NASA Mum, But Airline Mishaps More Common

Agency Admits Withholding Survey Results To Not Affect Airline Profits, Passengers' Confidence

(AP)  Anxious to avoid upsetting air travelers, NASA is withholding results from an unprecedented national survey of pilots that found safety problems like near collisions and runway interference occur far more frequently than the government previously recognized.

NASA gathered the information under an $8.5 million safety project, through telephone interviews with roughly 24,000 commercial and general aviation pilots over nearly four years. Since ending the interviews at the beginning of 2005 and shutting down the project completely more than one year ago, the space agency has refused to divulge the results publicly.

Just last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted the survey to purge all related data from its computers.

The Associated Press learned about the NASA results from one person familiar with the survey who spoke on condition of anonymity because this person was not authorized to discuss them.

A senior NASA official, associate administrator Thomas S. Luedtke, said revealing the findings could damage the public's confidence in airlines and affect airline profits. Luedtke acknowledged that the survey results "present a comprehensive picture of certain aspects of the U.S. commercial aviation industry."

The AP sought to obtain the survey data over 14 months under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

"Release of the requested data, which are sensitive and safety-related, could materially affect the public confidence in, and the commercial welfare of, the air carriers and general aviation companies whose pilots participated in the survey," Luedtke wrote in a final denial letter to the AP. NASA also cited pilot confidentiality as a reason, although no airlines were identified in the survey, nor were the identities of pilots, all of whom were promised anonymity.

Among other results, the pilots reported at least twice as many bird strikes, near mid-air collisions and runway incursions as other government monitoring systems show, according to a person familiar with the results who was not authorized to discuss them publicly.

The survey also revealed higher-than-expected numbers of pilots who experienced "in-close approach changes" - potentially dangerous, last-minute instructions to alter landing plans.

Officials at the NASA Ames Research Center in California have said they want to publish their own report on the project by year's end.

"If the airlines aren't safe I want to know about it," said Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., chairman of the House Science and Technology investigations and oversight subcommittee. "I would rather not feel a false sense of security because they don't tell us."

Discussing NASA's decision not to release the survey data, the congressman said: "There is a faint odor about it all."

Miller asked NASA last week to provide his oversight committee with information on the survey and the decision to withhold data.

"The data appears to have great value to aviation safety, but not on a shelf at NASA," he wrote to NASA's administrator Michael Griffin.

The survey's purpose was to develop a new way of tracking safety trends and problems the airline industry could address. The project was shelved when NASA cut its budget as emphasis shifted to send astronauts to the moon and Mars.

NASA said nothing it discovered in the survey warranted notifying the Federal Aviation Administration immediately. Its data showed improvements in some areas, the person who was familiar with the survey said. Survey managers occasionally briefed the FAA during the project. At a briefing in April 2003, FAA officials expressed concerns about the high numbers of incidents being described by pilots because the NASA results were dramatically different from what FAA was getting from its own monitoring systems.

An FAA spokeswoman, Laura Brown, said the agency questioned NASA's methodology. The FAA is confident it can identify safety problems before they lead to accidents, she said.

In its space program, NASA has a deadly history of playing down safety issues. Investigators blamed the 1986 and 2000 shuttle disasters on poor decision making, budget cuts and improperly minimizing risks. NASA decided to go ahead with a 2006 shuttle launch and is moving ahead with one this week despite safety concerns by NASA engineers in both cases.

Aviation experts said NASA's pilot survey results could be a valuable resource in an industry where they believe many safety problems are underreported, even while deaths from commercial air crashes are rare and the number of deadly crashes has dropped in recent years.

"It gives us an awareness of not just the extent of the problems, but probably in some cases that the problems are there at all," said William Waldock, a safety science professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Phoenix, Ariz. "If their intent is to just let it sit there, that's just a waste."

Officials involved in the survey touted the unusually high response rate among pilots, 80 percent, and said they believe it is more reliable than other reporting systems that rely on pilots to voluntarily report incidents.

"The data is strong," said Robert Dodd, an aviation safety expert hired by NASA to manage the survey. "Our process was very meticulously designed and very thorough. It was very scientific."

Pilot interviews lasted about 30 minutes, with standardized questions about how frequently they encountered equipment problems, smoke or fire, engine failure, passenger disturbances, severe turbulence, collisions with birds or inadequate tower communication, according to documents obtained by the AP.

Pilots also were asked about last-minute changes in landing instructions, flying too close to other planes, near collisions with ground vehicles or buildings, overweight takeoffs or occasions when pilots left the cockpit.

The survey, known officially as the National Aviation Operations Monitoring Service, started after a White House commission in 1997 proposed reducing fatal air crashes by 80 percent as of this year. Crashes have dropped 65 percent, with a rate of about 1 fatality in about 4.5 million departures.

NASA had begun to interview general aviation pilots and initially planned to interview flight attendants, air traffic controllers and mechanics before the survey was halted.

In earlier interviews that helped researchers design the NASA survey, pilots said airlines were unaware how frequently safety incidents occurred that could lead to serious problems or even crashes, said Jon Krosnick, a survey expert at Stanford University who helped NASA create the questionnaire. Krosnick also led a Stanford team that paid for a joint AP-Stanford poll on the environment.

"There are little things going on everyday that rarely lead to an accident but they increase the chances of an accident," said Krosnick. "It's the little things beneath the surface that cause the very infrequent crashes. You have to tackle those."

NASA directed its contractor Battelle Memorial Institute, along with subcontractors, on Thursday to return any project information and then purge it from their computers before Oct. 30.

[jowand]

The Republicans are more dangerous than any other group in the world. But what I don''''t get is they still have support of about 30 percent of the population. What is it with this bunch.

