NASA won't disclose air safety survey

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by Dark Knight, Oct 22, 2007.

  1. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight New Member

    Messages:
    21,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    By RITA BEAMISH

    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.

    Details of leaked info at link:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071022/ap_on_re_us/air_safety_secrets&printer=1

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Amraann

    Amraann Former Member

    Messages:
    9,705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ignorance is bliss??

    I guess I am confused ... If the survey results are so bad then doesn't that mean they need to do something to fix the problem?

    Why should the public trust air carriers if they are not trust worthy?
    Does NASA really mean to imply that the financial well being of the airlines should supercede the safety of the flying public?
     
  4. natasha-cupcake

    natasha-cupcake New Member

    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Okay, so the government's job is to protect the financial security of large companies? Public safety, anyone???

    I'm with you, Amraann!
     
  5. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Under the Bush Administration it is. I know this isn't the Political Pavilion, but there's no reasonable way to discuss the suppression of this study without acknowledging that under Bush and Cheney, we've achieved a near-fascist level of favoritism for large corporations over the safety and rights of individuals.
     
  6. natasha-cupcake

    natasha-cupcake New Member

    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You said it, Nova!
     
  7. Marthatex

    Marthatex New Member

    Messages:
    17,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    NASA has a history of suppressing safety truths.

    This is but another example of how the public's safety is constantly being jeopardized because of suppression of scientific truths.

    If the government, though, wants to help out the airlines, why doesn't it do so in the way of up-dated air traffic control equipment and better paying airport and security jobs?

    Oh, they help them out, but not by any way that costs money, and improves the public's safety. The fact the the pilots are reporting more near-misses just may be because our equipment is out-of-date.
     
  8. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight New Member

    Messages:
    21,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Now it's my turn to agree with you. :eek: :p

    Protecting the insurance companies sounded like a rationale for the SCHIP veto, overriding the important of health care for poor children.
     
  9. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can the End of the World be far off now? I don't think so. :D

    I'm glad you didn't think I was hijacking your thread and, as Martha points out, this isn't the first time NASA has concealed info. But there is a context of protectionism under the current administration and I don't think we can ignore that.
     
  10. CaliKid

    CaliKid Former Member

    Messages:
    4,646
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Uh-huh, what she said! :D
     
  11. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight New Member

    Messages:
    21,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've been telling people the End if Near! This proves it! :cool:

    Remember how much money Bush/Cheney raised during both campaigns? It was record amounts. You know that much had to come primarily from business and industry. So they are fullfilling their obligation to those who financed them. Which all politicians do, of course, but in this case it had to come from some very large industries and companies, which then affects most of us.
     
  12. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    19,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I realize there are always concessions to large donors, regardless of the party of the administration. But it's clear we're seeing new levels of corruption. Part of it is the expense of campaigning and the resulting obligations, but I think part of it is also scorn for anyone who actually takes the concept of "public service" seriously.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice