 36 nonstop destinations. And all those airlines that were supposed to rush in and replace the US Airways hub never arrived.

So in regard to mergers, here's a bit of heresy: tomorrow's airline context will not be anywhere near what we have today. Fact: in the long run (roughly five to seven years out) it may not mean diddly if carrier A gets merged into carrier B.

More Anathema Thinking: Ignore the Peanut Gallery mantras. US Airways, for example, isn't "left at the altar." American isn't the Ugly Betty of the industry, replete with corporate zits and unable to get a date. They don't need partners, because they may be filling a very different market role from that of today. As for the latest merger, it could ultimately be consumer-neutral - whether the combined new entity is named "United" or "Continental" or "Air Fred" may not make any difference.

One word, Benjamin: Alliances. Read the AA/BA/IB Joint Business Agreement (or at least skim it - it's lethally boring). What comes out are buzz-terms like "metal neutrality" and "brand indifference" - all of which indicates that individual airline brand will increasingly be subordinated to the global alliance system identity. It may well gravitate to the point where AA, UA, US, et al are lift providers to their respective global (note: not US) alliances.

This is part of a global airline trend - in ten years, it may not make much difference whether it's UA or AA flying the airplane - it will be competition between Star, oneworld, or SkyTeam. So, if UA and CO combine, all it ultimately may mean is that there is one less corporate lift provider to the Star Alliance. In today's context, it would be like a merger between Pinnacle and Mesaba. The corporation would change, but to the consumer, they'd still be booking on Delta. That's the future for independent international carriers - just on a global scale. Consumers book on Star, and the airplane might be operated by (depending on how the system develops) United, or US Airways, or for international travel, Lufthansa or China Eastern.

It's a global business world. And it's going to be connected by global alliance systems, not individual international airlines. So, for the long term, prognostications on how to deal with the UA/CO merger are the equivalent of planning arrival festivities for the Titanic. ..."

Thanks to Mike Boyd for looking beyond Wall Street baloney and the usual knee-jerking about mergers.

###

OAG Analysis of United-Continental Merger and Affect on Airports

OAG, in a report today on the proposed merger between United and Continental:

"The new United Airlines will be second to Delta in terms of worldwide seat departures, and third behind Delta and Southwest Airlines in domestic seats. American Airlines will move from second to third in U.S. and worldwide ASMs, and from third to fourth in total and domestic seats. 'Merger assessments usually focus on shares of the partners in a variety of differently-defined markets, ranging from a single airport pair, to dominance of one or more hubs to a set of traffic flows through hubs," said Sanford (Sandy) Rederer, Senior Consultant, OAG Aviation Consulting Services. "This information is of great interest to the communities whose air service will be impacted by the merger.'"

###

Trans-Atlantic Flights Canceled or Slowed by More Volcanic Ash

Here we go again?

Hundreds of trans-Atlantic flights are being delayed today for re-routing, and in many cases canceled, after a cloud of volcanic ash flowed into the North Atlantic skies between Iceland and northern Spain.

Here's the initial report from NPR. It says in part: "Until Eyjafjallajokul, the volcano in southern Iceland, stops its emissions, the key to the future course of Europe's ash crisis will be the prevailing winds. The eruption of the glacier-capped volcano has shown no signs of stopping since it began belching ash April 13."

There had been predictions during the 6-day shutdown of air traffic in Europe by volcanic ash last month that sporadic disruptions might occur in the future as more volcanic eruptions and aftershocks occurred in Iceland.

Here's the AP report.

By the way, the beast is spelled with either two "l's" or one at the end. AP style is one L.

Otherwise, to quote the "Volcano Song" per Mr. Jimmy Buffett:

Now I don't know
I don't know
I don't know where I'm a gonna go
When the volcano blow



###

TSA Objection to Strip-Search-Scanner Photo

The TSA objects to the photo in my previous post (see below) purporting to show a young woman's body as seen in a whole body imager.

It is, evidently, a photo-shopped image, a fake. Here's the link to the TSA "myth-buster" post debunking that particular image.

However, the image shown above left, of an older woman, is genuine. It shows a female TSA research official in a test of one of the backscatter versions of the whole body imaging machines. Backscatter machines are one of two technologies used in whole body images. The other is millimeter-wave technology. Here is the TSA's explanation of the differences between the two.

