Machines or Pilots?

I don’t know how genuine the featured Ryanair advert is – it could well be “fake news” – but it does fit the cost-cutting image of Michael O’Leary! He has long advocated that he wanted single-pilot airliners by 2020, as well as advocating “stand-up” cabins (no seats) and passengers paying to use the toilets. A lot of this is usually dismissed as publicity stunts, but his recent stand-off with pilot unions clearly indicates that a no-pilot airline would be his ideal. It is quite enlightening to hear him contradicting himself about the importance of pilots: https://youtu.be/fSmnHbGMMok

He is not alone.

Research into autonomous flight is well underway. Boeing’s research has been underway since 2013 and Airbus has been working with French aerospace research company Onera and avionics manufacturer Thales for a number of years now.

The financial impetus to move to pilotless aircraft is immense – analysts see a potential profit opportunity worth about $35 billion for the aviation and aerospace manufacturing sectors. Read more here: http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/pilotless-commercial-aircraft-follow-money

Artificial Intelligence has already surpassed human ability – just research Google’s AlphaZero programme, which defeated Stockfish 8, a programme capable of calculating 70 million chess positions per second. AlphaZero, though, was not programmed or taught any chess at all. It taught itself to play chess in just four hours and then beat the 2016 World Champion (Stockfish 8) on the 7th December 2017. Yes – machines have long surpassed humans at playing chess, a game which for centuries was considered one of the greatest achievements of human intelligence.

We as pilots are inevitably quick to point out that no machine can match our intuition achieved through training and experience – forgetting that “intuition” is only pattern matching, a skill which algorithms have proved to be much faster and more consistent at.

We’re also very aware of passengers preferring two (or more) pilots in the cockpit – but younger people and new generations will be quicker on the uptake and may accept a no-pilot environment more easily. Just think of the many cockpit jobs which have become redundant over the past few decades – radio operators, navigators, flight engineers – all once essential. And now? Could pilots be next?

While I submit that we are inevitably on the road to autonomous aircraft, it will in all probability not happen very soon.

For instance, Thales is working on “genetic algorithms,” the fittest of which survive. Several variants of an algorithm are combined. The resulting second-generation algorithms are compared by having them solve a problem. Those most effective are kept and combined to create a third generation and so on. So the ninth or tenth generation will be significantly better than the first. The problem, the way I understand it, is that the algorithms’ solutions become unpredictable – not wrong, but unpredictable. And in aviation we need predictability – you cannot certify a component with unpredictable characteristics. We need to understand “why” the algorithm arrived at a particular solution.

Boeing has just learnt this lesson with the MCAS system on the B737-Max. While the designing engineers thought they understood the “hidden” system and its implications, the human-machine interface failed because of the failure to include it in pilots’ conversion training. The pilots were simply not expecting the excessive nose-down trim demanded by the system, due to the FMC being confused by a faulty AOA sensor. And here we’re not even in autonomous territory yet, because the pilot can still disengage the electric trim and revert to good old manual flight.

So while the MCAS of the Max can still be understood and be “predictable” – once we hand over complete control to the aircraft, it has to be completely predictable.

That “predictability” appears to be some way off – “If we cannot explain what the system does, we will have a hard time obtaining a certification,” said Virginie Wiels, Onera’s director of information processing and systems. Significant progress can be expected by 2021, according to Marko Erman, Thales’ chief technical officer. But Wiels does not foresee any application on the flight deck in the next 10 years.”

That would imply that the possibility exists to have pilotless aircraft airborne by 2030!

So O’Leary may have to wait a few years to see his dreams come true – until then, I’m afraid we need to understand the immense pressures pilots experience in a very demanding environment – one where their crucial role is progressively being denigrated and misunderstood.

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Don’t put your daughter on the stage, Mrs Worthington…

Noel Coward wrote this song in 1935. While there are a few theories about what induced him to write it, the gist of the lyrics is a list of reasons why Mrs Worthington’s daughter should not be allowed near the stage. Whether intended as a genuine rebuke or simply a bit of (very tongue-in-cheek British) humour, I’m appropriating it today for another ditty (you can use the original music, should you please).

Actually, it won’t be a ditty – my musical ability lags too far behind. But the revised title is:

Do or don’t you put your daughter or son in the air, Mrs Worthington?

It is a topic I’ve briefly touched on before, in 2016 and the Future for Pilots. The situation (halfway through 2018) is much the same, but a few pointers need discussion.

