▲ 147 points
back
184 comments
Has anybody modeled what this does to the overall system?
My impression is the system doesn't have all that much slack to begin with. And then to reduce all the major airports at the same time? And with the (current) expectation that next week will be worse?
Edit: this feels ripe for a simulator type of game. Assume X% of ATC walk off the job every week because they have to pay their bills and can't work ATC for free any longer. Assume Y% of TSA do likewise. Assume FAA increases acceptable fatality risk by Z% weekly. Give little sliders for X, Y, Z. See what conditions are required to let us make it to December 1.
More edit: It would be cool to compare this to natural shutdowns. For example, how does a 10% reduction overall affect traffic as compared to a given Nor'easter or hurricane or bomb cyclone?
More edit: give FAA the power to e.g. shut down airports and rapidly move & re-certify ATC on other airports, like regional triage. Maybe shut down Hobby and Austin and put everyone at IAH. Move to sectors, so there's a single airport operating in Texas and surrounding states, ATL in the southeast, etc. Game out how far in advance FAA needs to make all those calls in order to minimize fatalities. Game out what is the date after which air travel becomes less safe than driving. This could be like Railroad Tycoon, except from the regulator's perspective.
I would expect the airlines to ad hoc create a reduced master schedule in the interim until capacity is restored. They do this for major holidays, but many months in advance. Here they will be doing 72 hours in advance. Flights won't get "cancelled" they'll be NOOP (Not Operating) which is different. As an Ops Chief, this is heaven (while losing money). Tons of spare planes available. Lots of time to work on backlogged maintenance on the planes. Major headache is parking: it's not easy to have too many idle aircraft for a sizable carrier. Stowing them overnight becomes a choke-point.
> Has anybody modeled what this does to the overall system?
At this point I'd be more concerned about safety than secondary effects so I think they are making the right call. At the same time the economic impact will be massive.
The longer it goes on, I expect another statistic which is once the backpay check clears, people quit. Because this is bullshit. The backpay will not cover the financing costs of going into debt to cover bills, food, rent, mortgage. The government should foot that bill, but I don't think they will.
Is this the greatness I've been promised?
Aren't you tired of winning already? I certainly am.
Kind of glad I picked Amtrak to go down and visit family for Thanksgiving
Gonna be rough if the shutdown lasts to the end of November. Shame the usual suspects didn't get the memo about how badly their party was just decimated across the country. Should've been a canary in the coal mine moment
In my mind this is how you’re spending your holidays
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VTD96WhhC9w&list=RDVTD96WhhC9w...
Publix holiday commercials were something else
After my last horrible domestic flight experience, several trips to Japan, and watching an ungodly amount of Miles in Transit videos, I actually considered just doing 100% Amtrak for an upcoming trip.
Problem is, I live in Utah. The daily California Zephyr pulls into Salt Lake Central at 3AM, way after all the connecting public transit has shut down for the night. So just getting to the train will probably involve a night Uber at what I assume is extraordinary expense. Not to mention it's in the run-down industrialized car park part of downtown, not the nice part with the mall and LDS temple.
Additionally, Utah's class 1 railway is Union Pacific, a dogshit hedge fund running a decrepit railroad that clogs up downtown with shittons of long, slow freight trains[0]. Which means the California Zephyr is one of the most frequently delayed Amtrak services, even with Amtrak levels of padding. So that 3AM train could easily wind up being delayed several hours, and any connections through Chicago are almost certain to get missed. Not to mention it's a three day ride, which is a lot of time to spend on a train without access to a shower[1].
So Amtrak here is the worst combination of inconvenient and slow. I've heard the scenery on the Zephyr is absolutely amazing, though.
I ultimately wound up booking SLC - JFK and a connecting Amtrak from Penn Station to Pittsburgh, which turns out to be about the same time as SLC - JFK - PIT by air. In fact, the air layover is so long JetBlue won't sell you a connecting ticket.
However, I'm now afraid that itinerary is going to get wrecked by this stupid government shutdown, and if that happens I'm pretty sure I'm just out the money for both the plane, train, and hotel.
With infrastructure like this, why would anyone want to vacation in this awful country?
[0] To the point where pedestrians often ignore grade crossing warnings, expecting a slow freight train they can outrun, only to be turned into a fine red mist by a FrontRunner train going 80mph.
Also, if you're reading this and live in Utah, please tell your local representatives to support the Rio Grande Plan: https://riograndeplansaltlakecity.org/
[1] Please correct me if it turns out there are public showers for coach passengers.
I have to believe that they'll get their shit together before Thanksgiving. If this petty standoff ruins people's holidays, there will (hopefully) be hell to pay at the next election.
Watching officials describe how the NTSB is working hard to investigate the recent air disaster, knowing that many at NTSB aren't getting paid...
Are any getting paid?