The TSA maintains that images as detailed as the one shown above won't be routinely used during airport security operations. The agency says the above image, from several years ago when the technology was first being tested, is out of date. Software was later developed to enable the screener viewing the body images to blur or pixelate private body areas.

In Miami, where a fight among TSA officers followed training on the machines, a supervisor allegedly ridiculed a screener's allegedly small penis as it appeared on the image. Evidently the blurring or pixelating was not sufficient to obscure the area in dispute, whatever its size.

Via Thesmokinggun.com, here is the police report on the Miami incident.

Hey, you in the back row: Cut out that laughing!

Meanwhile, as security critics have pointed out, any smart terrorist, reassured that private body parts will be blurred in the image, probably figures it's a good idea to tuck contraband where the sun don't shine. So the blurring, image-pixelating rationale needs some work.

Incidentally, the TSA has also said repeatedly that the whole-body imagers cannot store images. In fact the machines can store images, as the TSA told me 18 months ago. It's just that they will be configured not to store them. This is, however, in dispute.


As to the Three Stooges-like incident in Miami, TSA spokeswoman Kristin Lee sent the following via e-mail:

"TSA has a zero tolerance policy for workplace violence. Per our normal
procedures, TSA is moving quickly to act on the security officer charged
with assault. At the same time, we are investigating to determine
whether other officers may have violated procedures during a training
session with coworkers and committed professional misconduct. The
training was internal and at no time was anyone from the traveling
public involved."

Incidentally, Michael Chertoff, the former head of the Homeland Security department, of which the TSA is a part, now runs a security company that has done consulting work for companies vying to sell whole-body image machines to the TSA. When he ran Homeland Security, Chertoff was a prominent advocate of using the machines.

The TSA has been operating without a permanent director in charge for 16 months.

###

More Fun & Games at the TSA

[UPDATE: See correction in post above about the image of the woman.]


Hey, not to worry about those strip-search machines the TSA is busily awarding contracts for. They can't be abused, the TSA insists. Also, they don't show "detail," the agency says, sticking its fingers in its ears and singing "la-la-la" about that official image above from a TSA body scanner.

So pay no attention to this smirky local TV report about an incident at the Miami airport where a TSA supervisor ridiculed a co-worker's genitalia during a training session on body scanners. A Three Stooges style incident ensued. Your tax dollars at work!

The TSA, of course, has been without a permanent director for 16 months and is still being run by the same people who have run it through all of the past embarrassments,

###

That No-Fly List and the Times Square Bomber

There's a lot of baloney being peddled today again about the "no fly list," which manifestly did not work when the flea-brained Times Square would-be bomber managed to get onto an airplane for Dubai the other day with the cops hot on his tail.

Again, it appears to me that the TSA, which has been operating without a permanent director for 16 months, has failed another major security test.

It's being dutifully reported that the TSA was not responsible here. Technically true. My question: Why not?

Yes, for international flights, the responsibility for enforcing the terrorist watch lists still rests with airlines, rather than with the TSA. Late last year, the TSA began taking responsibility for domestic enforcement of the lists from the airlines, in a move to reduce the number of infuriating false-positives on the so-called "selectee" portion of the lists.

Incidentally, reporters keep confusing the selectee portion of the lists with the no-fly portion. This is an egregious error.

The selectee list, the one that drives innocent people nuts, consists of hundreds of thousands of "identities" that correspond to about 30,000 actual people who are considered by various law-enforcement agencies to be worth having a second look at before they fly. The trouble with the selectee list is that airline enforcement cast a very wide net, and upstanding citizens whose names are even similar to someone on the list were routinely hassled at airports.

The TSA's new so-called Secure Flight program is supposed to be addressing that problem by taking the enforcement from the airlines to the TSA itself, and by requiring fliers to provide additional personal information on booking, allowing the TSA to more accurately check them off the selectee list.

The no-fly list is a whole other kettle of fish. If you're on it, you do not fly. Period. It is a deadly serious list. The Times Square would-be bomber, Faisal Shahzad, was placed on the no-fly list hours before he bought his ticket and boarded that plane.