Over the past years, a number of forecasts have indicated that a world-wide pilot shortage is looming. At the RAeS Conference of September 2017 (Training for the new Millennium) the demand for airline pilots was depicted in this graph:

blog-cae-airline-pilot-demand-outlook-infographic

So we would need 70 new pilots per day to be trained – a total of 255 000 pilots required over the next nine years. For Africa and the Middle East the quoted number is more than 30 000 new pilots. The question is, where are they going to be found? I’ve discussed this before in Of Expensive Dachshunds and Landings, but my cue from Mrs Worthington is whether the prospective new replacements would be appropriately suitable, capable and safe.

In another RAeS paper, the International Pilot Training Association quotes the high cost as a barrier to entry for prospective pilots:
“The Outreach, Recruitment and Retention Workstream is targeting the pilot demand and aims to find ways of funding the ab initio training of pilots. With a demand of 600,000 pilots in the next 20 years and an average cost of £100,000 per Air Transport Pilot License, there are not enough pilots produced per year to cover both retirement and the growth of the industry”.

Also this:
“Next to the costs, there is a growing decline in the attractiveness of the pilot profession, as there are many other opportunities for young people. Women still represent only 7% of the pilot population. In China and India it is 13% but the interest of women in becoming pilots is likely still influenced by the myth that it is not a family friendly job”.

I would submit that this completely underestimates the current level of “unattractiveness” of the pilot profession.

The high cost should have been addressed long ago – a small group of airlines are now, belatedly, looking at finding ab-initio cadets to train. So yes, the cost is certainly a major barrier to entry.

To state that it is a myth that it is not family friendly is disingenious. The harsh reality is that a career as a pilot plays havoc with your family life. The fact is that pilots now no longer remain with one airline for a multi-decade career, but switch employers on average seven times during that career. This could mean moving a number of times to different continents – not necessarily what young families with children would find attractive.

That leads us then to the further problem our proverbial Mrs Worthington would face: The many thousands of new pilots required by 2027 would, of necessity, be so-called millennials – actually post-millennials, people born after the year 2000.

Millennials are a constantly connected, always mobile generation. Perhaps this could explain the decline in flying as a desirable career – aircraft (whether piloted by humans or machines) are simply another means of connecting them to the “now” experience. It is not something that warrants their total dedication and attention for many years.

I don’t believe that piloting could offer young post-millennials the instant rewards they seek – employers in other sectors would warn that millennials tend to “job-hop” very easily and regularly (for too many reasons to allow discussion here).

From the RAes Conference: “According to Rod Wren, CEO, Wings Alliance and Director Bristol Groundschool, around 50% of flight school graduates are not selected for airlines. “We need to train the right people,” he said. “Self-selection does not work. Instead, selection should be based on pilot core competences. Airlines need to engage with the flight training industry.” “We need to look at the person first before we look at their skills,” 

This is a scary point – one I’m afraid the training industry mostly overlooks to ensure a financial future. Not every bright-eyed millennial candidate arriving at your flight school would possess the competencies required to become a pilot – some should simply be pointed in another direction, rather than them wasting money on a very expensive training course.

These competencies have been well identified and documented, as set out in the Evidence Based Training (EBT) documents of ICAO, and IATA. In short, nine required competencies have been identified:

Two dealing with Flight Path Control – Manual and Automation;
Two dealing with Procedures – Knowledge and Application of Procedures;
and the remaining five all dealing with Human Factors or CRM competencies –
Communication,
Leadership & Teamwork,
Situational Awareness,
Workload Management, and
Problem Solving & Decision Making

Generalising, I understand the millennial mantra to be (remember, Mrs Worthington is all about generalisations):
(a) I am not responsible (for anything)
(b) If you hold me responsible, I will be traumatised and need counselling.
(c) My life is ruled by social media – I don’t need to learn all this stuff. If I need to know anything I simply ask Siri or Google.
(d) I live for now, your fascination with tomorrow is your problem.

This poses the problem that most of the competencies required for pilot training would not be met – unfortunately, acquiring the required level of knowledge and skill demands unwavering dedication and the acceptance of total responsibility.

Thus it would appear that the industry is soon going to run out of willing and suitable candidates.

What does that mean – what would the answer be?

The answer lies in algorithms and artificial intelligence – which already runs much of our lives (Google and your cellphone probably already know you better than you know yourself…)

In the US there is currently a concerted effort by ALPA to avoid a vote by Congress that would mandate manufacturers to research the potential for single-pilot airliners – and, by extension, pilotless airliners.

I believe that is simply delaying the inevitable.

The future of aviation is eventually going to be a pilotless environment, with autonomous aircraft whizzing your millennials’ kids between continents – and possibly between planets.

Fortunately for me, it is not likely to happen within my lifetime – oh, hang on, my cell-phone is telling me that my roster has changed, and with it my future…

So, should you put your daughter or son in the air, Mrs Worthington?

Featured image: Noel Coward and Julie Hayden, The Scoundrel.

 

 

(Dis)Service Animals?

Serious animal lovers – my family and I. We currently have a rescue dog, who has turned out to be the most intelligent and lovable animal. I have to state upfront that, having grown up with family pets and with some farm experience as well, I do actually know something about animals.

Malaika

Enjoying the sun on the boardwalk. 

One of the less enjoyable parts of my job is to sign the NOTOCs (Notification To Captain) for animals carried on board our aircraft. Less enjoyable, as I often see the distress these animals suffer. More about that later.

Firstly, let’s discuss the merits of carrying animals in the cabin – a hot topic on social media, where (in particular) some US airlines are taking serious flak for faux-pas with “service animals”. The use of inverted commas is deliberate, as many of these animals appear to simply be badly behaved pets owned by equally badly behaved passengers. Apparently US airlines opened themselves to abuse by allowing “service animals” and “emotional support animals” indiscriminately into cabins – a trend they are now attempting to reverse by imposing some restrictions.

Mostly it would appear that US passengers are simply trying to avoid paying for their pets’ transport. Animals are apparently carried free of charge in cabins – probably regarded as carry-on luggage!

But this has come back to bite some airlines (pun intended), where dogs have attacked other passengers and animals caused havoc in aircraft cabins, with lawsuits now the order of the day.

To my mind, putting an untrained animal in a stressful situation among strangers in an aircraft cabin is tantamount to cruelty. That’s apart from it being discourteous and possibly dangerous to other passengers. And I am sorry, but if you need a peacock or a pony as an “emotional support animal” on an aircraft, perhaps your psychologist should have advised you against using any form of public transport.

Fortunately, the airline I fly for has strict rules about service animals in our cabins. In fact no livestock is allowed, with service dogs being the only exception. Only dogs trained (or being trained) by the Guide Dog Association of SA and other organisations affiliated with Assistance Dogs International and the International Guide Dog Federation can be accepted as “service dogs”. Passengers need to complete assessment and declaration forms, signed by a medical practitioner and provide proof from the aforementioned organisations that the dog has received the required functional and familiarisation training – all this well in advance of travelling.

In my experience this works extremely well. We often have properly certified service dogs on board and they behave impeccably, with no or minimal disturbance to other passengers.

Any other livestock must be carried in specifically designed containers in the forward hold. (Referring now specifically to the airline I fly for and the B737). IATA Live Animals Regulations apply. By the way, these regulations do not recommend sedation, except under certain conditions and when carried out under veterinarian direction.

I mentioned earlier the distress these animals suffer – this I’ve seen first-hand many times. I don’t know about fish, snakes or birds – they’re a bit difficult to understand (and we often carry those). But dogs, cats, monkeys and other pets often appear frightened and very stressed. One big Alasatian became so stressed that he chewed through his container and was found running around on the luggage in the hold after we had landed.

IMG-20150401-WA0002-crop

Alsatian chewed his way out during a flight of under two hours.

IMG-20150401-WA0001-crop

Eventually caught by a professional, still aggressive to anyone coming close.

That is clearly not ideal and perhaps indicates how, despite our best intentions, these animals suffer when forced to travel.

Now I know that the airlines, freight forwarders, pet shops and vets make good money from the transport of livestock – it’s just that I would personally not endorse the endeavour. I’ve seen too much trauma in the front hold during my many pre-flight walkaround inspections.

And as for animals in the cabin – don’t even go there!

(Featured Image by JBR Ranch via Aviation Week; Other images by the author).

 

Ex Libris

Pilots don’t read very much.

Just ask any chief pilot or flight ops head and they’ll tell you that pilots don’t read NOTAMS or memos – or e-mails, for that matter!

However, when it comes to recreational reading, it may be a different story – certainly in my case.

I have a veritable library of “flying” books, ranging from the whole set of Ernest K Gann’s books, to many biographies and histories. I must have indicated as much somewhere in one of my posts, as about two years ago Pen and Sword contacted me to suggest that I should perhaps read some of their publications for possible review. Their logo includes the heading “Bringing you Closer to the Past” – which explains their catalogues of special interest publications. Long story short – after battling the SA postal service, I finally received From the Spitfire Cockpit to the Cabinet Office.