> The move comes as air traffic controllers have missed their paychecks due to the government shutdown. Air traffic controllers and Transportation Security Administration screeners are among the essential government employees who are required to work during the shutdown.
Slavery never went away, it just shifted.
But at least the Republican goverment is doing something positive to curve climate change. If they shut down enough of the economy and people cannot afford gas anymore that will produce less CO2. Win?
I bet the assholes responsible for shutdown would solve the problem in an instant if they were to start losing money. But they are of course shielded from harm done to the rest of the population.
It should be a constitutional amendment that congress and the president get no pay during a shutdown (with no back pay) and pay a $1000 / day fine for each day that it remains closed. And shutdown for a month should trigger elections.
Most of the establishment are rich enough to not care, but more junior representatives would suffer.
It would become a war of attrition where the richest win because they can afford to.
Earlier: US may cut air traffic 10% by Friday without shutdown deal, sources say
(reuters.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45828203
No doubt flights between blue cities.
I'll give you a hint about all cities in the great us of a. https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-map-showing-trumps-004...
Wild times. I guess I'm just at a loss for words—what's going on in this country.
Out of touch billionaires are running the show, insulated from the problems they are creating. They are people who never have to set foot in a grocery store, worry about paying for a doctor's visit or, importantly here, fly commercial.
[flagged]
Divisiveness and extremism from both parties, when moderates are badly needed. On the issue of the shutdown specifically, there was some belief that Democrats (Schumer in particular) would approve a CR (resolution to fund the federal government) after the second “no kings” protest or perhaps after the election, like maybe it was a political tool they wanted to use for election gains. But it seems they’re content with just letting the shutdown continue indefinitely unless the COVID era “temporary” expansion of ACA subsidies is extended - which is effectively trying to make it permanent.
Why is a shutdown even possible? If there’s no agreement just use what was already law before. It makes no sense.
What other country has such a stupid procedure?
> Why is a shutdown even possible?
Because much of what the US government does, including paying most of its employees, is funded by annual appropriations, which are only valid for one particular fiscal year. As soon as that fiscal year ends and a new one starts, if new annual appropriations haven't been passed for the new fiscal year (or something else that provides funds, like a Continuing Resolution), all those things have to stop because there's no money to fund them any more.
There's no Constitutional requirement for all those things to be funded by annual appropriations; the only restriction the Constitution imposes is that no appropriation "to raise and support Armies" shall be for more than two years. It's just how the budgeting process has evolved.
> If there’s no agreement just use what was already law before
That won't work quite as you state it because "what was already law before" expired at the end of the last fiscal year.
A Continuing Resolution is an attempt to extend "what was already law before" for some period into the new fiscal year (in the case of the one passed by the House in September that was until November 21). But it still has to be passed as a law--it doesn't just happen automatically. Congress could put something in place to do that (since there's no Constitutional bar to that--see above), but they never have.
Other countries call it "Loss of Supply".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_of_supply
Usually it is interpreted as a loss of confidence in the government, resulting in the formation of a new government or the calling of an election. Potential loss of power is a pretty good incentive for a government to find a sensible solution.
Fun fact: this didn't happen before 1980 when the courts started enforcing the anti deficiency act.
I'd say certain countries in Europe give us a run for our money: https://caw.ceu.edu/other-activities/academic-blog/politics/...
better, US can move essential services to a separate budget and keep it away from this shutdown nonsense.
Have you lived in London or Paris? There are WEEKLY strikes on public transportation. I now live in the US and rarely a day goes by that my teammates across the pond don't complain about how bad the trains are to commute to work, half the time its because of a strike.
Maybe they should just cancel all the private jets that fly around and that would probably amount to 10% which would only affect the 1%.
What is stopping them from funding the things they have consensus on piece by piece while they continue debating the rest?
In short, horse trading. That is, if you have leverage in an adversarial negotiation, you'd be foolish not to use it to get more of what you want.
For example, as a prospective employee, if I knew that I was the only qualified candidate the employer had interviewed, and they really needed someone within a week, I'd know that I can ask for more salary. If I instead take the middle of the salary range, just because it's maximally acceptable to both parties, I'd be missing out
If they've funded all of the things they have consensus on, what would motivate them to fund the things they disagree about?
Seems like a win for reducing air pollution
Not if a significant fraction of people drive.
How many ATCs are there anyway? Surely the gov can find money from somewhere to pay them during the shutdown. They had no problem raising $250M to fund a ballroom (shows you how much of a bribe those "contributions" really were).
Its more important to brutalize your citizens with ICE.
Anyone figure out yet which 40 airports these are?!? All articles I have seen say 40 airports but don't mention which ones
Even if flights aren't cut, TSA and related staff are. I've heard rumors of 4 hour security lines at IAH.
sounds good for the economy
ICE agents still getting paid (with hefty bonuses) but they can’t pay ATCs. Trump priorities.
Email every representative available in your state and ask them to please either immediately reopen the government or resign and let in someone who will.