TSA responsibility for enforcing the lists on international flights is scheduled to commence later this year. That includes the no-fly portion.

How come? How come after seven years and tens of billions of dollars spent by the TSA on security theater, on patting down infants, people in wheelchairs and -- I can personally attest -- parrots, some would-be terrorist whose name is on the no-fly list manages to 1. Buy a one-way ticket, for cash, for Pakistan from New York and 2. Get onto the airplane. His escape was averted only when the cops and FBI rushed onto the plane and hauled him off.

The New York Police Department did spectacular work, as usual, finding this bozo. The FBI did great work, too, although unaccountably the suspect slipped from surveillance for a couple of hours before turning back up on the radar.

The half-assed bomb he constructed failed to go off in Times Square. The perpetrator -- and this Faisal Shahzad looks to be a malcontent Islamist U.S. citizen who went looking for terrorist cred in Pakistan only after his American Dream went sour during the mortgage crisis in Connecticut -- is behind bars and singing like Sinatra. Nancy Sinatra.

But it ended without catastrophe.

That was no thanks to the TSA, which again drops the ball in a crisis.

Yes, the responsibility for red-flagging this nitwit was technically the airline's. The question is: Why? Where was the TSA?

And again, I need to point this out: The TSA has been operating without a permanent director for 16 months. The agency is still being run by Bush political appointees and Civil Service hires who have been on duty through every single TSA screw-up in the history of the agency.

###

Arresting the Times Square Would-Be Bomber

Great police work by the NPYD and FBI in nabbing the flea-brained would-be terrorist who planted the car bomb in Times Square Saturday night. While Drudge, Fox News, Pete King and other hysterics were near fainting from the terror-vapors, the cops did their job calmly and deliberately.

There was an interesting situation just before the guy was arrested on that Emirates flight to Dubai at JFK. The plane almost took off. See this, via Politico, via ABC News reporting on the ATC transmission on the very useful Web site LiveATC.net, which monitors live air-traffic control chatter.

On the other hand, let's not make too much of this being a "close call." Had the plane taken off, it certainly still would have been called back to Kennedy, and the pilots without question would have complied.

###

Phoenix Paper: 'Arizona, Our Time for Excuses Is Over.'

Sometimes a newspaper makes you proud. Today, the Arizona Republic, a conservative newspaper that's part of the Gannett chain, is a moment of journalistic greatness -- not just for this terrific article rebutting conventional wisdom on Arizona border-town safety, but for this thundering editorial holding elected officials' feet to the fire over immigration clownishness.

The editorial is actually today's front page, a special sheet wrapped around the traditional front page, which is shown to the right.

###

Travel Warning for New Delhi

The U.S. Embassy in New Delhi is warning that "there are increased indications that terrorists are planning imminent attacks in New Delhi."

Here is the alert. And I have no idea what a "warden message" means.

Could someone please instruct the State Department in India, where English has been spoken and written for over a century, to communicate in standard English?

###

Arizona Boyott

Nah, just kidding. Nogales, Az., International Airport always looks like this.

###

European Airports Ending Liquids Ban in 2013

While the TSA in the U.S. still drifts along, a year and quarter without a permanent director in charge, the European Union has found a way to lift the widely hated and frequently ridiculed ban on carrying liquids. It will occur in 2013, however.

From Speednews.com, via an EU announcement:

The European Union this week announced new measures intended to streamline and simplify the EU framework for aviation security. The new measures will update those policies which were first put into place in 2002 following 9/11, the first time the EU had adopted common rules on aviation. Previously each Member State had its own rules for aviation security.

"The revision is about better regulation – simplifying and improving procedures to make it easier for industry on a daily basis to implement safety controls, without any reduction in security," EU said in a press release.

The framework sets a deadline of April 29, 2013 for the lifting of current restrictions on the carriage of liquids in cabin baggage. New screening equipment for liquids must be used in all airports across Europe by that deadline.

As a preliminary step in phasing out the restrictions on liquids, beginning April 19, 2011 at the latest, duty-free liquids purchased at third country airports or on board third country airlines and carried in tamper evident bags will be allowed as cabin baggage and will be screened, the EU said. Currently these liquids are only allowed in cabin baggage if they come from selected third countries (United States, Canada, Singapore and Croatia).