A typical Pen and Sword offering, this is the memoirs of the late Air Commodore JF “Johnny” Langer, CBE AFC DL. A career Royal Air Force pilot, he joined the RAF towards the end of WW2 and, as pilots could wait for up to a year for a flying posting , volunteered to fly gliders in India, preparing for airborne assaults in Burma. Later in his career he would return to the far East in various postings – the final time overseeing the creation of the Singapore Air Force.

JF Langer book

Post war he served on fighters, first in Germany and later commanding No 43 (F) Squadron – the famous “Fighting Cocks” at Leuchars. As a Group Captain he commanded RAF Valley and later became Director of Flying Training. In this position he set up the original Red Arrows in Gnats and saw their transition onto Hawks.  Of particular interest is his co-chairing of the multi-national committee to bring the Tornado into service, and his responsibilities in introducing the Hawk trainer into the RAF (and the US Navy).

Retiring after 37 years of RAF service, he served as Civil Aviation Security Adviser to the UK Government.

That’s the very short summary.

The book itself is typical of a self-written memoir, full of minutiae and sometimes quite long-winded. Bearing in mind that he wrote these memories down over three years while already in his eighties, it is easier to understand where the sometimes quaint and often almost archaic descriptions come from. Be prepared to decipher many bits of “RAF-speak” and a military attitude to most situations described – the writing often reminds one of a staff paper, but at least with some typically dry British humour thrown in here and there! At times he almost touches on ribaldry (he quite bluntly lists some of his youthful sexual conquests), but constantly one senses an understated but very detailed approach to the typical peace-time career of an air force pilot. This said, he is never shy to make mention of some of his achievements as a pilot and sportsman!

One issue, about which he minces no words, is his dislike of military personnel who did not meet his demanding expectations. He is particularly scathing about some senior officers whom he regarded as obstructive to his career advancement. His aim was to end his career as an Air Vice Marshall (AVM) – something he did not achieve.

Air Commodore Langer remained active in retirement, still acting as a tour guide at Kelmscott Manor in the Cotswolds well into his eighties.

From the Spitfire Cockpit to the Cabinet Office covers a period from the end of WW2 to the first military jets, through the Cold War and the Victor series, to the modern fast jets and the security threats to modern airliners. If military and aviation history is your cup of tea – then you will thoroughly enjoy this book!

Featured Image: World of Aircraft Design; WordPress.com.

 

 

 

 

 

On MAMILs and Jekyll & Hyde

While reading a recent Sunday paper, I added a new word to my vocabulary: MAMIL (Middle Aged Men in Lycra).

Around the area where I reside, MAMILs flourish – they thrive on the beautiful scenery and the abundance of coffee shops. They also seem to hunt in packs, but not silently and stealthily as one would expect – rather garish and brash colours give away the expensive stores their apparel was bought from, and loud conversation gives away their actual occupations (mostly finance and stocks).

Somehow, when I watch TV coverage of le Tour, the small, rather emaciated professional cyclists look – well, professional. MAMILs mostly look like beached whales on thin wheels, tottering into trendy coffee shops. When will they learn that tight lycra pants were probably not intended for the male anatomy?

When they actually ride, the Jekyll and Hyde personalities emerge: Apparently placid men in boring eight-to-five jobs suddenly turn into hooligans. The road rules, which they would (more-or-less) abide by when driving their BMW’s, Range Rovers and McLarens, are suddenly redundant. Now they are free to terrorise other road users – riding five abreast, hogging lanes, shouting abuse at anyone daring to come too close or show some irritation. Some MAMILs actually take to bashing on cars and threatening those who dare to stop at a red light in the lane they would like to occupy.

The fact is, you actually cannot be Jekyll and Hyde, not unless you happen to have a very serious personality disorder. You are either the one, or the other and the way you behave on a bicycle will indicate how you would behave in a car, in your day-job, as a father, husband…. In short, you may adjust your behaviour to suit certain situations or environments, but it does not change who you are.

This is an area of concern and new study in aviation Human Factors. We have accepted that behaviour style analysis can assist pilots and crew to understand themselves and others a little better – thus creating an environment where appropriate behaviours should assist in ensuring safety.

Now, however, we are considering other influences and personality becomes a focus area. Just compare the psychometric tests of, say twenty years ago, with those used by some airlines today: Chalk and cheese.

