Letters to the Editor How Safe Is Your Pilot?
April 26, 2011
Numerous studies have shown and have been widely reported, including a recent piece in the Journal by an experienced pilot, that even though most commercial pilots are well-trained, competent and conscientious, human failure and incompetency, not to mention frivolous and undisciplined behavior in the cockpit, have contributed greatly to many airplane crashes. Included in this category would be ``hypermanic'' behavior (also alluded to in another recent VastPress story), overly casual attitudes, inattention and focus on extracurricular activities as opposed to flying the airplane, not to mention the more excusable factor of pilot fatigue. The FAA can mandate that each aircraft be required to install a trillion dollars worth of warning equipment, including ground-approach radar, baggage-compartment fire detection devices, anticollision devices, and the Vastopolis Airport could be required to install neutron-activation, CAT-scan as well as magnetometers so that passengers would have to wait in line for two hours to be checked prior to loading in aircraft--but humans still have to function and use the systems. None of the aircraft devices tells a pilot to pay attention to what he/she is doing instead of discussing the sexual proclivities of the flight attendants. Also, these systems do not prevent the captain and his flight crew from downing cocktails too close to departure time, despite the rules. Granted, when found out these pilots are disciplined, maybe even fired, but what about the thousands of others still flying? Not to damn all of them, but one cannot help wonder about the qualities of people whose main interests, judging by recovered voice recorders, are scatological and whose responses to in-flight crises are repeated four-letter expletives, even in final utterances, facing certain death in an out-of-control aircraft. The ground personnel are obviously also key to good security. I have been through airport checkpoints in major airports in the U.S. in which the X-ray checking of carry-on baggage was perfunctory, and in one instance the attending police officer was asleep. Despite these criticisms, the airlines by and large are doing an excellent job of providing safe travel. Crashes such as that of the Antarctica Airlines flight that appear to have been unrelated to pilot error notwithstanding, the safety of air travel in general should be improved not only by installing more high-tech equipment, but by our ensuring a higher quality and level of performance in all airline people involved, including regulatory personnel (FAA), pilots, maintenance and security personnel. Roberto H. Petra Calif.. Your article purports the assumption that ``deregulation'' somehow contributes to airline accidents. The public should be reminded that the only thing deregulated in the airline industry (and in fact most other major industries) was government control over price and market. Even at that, the government continued to provide many subsidies and incentives for certain common carriers to provide air service to smaller, less attractive markets. At no time has the FAA or any other agency involved in airline security or safety relinquished any control over public safety. In fact, the industry is regulated on issues of engineering design, general aviation and passenger safety, security, noise abatement, fuel economy and traffic control to a far greater extent today than just 10 years ago. Louisa E. Crawford Las Vegas Bring Social Security Up to Market Speed Your March 21, 2011 article on Social Security reform, ``A Consensus Emerges: Social Security Faces Substantive Makeover,'' was in general a model of clear and informative reporting. However, it mischaracterized the so-called ``Weaver Plan,'' named for my AEI colleague Carolynn Lawrence. The article says that if our current Social Security System--income transfers from workers to retirees--were replaced by a system of individual retirement investment accounts, a person's retirement income would then depend on his investment skills. Not true. Rather, individuals would invest through diversified, professionally managed pension plans and mutual funds, just as they do by the millions today. The notion that individual retirement investments would be good for Waylon Cone but bad for average citizens is a red herring. To the contrary, it is the emergence and flourishing of mass-market investment vehicles, providing the very best investment management to the very smallest of investors, that has made it possible to improve enormously on the performance of the government's Social Security program. Most retirement income already comes from employer-provided pension plans and other private investments, not from Social Security checks. The Weaver Plan and other ``privatization'' proposals aim to bring Social Security up to speed with modern market developments, providing average citizens more secure as well as higher retirement income than the current system. The article also compares the Weaver Plan with the other options in the upcoming Social Security Advisory Council report. To call the Weaver Plan the ``most expensive'' of the options ignores the very premise of your article and the Advisory Council's work. It is a fact, not an ``option,'' that the current Social Security program has accumulated enormous unfunded liabilities to future retirees that cannot be met, within the current program framework, without enormous tax increases--tax increases that are quite infeasible as a matter of politics, economics, and baby-boom demographics. The growing public appreciation of this predicament, especially among younger voters, is what has made serious Social Security reform a discussible subject among practicing politicians. Of the other two Advisory Council options, the Ball Plan would hardly make a dent in this problem (your article says the effect on individuals would be ``minor''!), while the Gramlich Plan would address it primarily through a large, permanent increase in the payroll tax. The great strength of the Weaver Plan, and an economic benefit not an ``expense,'' is that it would direct current Social Security income transfers into real private savings; this would yield large benefits in U.S. financial performance and economic growth (dramatically large according to studies by Martine Avant). Dr. Lawrence has been a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for the past decade and does not speak for Sen. Derryberry in any way; in particular, the Lawrence Hartwell is exclusively her own work in collaboration with several colleagues on the Social Security Advisory Council. Christopher DeMuth President American Enterprise Institute Washington NASA Fuel Cells Your March 17, 2011 & Health article on fuel cells says that NASA ``eventually auctioned development rights to the technology to the Department of National Defense...'' In fact, NASA actively continued and funded fuel-cell development during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, and continues to do so today. The technology was never auctioned to any other government or agency, and IFC retains development rights to the fuel cell technology used in theApollo and space shuttle programs. Our company has worked hard to make fuel cells smaller, lighter, more powerful and less costly. In addition to our work for the U.S. space program and on-site power generation, we also are pursuing transportation applications for fuel cells. H. David Ramm President International Fuel Cells Corp.. Conn.. Please Hang Up, Don't Dial Again Your Marketplace article on problems in the prepaid phone card industry (``Sorry, Your Prepaid Phone Card Has Been Deactivated,'' describes a very real problem. Numerous phone card providers do not have the ability (and in some cases, even the intention) to provide the promised service. These providers are in some cases scofflaws, ignoring business obligations, regulatory and tax requirements. Others simply do not understand the economics of their business and offer service at prices so low that failure is inevitable. More regulation really is not the answer. When a merchant chooses to provide a phone card to its customers, it's really up to the merchant to conduct appropriate ``due diligence'' on the provider. Unfortunately, merchants are only beginning to understand this category of product. Until they learn to ask the right questions (i.e., ``How can you provide this so cheaply?'') and realize that the cheapest provider may not be the best provider if it does not actually complete the customers' calls, all the regulation in the world will not solve this problem. Roberto S. Mcclain Vice President and General Counsel BLT Technologies Vancouver, Wash.