The Republicans, nicely summarized.

Posted by ibsteve2u at 10:23 AM : Oct 22, 2007

Nicely worded.
Posted by antoniof123 at 02:18 PM : Oct 22, 2007

Nicely worded 100 percent hype. Pelosi has only 11 percent behind her Reid about the same, thats about 300 percent more for Bush.

[jowand]

Well, if they revealed all of these airports problems then they''''d have to tell us about the aliens who have taken over our government right?

Posted by talkingham at 03:32 PM : Oct 23, 2007

Correction, attempting to take over our goverment.

[talkingham]

Well, if they revealed all of these airports problems then they''d have to tell us about the aliens who have taken over our government right?

[crater7]

YOU CAN''T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

THIS ADMINISTRATION IS ONLY TRYING TO PROTECT US. RIGHT?

TRUST ME.

STAY THE COURSE..........

[alphaa10-2009]

If Bush ever doubted his deceit and contempt for the welfare of the American public would bite him in the end, perhaps-- only perhaps-- he does now.

The Bush policy of malign neglect reared its ugly head in attempts by a Bush political appointee to remove portions of a report by government scientists about global warming. Science was found to be politically incorrect.

And now we find at NASA even public safety is politically incorrect. Air travellers are not to be told they travel in a faulty air traffic system-- it might upset them.

But NASA is at least consistent. NASA is the same Bush agency which, after Columbia burned, was told by Congress to fix the problem. Yet, after some three years of incompetence, NASA launched a year ago without doing so.

All this--- from "Your Katrina president at work!" Heckuva job!

[vastr-wcon]

.
This is typical behavior of the DickNBush crowd - which puts the US citizen (except millionaires/billionaires) last in all matters, particularly when corporate profits are an issue.

This matter is certainly related to the other news story today about Micro$oft. For those with short memories: the Clinton justice Department was actually, seriously investigating the criminal monopoly behavior of Micro$oft prior to the 2000 election and were likely to have broken up this criminal monopoly had the investigation been completed prior to the election. With the theft of that election by DickNBush, the investigation was stopped with only a weak slap of the wrist of Gates. That left prosecution of the criminal monopoly to the European Commission, which has made a good effort to protect consumers and to curb Gates'' greed and abuse of the marketplace.

These are more things for the DickNBush Repugs to be "proud" of. Show then how "proud" you are in your vote in November 2008.

.

[l8c6]

What does the public expect in the face of high fuel prices and consumers not willing to pay higher fares. Corners are cut somewhere.

Posted by nathan8804

Yep, for sure, in the world of 1/10 of 1% rule you can be rest assured the profits for this privatized corporate rule, the most massive accumulation of concentrated wealth in the history of the U.S., this proliferation of billionaire control will not be sacrificed.

[l8c6]

Our government only releases data if it benefits them, not US----Posted by BareEmperor

Clarification: Our privatized corporatized neo conized government. Reagan initiated the goal to get the citizens off "their" backs.

[antoniof123]

The Republicans are more dangerous than any other group in the world. But what I don''t get is they still have support of about 30 percent of the population. What is it with this bunch.

The Republicans, nicely summarized.

Posted by ibsteve2u at 10:23 AM : Oct 22, 2007

Nicely worded.

[creeper00]

God forbid we should let the truth out if it might jeopardize the bottom line.

Disgusting.

[mitch0927]

Cut airline travel completely.

[bareemperor]

Truth, and airline safety have never walked hand-in-hand. Thus, the airlines were easy victims during the 9/11 Bu$hit.
Most fliers recognize the only terrorists behind the mayhem on 9/11 were Bu$hCo operatives, not Saudi bad boys.
Our government only releases data if it benefits them, not US.

''NASA directed its contractor Battelle Memorial Institute, along with subcontractors, on Thursday to return any project information and then purge it from their computers before Oct. 30... The AP sought to obtain the survey data over 14 months under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.''

[andor3]

more evidence--the government puts a higher priority on the profits of the air carriers than on the safety of the passengers.

it''s just a phase of the ongoing plan by radical elements to make people in the US forget that WE are the government and it represents US not the corporations. They want people to resent the government and feel taxes are a burden so they can justify letting corporations run unchecked.

[rational_1]

"A senior NASA official, associate administrator Thomas S. Luedtke, said revealing the findings could damage the public''s confidence in airlines and affect airline profits."

Statements like that don''t do much for my confidence either.

[GRPDiver]

You have a greater chance of dying on the way to and from the airport, than on the plane. Yet people consider it government intrusion to require motorcycle helmets, seat belts, child safety seats, cell phone prohibitions, 0.8 BAC limits, reduced speed limits, aggressive driving enforcement, etc. In 2005 (latest data available), there were 37,594 motorist (drivers and passengers) and 5,849 non-motorist (pedestrians and pedalcyclists) fatalities. Compare this to zero airline fatalities in 2005. There are 0.019 fatalities per million trips on airlines and 0.130 fatalities per million trips in an automoble. The odds of being killed on a single trip are 52.6 million to 1 on airlines and 7.6 million to 1 in an automobile. It''s all about shock value -- an airline going down kills a lot of people at one time. About the same number killed by a bomb blast in Paakistan. So, yes, lets focus our attention and tax dollars on airlines instead of automobiles.

[nathan8804-2009]

What does the public expect in the face of high fuel prices and consumers not willing to pay higher fares. Corners are cut somewhere.

[missingamerica]

"A senior NASA official, associate administrator Thomas S. Luedtke, said revealing the findings could damage the public''s confidence in airlines and affect airline profits."

Making profits overrides any concern that an American should have the right to be made aware of any threat to them and theirs.

The Republicans, nicely summarized.