It says the package will also open the door for negotiating "one-stop shop" security agreements with third countries. Those agreements could potentially reduce re-screening for transfer passengers.

"A lot has been learnt since the first EU-wide rules putting in place common aviation security standards were put in place after September 11," Commission Vice-President in charge of transport Siim Kallas said. "This is about building on the experience of recent years and streamlining procedures, so that on a daily basis security controls are easier for industry to implement. For passengers, the aim is also to simplify wherever possible the necessary security controls. In that sense this package takes a significant step forwards in signaling the beginning of the end for the current restrictions on liquids in cabin baggage, with a clear and final deadline of April 2013."

The new rules put in place a series of measures to improve, streamline and simplify existing procedures, by:

* Eliminating duplication of security controls. For example, reducing costly duplication of checks in strictly controlled areas of EU airports, where there has already been strict screening for access. This is of significant operational benefit for airlines and airports.
* Simplifying procedures. For example, by establishing a single set of standards for the documents you need to get access at airports. The new rules clarify which kinds of identification and authorizations are necessary for access to different restricted areas. This clarifies the situation for authorities making it easier for them to operate the system.
* Harmonizing procedures. For example, introducing EU-wide procedures for the recognition of hauliers transporting air cargo consignments. These can be recognized and used by hauliers in all Member States – this reduces restrictions for hauliers and the need for costly re-screening of cargo.
* Introducing common minimum standards as regards security training for all staff that implement security controls.


"The implementation of these security measures at EU airports will continue to be closely monitored through unannounced Commission inspections," the EU said in its press release. "Where necessary, the Commission will perform follow-up inspections or start infringement procedures against Member States in order to ensure the overall level of aviation security in the EU."

###

Oil Slick Forecast for Lousiana Coast

If it's not one thing it's another ...

Arizona's Stupid New Immigration Law: Read It For Yourself

[Photo -- Clueless in Phoenix, Appointed Gov. Jan Brewer signs Arizona Laughingstock Law]

I'm impelled to publish the full text of the ridiculous bill that the appointed governor of Arizona, resembling some poor dear wandering a casino looking for the nickel slots, signed into law yesterday.

The actual text is useful because reporters can't seem to explain this nonsense coherently. For example, I just read in a news account that the bill makes it a crime "to not carry immigration papers."

What the hell are "immigration papers" and why must you or I have them on our persons in Arizona -- or be arrested? Even in a stone stupid law, that makes no sense.

That's another consequence of one of the more disturbing trends in journalism today, the trend toward paraphrasing rather than quoting specific language. As Bill Moyers said, "Reporters are paid to explain things they don't understand."

Anyway, here is the text of the bill as signed into law. As any second-year law school student can see, it's full of laughably imprecise language and spurious provisions that won't stand up to legal challenge.

And I hasten to add that this ridiculousness -- vaulting Arizona to the top of the national state-laughingstock list (South Carolina and Mississippi say thanks!)-- is the work of the nativist cabal that controls Arizona from within the invincibly resentful white right-wing population mass in Phoenix.

Phoenix is Orange County circa 1964, but without an ocean. Tucson, on the other hand, is relatively progressive (if politically weak) -- a citadel of good Old West sense and diversity.

Some people are calling for a tourism boycott of Arizona. But I'm launching a new campaign here: "Tucson, the Anti-Phoenix."

###

Ugly Racial-Bigotry Charges At Ritz-Carlton in Florida

[Please see my comment at the bottom about newspapers giving free rides to bigots in comments attached to legitimate news stories online]

Just as higher-end travel is coming back and five-star hotels are reporting a small rebound, the swanky Ritz-Carlton hotel in Naples, Fla. has a sticky situation on its hands.

Alas, there's a lot of rushing to judgment online about this, compounded by the predictable onslaught of people shooting mouths off in comments before the facts are clear.

This much is clear:

A 15-year employee at the hotel -- a Haitian-born U.S. citizen -- has sued for emotional distress. He says he was blocked by supervisors at the hotel restaurant from serving a British couple who had specified in their instructions before arrival that they not be served by "people of color" or people with "foreign accents," according to a report first published in the Naples, Fla. News.