Modern psychometrics look for certain competencies (see ICAO competencies) in pilots. One would expect the basic technical knowledge and hands-on flying skills to be there – it is interesting, though, that only four of the nine required competencies are based on traditional flying skills: Flight Path Management (Manual and Automated) and Knowledge and Application of Procedures.

The other five required competencies are Human Factors skills: Communication, Problem Solving & Decision Making, Situational Awareness, Leadership and Teamwork, and Workload Management.

These competencies can obviously be enhanced by training and experience, but by ensuring that pilot candidates display these competencies, their training and successful integration into a safety culture is made easier.

The problem of Jekyll and Hyde still exists, however. If you display a disdain for rules and regulations in one aspect of your life – you will show the same disdain in other aspects. The FAA Risk Management Handbook mentions that Human Behaviour studies indicate that there is a direct correlation between disdain for rules and aircraft accidents.

Picture1

From: FAA Risk Management Handbook.

Bottom line is, whatever you wear and whatever your choice of Sunday morning transport, you cannot hide who you really are! And, if you happen to be a pilot – imagine others’ surprise at your law-breaking behaviour.

Would you let your wife and children fly with someone displaying a disdain for rules and regulations?

(Featured image from The Human Cyclist – WordPress.com)

 

Turbulent Times

Turbulence:

  • sudden, violent movements of air or water

  • a state of confusion, violence, or disorder

We use the word mostly in terms of politics, finance and, of course, aviation. Not many other fields of endeavour apparently experience such movement or confusion!

However, it is the aviation-related turbulence that holds our attention today.

I have recently been asked to comment on a turbulence event, experienced by one of the aircraft in the airline I fly for. As is usual with out-of-the ordinary flying encounters, social media immediately provided some passengers with a fleeting moment of fame. Words such as “I thought I was going to die”; the aircraft “going sideways”; and even people “getting up to open the emergency exits”….. the mind boggles at the thought!

But first, let’s deal with the phenomenon of turbulence. While this is not intended to be a lecture on atmospheric sciences or fluid dynamics, a simple analogy should suffice:

Air is a fluid, and like any fluid it wants to flow from high pressure to low pressure. This leads to the “highs and lows” depicted on your TV weather forecast. Like water, air wants to flow along the path of least resistance, so any obstacles or other flows encountered would lead to ripples and eddies, or in conflicting flows to crashing waves.

Turbulence can be experienced under a myriad of conditions. Thunderstorms, mountain wave, wake turbulence and clear air turbulence (CAT) are just a few of these. I have experienced wind-shear and mountain wave even at the highest flight levels – all contributing to possible turbulence. We describe turbulence in different categories, ranging from light, to moderate, to severe. Anything more than severe (possibly extreme)  could result in control loss or air-frame damage. (To read more about this, see ICAO’s guidance on turbulence.)

In essence, light turbulence would cause ripples in your coffee, moderate would make you spill your coffee and severe would send your coffee all over the ceiling. We would describe turbulence as moderate when equipment starts moving around and as severe when items dislodge and people are injured.

Forecasters can usually predict the areas where turbulence could be expected, but unless we have convective activity with water and ice particles reflecting on our weather radar, pilots cannot see it coming – so clear air turbulence (CAT) usually becomes apparent only once we’re in it.

On the day of this particular encounter Cape Town experienced a massive frontal storm, resulting in north-westerly surface winds of 27 knots gusting to 47 knots at the time this aircraft flew the approach. (That’s 50 – 87 km/h). This would equate to a crosswind component varying between 23kts to 41kts on runway 01. The B738 crosswind limit on a wet runway is 25kts – with the scimitar winglets a max of 15kts is recommended. However, with the visibility and cloud-base allowing, a circling approach with a landing on runway 34 could be considered (bringing even the gust into the allowable crosswind limit) and a number of aircraft reportedly did land on 34.

All this tells us, is that it was clearly a challenging approach with rapidly changing conditions causing some severe turbulence once below 5000ft. Winds over the Cape peninsula have their own very unique characteristics, with the upper winds almost always very strong westerlies and the lower winds affected by the mountainous terrain. (The well-known Cape south-easter in summer, for instance, is usually a purely low-level phenomenon below 5000ft.). So the wind conditions on descent could vary dynamically – quite easily causing turbulence, especially in the vicinity of the thunderstorms present at the time.

