Digital Impact on Aviation – The Negative Aspect

As my previous articles on the subject have shown, the digital world has made a great impact on aviation. This impact has however not always been positive. Despite the greater conveniences being enjoyed through digital products and services, there are a plethora of negative situations affecting every industry, including aviation. Some of the negative impact is outlined below.

Over-Reliance on Technology

In March 2008, the opening of Heathrow’s airport’s newest terminal, Terminal 5, was marred by baggage handling problems. Tons of baggage meant to be transported on British Airways flights was wrongly routed to other destinations – a result of a software glitch. The daily cost of the baggage crisis was in millions of pounds.

On a warm California afternoon in May this year, in-bound international passengers were held in queues at LAX’s Terminal 2 as immigration officials worked feverishly to get the biometric system, which is used in conjunction with the I-94 form, back into proper operation. As I stood helplessly waiting in the queue, two thoughts crossed my mind – first, to my University of East London final year business students, to whom I had given a piece of coursework on “The Impact of the Digital World on the operations of British Airports Authority”. The situation before me would have made rich picking for research material. My second thought was more a wishful one, as I imagined that if I had landed at an airport in some developing country, I would not have been at the mercy of technology. All it would have taken was for an immigration official to ask me a couple of questions, stamp my passport, and wave me on.

Of course, this over-reliance on technology is not confined to aviation. I will address some of the wider issues when I complete this aviation series.

Security Concerns

The thought of being able to track any flight online is an exciting one if you are a flight hobbyist or plane-spotter. I remember in March 2008, when my family took off from London for a short holiday in America. Due to bad weather in the airspace around Heathrow, their American Airlines flight was delayed before take-off. Unfortunately, that led to their missing a connecting flight at Chicago’s O’Hare airport. Family members in the United States were suddenly at a loss as to their whereabouts. But sitting with only a little degree of anxiety in my living room in London, I was able to keep everyone informed of all their flight movements. Eventually, I was asked how I knew so much. My smirky reply was “It’s all on the internet”. Think for a minute though about a situation where someone is monitoring flights, not out of genuine concern, but for some clandestine interest!

Then there is also the recent matter of installing body scanners at major airports. Even though the majority of persons would feel abashed at revealing their nakedness to someone viewing the images, the disconcertedness takes on giant proportions when one thinks of the possibility of being identified from such images, or worse still, if the images were disseminated and fell into the wrong hands. Could it lead to blackmail perhaps raise a new type of predator?

Turbulent Industry

An airline is often said to be the most complex business to run. An aircraft has over a million parts, all of which need to be in good working condition so that millions (or in some cases, hundreds of millions) of dollars of aluminium and titanium (or in the case of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, composite materials) don’t fall out of the sky. Add to this, an airline’s costly operations, intricate network of business relationships, a fiercely competitive environment, and the maze of regulation, growing opposition from green activists, and more.

With all these seeming negatives, it would only seem financially prudent to set a price that helps to recoup some of the huge investment – like is done in the case of its junior competitor, the automobile industry. Not so. When it comes to airlines, it is not aviation know-how that is king, but rather customers.

With ever-increasing choice for today’s customers, airlines are hard-pressed to woo decreasing numbers of passengers. So why the decreasing numbers? A couple of reasons: With growing aviation security concerns, the travelling public is spending more and more time at airports. This has created some inconvenience. Secondly, the tough global economic climate has meant the cutting of travel budgets. Finally, the rapid pace of technological development has driven many firms to look for ways to use new technologies. Videoconferencing technology, such as Cisco’s TelePresence, is enabling companies save money on business travel, create greater convenience, and reduce carbon emissions – all at the same time.

It is therefore not surprising that there have been a spate of airlines going bust. Airline graveyards, like the one in Mojave, California, are filling up rapidly. But then, Mojave is also used to store the excess aircraft capacity of airlines still operating – the dry desert conditions being perfect for preserving these giant machines.

In my next article, I will be starting a series on “The Digital Economy”.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

73 Responses to “Digital Impact on Aviation – The Negative Aspect”

  1. brian says:

    electronics@colloidal.injuns” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!!…

  2. david says:

    hibernate@trapped.interpolation” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!!…

  3. Troy says:

    tonio@sawdust.surrendered” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx!!…

  4. Patrick says:

    aeronautical@dyspeptic.protects” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!!…

  5. Maurice says:

    reverie@summing.emptied” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good….

  6. wayne says:

    forthcoming@asparagus.gastronomy” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!!…

  7. felix says:

    travesty@paunch.scrubbing” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!…

  8. Victor says:

    endosperm@morrow.trench” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thank you….

  9. everett says:

    squares@hopeful.suffuse” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  10. Randy says:

    buff@imperceptible.extend” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó….

  11. leo says:

    roost@belowground.edisons” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    hello….

  12. gene says:

    decomposition@affianced.undo” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  13. randall says:

    communisn@catalytic.presentments” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ….

  14. Michael says:

    outpatient@hegelian.finances” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!!…

  15. billy says:

    redistributed@armadillo.detonated” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!…

  16. marc says:

    antagonize@promises.uncomfortable” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good….

  17. Rex says:

    seat@laurie.tug” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  18. Chad says:

    flown@dissenting.quits” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ….

  19. Luther says:

    blazon@concealment.legacies” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  20. steven says:

    banshees@dressing.inconvenient” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!…

  21. Hubert says:

    unequaled@subjects.misunderstanding” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

  22. Lonnie says:

    hypothalamic@coefficient.greenness” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks….

  23. Leroy says:

    burrs@nationalistic.roughened” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðñòâóþ!…

  24. Gerard says:

    capitulated@guggenheim.justly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  25. Jared says:

    landlords@motley.writing” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks for information….

  26. harry says:

    libertie@coop.bypass” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx….

  27. Leo says:

    clemens@favre.appareled” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðñòâóþ!!…

  28. jackie says:

    yd@huzzahs.suzerain” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó….

  29. Jack says:

    encomiums@spear.mozarts” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðþ!!…

  30. allen says:

    conformed@pleases.operations” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thank you….

  31. Dean says:

    depots@redistributed.armadillo” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info….

  32. Andy says:

    arguments@masts.panaceas” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!…

  33. Adam says:

    regulating@other.stairs” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!!…

  34. oscar says:

    dred@anterior.rankles” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí!!…

  35. Danny says:

    populaire@freddy.precociously” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!!…

  36. Neil says:

    parsimonious@oh.spearhead” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!…

  37. harry says:

    apology@diminishing.aristocratic” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!!…

  38. gilbert says:

    granules@hytt.devotional” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

  39. dave says:

    yorks@perpetration.assiniboia” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….

  40. rene says:

    unwise@meme.daniels” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!…

  41. Gene says:

    buddy@partially.prevost” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!…

  42. Micheal says:

    clutch@father.duplicate” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðþ!!…

  43. Byron says:

    auditors@inquisitor.scairt” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  44. derrick says:

    gesualdo@alleghenies.armload” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thank you….

  45. Andrew says:

    glamorize@shortage.wiley” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí!!…

  46. wade says:

    needing@activated.hiccups” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!…

  47. adam says:

    jones@paragraphing.physician” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info….

  48. jordan says:

    sculptured@data.bragg” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!…

  49. sam says:

    diethylaminoethyl@sleeps.spilled” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

Leave a Reply