According to the Naples newspaper, the complaint states that a guest-profile entry in the hotel computer system, which is consulted by staff, said: "As per Mr. Staros, this couple is very, very prejudice(d) and do like like (sic) ppl of color or foreign accents."

The reference, by the way, is to Edward V. Staros, the top executive at the hotel and, ulp, a co-founder of the Ritz-Carlton chain in the U.S. during the 1980s. (Ritz-Carlton was bought by Marriott International in the 1990s).

Staros is one of the lions of the hotel industry and, frankly, I'm not buying any assertion that a person of his stature would have been so crude, let alone so dumb, as to promulgate a bigoted directive at the behest of some racist slobs from the UK.

Hotel people are the smartest and most cosmopolitan people in the travel industry; they were practicing diversity before it became something that corporations had to do -- it just doesn't add up to me that a guy like Staros would given any such guidance to staff. I repeat: It doesn't add up.

More likely, the low-ranking staffer who made the vile profile entry -- if the lawsuit complaint's citation is accurate -- was merely invoking the boss's name. That's the general assumption among hotel people I talked to today, by the way.

Furthermore, Staros himself also spoke with the British guests after the initial commotion and instructed them, speaking for the company, that they are no longer welcome at any Ritz-Carlton in the world, said Vivian Deuschl, the Ritz's highly respected spokeswoman.

Ritz-Carlton is a well-managed company that is intensely focused on staff training and has a solid record of international diversity. But the company needs to move decisively to deal with this and keelhaul those responsible, because this story has legs.

Here's the official statement from Ritz-Carlton:

"Ritz-Carlton is in the process of investigating the facts underlying the lawsuit. While we do not comment on ongoing litigation, we believe it is important to convey several points. We absolutely deny that Ritz-Carlton in any way condones discrimination by its guests against its employees or discrimination in any form.

"We value our guests and employees and their diversity in all respects. The guests in question stayed at the hotel in March 2010 and were barred from the hotel and other Ritz-Carlton Hotels shortly after their stay ended, as information about their conduct and comments came to light. We are in the process of reminding all of our employees of Ritz-Carlton’s strong non-discrimination policies."

***
And by the way, the editors at the Naples Daily News need to use better judgment in the kinds of comments they're allowing to be posted with their story on this incident. People have the right to say whatever they want, within the legal bounds of libel and slander. Anyone can start a blog or buttonhole their neighbors. But newspapers shouldn't give bigots and ignoramuses a free ride on the tails of a legitimate news story.

###

US Air: We're No Longer Talking to United About a Merger

US Airways says it no longer is talking to United Airlines about a possible merger.

In a letter to employees this morning, Doug Parker, the US Air CEO, said, "our Board of Directors has decided to discontinue those discussions ... those talks have not progressed to a merger agreement, and for the foreseeable future we intend to remain a standalone carrier."

Not long after the talks between United and US Air began last month, United also began talking with Continental Airlines about a merger. Those talks are continuing.

Parker, like other airline executives, strongly believes that the domestic airline industry needs to contract and consolidate to achieve better control over pricing. "As I have said many times, it is not necessary for us to be direct participants in a merger because the entire industry benefits when consolidation occurs," he said in his letter to employees today.

He added, "I am sure some 'industry experts' will suggest that US Airways will be strategically harmed if United now chooses to merge with Continental. They will be wrong. Thanks to all that we have done together over the past two years – capacity rationalization, a la carte revenue programs, cost control and our commitment to operating efficiently and reliably – we have a strong and viable standalone airline that is producing industry-leading results. Should our competitors choose to merge and help create a more stable airline industry, our independent airline will only become stronger."

###

Narco Gunmen Storm Holiday Inn in Monterrey, Mexico, Abduct Guests

Gunmen stormed two hotels in downtown Monterrey, Mexico, in the middle of the night and abducted 7 guests and workers in one of the boldest attacks yet against the staggered tourist economy in the border region of Mexico.

The hotels were the Holiday Inn Centro and the Mision Hotel.

Here's the New York Times report on the attack.