This is the nature of AWOPS (All-Weather Operations) which calls for flights to be conducted under all possible weather conditions. The rider is of course that all conditions must be understood, briefed, prepared for, and the go-around or diversion plan must be in place. So I am quite sure that the passengers on this particular flight were not in any danger at any time – very uncomfortable, yes – but not in jeopardy.

Passenger video recordings (now in the public domain) show one or two big jolts and some changes in the aircraft attitude, due to the changing wind speeds and directions. What is concerning is passengers clearly not adhering to safety instructions. Seatbelts not tightly fastened, children being passed around and sitting on laps, cellphones being used – clearly no understanding of how that cellphone or tablet could become a missile if you let go of it – the list continues…. (Remember that this is in the last ten minutes before landing, with the cabin secured and passengers supposed to have turned off all electronic devices). Video Here.

By the way, I flew the aircraft concerned two days later and found the event described in the technical logbook as “severe turbulence” experienced for a short period. The aircraft was inspected as required and found to be completely serviceable and safe.

Turbulence in the air is a fact of life, just as ships will roll and pitch in high seas, or your car will rattle and shake over rough gravel. As pilots, we try to avoid or mitigate it as much as possible, by avoiding forecast areas, descending or climbing, or even slowing down to the recommended turbulence penetration speed.

Turbulence is also forecast to increase in intensity. Scientists advise that, due to climate change we could expect natural events to become more isolated, of shorter duration and much more intense.

A recent study by Paul Williams of Reading University, published in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Sciences forecasts that severe turbulence events could increase by 149% over the North-Atlantic routes – I’m quite sure that the same could be expected locally.

If turbulence worries you, my advice would be to check the weather forecasts before you fly: Should thunderstorms and high winds be possible, change your flight to another day. Once a strong front starts moving from west to east over South Africa, you could expect high winds and possible turbulence aloft. In summer, fly in the morning!

 

 

Turbulence pax

Turbulence can be unnerving for most passengers. (Pic: traveller.com.au.)

But more importantly, listen to the Captain’s briefing and adhere to the Cabin Crew’s instructions. The illuminated seat-belt sign is not a signal to get up and visit the toilet!

Should you experience some unnerving turbulence, be assured that the crew will do everything possible to alleviate the situation and that the aircraft is built strong enough to take severe turbulence in its stride.

Turbulence mess

Aftermath of a turbulence encounter: Singapore SQ308, June 2013. (Pic: @Alan Cross via Daily Mail).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read between the lines…

“The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses”.  – Malcolm X –

I’m always fascinated when the ultimate truth of any assertion can be proved by stating “I’ve seen it on TV / read it in the newspaper / seen it on Twitter”, et cetera. Too often something proposed as gospel truth is preceded by the statement “they say….”.

The major difference between the media of Malcolm X’s era and today is the internet and social media. Which means that the power of the media is now in your and my hands – it is no longer held by the media houses and TV majors. Anyone with access to a cell’ phone can now become an instant reporter – even with no training or understanding of the power of the media.

The airlines are learning this lesson the hard way – just consider the recent furore on both United and American. I’ve touched on the issues of social media before, refer to my blogs Evacuate! Evacuate! Are you ready? and Beware the Jabberwock, my son! . But now it has become even more dangerous, when 140 characters going viral in an instant could potentially bankrupt an airline. It would actually appear to me that passengers are now simply waiting for any little irritation or slight problem to pounce on with their cell’ phones, and once it has gone viral, hoping to sue for some huge compensation.

Chris Manno2

 

Let me get this straight: The way the United crew removed the passenger on the viral video clip is not acceptable and the airline deserved the fallout. Similarly, the way the American crew reacted to the mother and stroller was unacceptable.

But, I believe in the old adage that there are always three sides to a story: Yours, theirs and the truth (and no-one is lying). The bottom line is that airlines and crews need to be very aware of the pitfalls associated with social media. We need to watch our every step and every action, ensuring that no opportunity exists for untoward internet exposure. We need to ensure that all three versions of the truth actually correspond – then we could avoid the negative impact of the viral video phenomenon.

Chris Manno

With the recent emergence of “fake news” and “paid Twitter”, the other danger we are exposed to is that the “they” we so often quote as a source of information could actually be disingenuous – their “facts” should be taken with the proverbial pinch of salt.

So, the next time someone starts telling you about what “they” say – rather ask “who?”, before endorsing it.

(Cartoons by Capt. Chris Manno – @Chris_Manno)
(Featured image by ParkSleepFly.com).