Monterrey, a major business center for both Mexican and American companies, is about 150 miles south of the Texas border. Border towns from Tijuana to Matamoros have been stunned by drug violence in the last two years, and tourism has been devastated.

Nearly all of the violence, which has accounted for about 20,000 murders in Mexico in two years, has been between drug gangs or drug gangs and police and military, though innocent bystanders have often been killed. This year, violence escalated sharply in Monterrey, but an attack on a major tourism/business hotel is very unusual.

###

Airlines Ready to Jack Up Fares With 'Fuel Surcharges' Again?

If it's not one thing it's another.

According to Rick Seaney at Farecompare.com, airlines may be poised to slap fuel surcharges on domestic ticket prices, something they haven't done since November 2008, when legacy airlines folded these surcharges into the base airfare as the price of oil dropped dramatically from record summer highs that year.

[Delta has already added fuel surcharges to many peak summer fares, and other carriers could follow.]

With oil prices rising over $80 a barrel, surcharges are beginning to make a comeback, according to Seaney. On Monday, he said, "Delta Air Lines filed a $20 roundtrip ($10 one-way) fuel surcharge on top of their lengthy list of peak travel day surcharges, on tens of thousands of mostly smaller city-pairs with no departure date restrictions."

For example, a one-way connecting Delta flight from San Francisco to Denver or Dallas (via Salt Lake City) on May 27 has both a peak travel surcharge of $30 and a fuel surcharge of $10 tacked onto the base airfare.

"A closer inspection of the cities with this new fuel surcharge shows that airfares to/from Delta's hub cities along many non-stop routes were spared this fuel surcharge hike -- placing most of the hike on smaller markets and larger non-hub cities," Seaney said, adding:

"Airlines have been struggling to get even the smallest systemwide domestic airfare hike to stick this year. Several attempts have failed in the last few months. In lieu of significant base airfare hikes, airlines have resorted to fewer sales, peak travel day surcharges, a bevy of non-ticket fees, and the release of fewer of the cheapest seats, all in order to increase revenue.

"This new fuel surcharge filing is effectively an airfare hike as miscellaneous (peak) and fuel surcharges are added to the base airfare prices before the 7.5 percent U.S. sales tax is added on. Note that as of this afternoon no other airlines have matched the fuel surcharge increase."

###

Corporate Travel Managers Assess Impact of Europe Shutdown

[Correction: ACTE is based in Alexandria, Va., not in the UK.]

Stranded travelers and canceled meetings were the two top effects cited by corporate travel managers in a new survey of the impact on business travelers of the volcanic ash crisis that shut down air travel in Europe.

The Association of Corporate Travel Executives (ACTE), in a survey of its international membership, says that 31 percent of respondents claimed their greatest challenges resulted from stranded travelers and canceled meetings (as an equal priority). Nineteen percent cited stranded travelers as their primary concern, while canceled meetings were a major issue for 11 percent. Twenty-two percent checked "all of the above,' including stranded travelers, canceled meetings, reduced sales calls, and increased expenses. A remaining 11 percent said they were not affected at all.

ACTE is based in the UK. The ACTE president-elect, Chris Crowley says he is currently stranded in the United States.


Asked if air-travel disruptions in Europe were to continue for months or even a year, 29 percent of respondents said they would rely on a strategic response combining rail travel, ground transportation and electronic travel alternatives -- including video and Web conferencing. Thirteen percent reported they have a program for electronic travel and meeting alternatives in place now. Thirty-nine percent indicated they had both a strategic response and a plan in place now, while 19 percent felt confident they would need neither.

###

Never Mind II: Now the Brits Are Reopening Air Space -- Tonight

In an abrupt twist, Britain plans to phase in an opening of its air space tonight at 10 p.m. London time, which would be shortly from when I am posting this around 1.30 p.m. Pacific time.

Let me note, there is some remarkable stuff in this statement from the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which has come front and center amid growing criticism of two for-profit companies that have been largely setting the agenda in British response to the crisis, the National Air Traffic Services (NATS) and the Met Office. Both NATS and the Met Office have been criticized for allegedly overreacting to the situation starting last week.

An example of some remarkable stuff in the announcement: The news that aircraft manufacturers (whose specifications are sunk into the bedrock of aviation safety standards) have "increased tolerance levels" for flying near low-ash areas.

Anyway, here is the statement from the CAA, the UK’s aviation safety regulator, issued in conjunction with the Irish Aviation Authority.

"New guidance allows a phased reintroduction from 2200 tonight of much of the airspace which is currently closed due to the volcanic ash plume over the UK. There will continue to be some 'no fly zones' where concentrations of ash are at levels unsafe for flights to take place, but very much smaller than the present restrictions. Furthermore, the Met Office advise that the 'no fly zones' do not currently cover the UK.

... The CAA has drawn together many of the world’s top aviation engineers and experts to find a way to tackle this immense challenge ... Current international procedures recommend avoiding volcano ash at all times. In this case, owing to the magnitude of the ash cloud, its position over Europe and the static weather conditions, most of the EU airspace had to close and aircraft could not be physically routed around the problem area as there was no space to do so.

We had to ensure, in a situation without precedent, that decisions made were based on a thorough gathering of data and analysis by experts. This evidence-based approach helped to validate a new standard that is now being adopted across Europe.

The major barrier to resuming flight has been understanding tolerance levels of aircraft to ash. Manufacturers have now agreed increased tolerance levels in low ash density areas. [Italics mine]

Our way forward is based on international data and evidence from previous volcanic ash incidents, new data collected from test flights and additional analysis from manufacturers over the past few days. It is a conservative model allowing a significant buffer on top of the level the experts feel may pose a risk.

In addition, the CAA’s Revised Airspace Guidance requires airlines to:

--Conduct their own risk assessment and develop operational procedures to address any remaining risks;

--Put in place an intensive maintenance ash damage inspection before and after each flight; and

--Report any ash related incidents to a reporting scheme run by the CAA."

###

Never Mind: UK Scraps Plan to Resume Flights As New Ash Cloud Looms

[UPDATE: British Airways canceled all long-haul flights departing from the UK today and all long-haul flights scheduled to arrive in the UK before noon tomorrow.]


Britain postponed a plan to open its air space more generally to flights as the Iceland volcano pumped more ash into the skies.

According to this report today in the Times of London, "Airports in the south of the UK will remain closed until at least 7 p.m. and British Airways abandoned plans to operate some short-haul flights. Glasgow and Belfast, which briefly reopened this morning, both shut by the afternoon."

This, alas, is going to be the situation for weeks, if not months, for air travelers in Europe if that Iceland volcano, Eyjafijallajokull, keeps erupting on and off, as has been its habit in previous major eruptions.

Worse, there's a bigger and more dangerous volcano just to the east of Eyjagfijallakull that has had an unfortunate tendency to erupt soon after its smaller neighbor does. Its name is Katla, which at least has the virtue of being easier to spell. Let's hope we don't have to spell that one too often, though.

[Hey, remember the good old days when the toughest foreign spelling journalists had to learn was Chiang Kai-shek?]

See my column in today's New York Times for a hint on how many business travelers, corporations and others stuck in the air-travel shutdown are finding alternatives using teleconferencing.

By the way, there is continuing controversy surrounding two private companies that have been setting the response-agenda in Britain - NATS, the privatized national air travel service, and the Met Office, which is in effect Britain's weather bureau. It's also a private company.

Both are under fire for using computer models to project ash-cloud patterns without supplementing the computer projections with real flight tests in the skies. NATS, for one, has been criticized for overreacting. The computer models used for the evaluations of the ash cloud are based on incomplete science and limited data, according to Matthias Ruete, the European Union's director-general for mobility and transport, quoted in the Financial Times newspaper yesterday.

In Britain, the Met Office, which defends NATS in this situation, is largely a province of meteorologists, rather than hard-core academic scientists.

Some weeks ago, a fascinating story in the New York Times described the conflict over global warming between meteorologists and climate scientists.

That story mentions a new study by George Mason University and the University of Texas showing TV meteorologists', let us say casual, attitudes toward climate science. Two-thirds of the TV weather people surveyed don't believe that global warming/climate change is caused by human activities.

Of course, most "meteorologists" (and being one requires merely a bachelor's degree, if that), are local television-news performers whose main focus is enhancing their own celebrity, with hand-puppets if ratings demand.

###


###