By Del Quentin
Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 1, 2008; D01
NASA yesterday
released partial results of a massive air-safety
survey of airline pilots who repeatedly
complained about fatigue, problems with
air-traffic controllers, airport security, and
the layouts of runways and taxiways.
Reacting to
criticism about its initial decision to withhold
the database for fear of harming airlines'
bottom lines, NASA released a heavily redacted
version of the survey on its Web site yesterday
afternoon. But the space and aeronautics agency
published the information in a way that made it
difficult to analyze.
NASA Administrator
Michael Griffin told reporters in a conference
call that the agency had no plans to study the
database for trends. He said NASA conducted the
survey only to determine whether gathering
information from pilots in such a way was
worthwhile.
Despite the lack
of analysis by NASA scientists, Griffin said
there was nothing in the database that should
concern air travelers. "It's hard for me to see
any data the traveling public would care about
or ought to care about," he said. "We were asked
to release the data, and we did."
The NASA database,
which included more than 10,000 pages of
information, was based on extensive telephone
polling of airline and general aviation pilots
about incidents ranging from engine failures and
bird strikes to fires onboard planes and
encounters with severe turbulence. The survey
cost about $11 million and was conducted from
2001 to 2004.
The survey
included narrative responses by pilots, but NASA
released the information in such a way as to
make it impossible to determine details of what
the pilots were describing. The narratives
sometimes included terse answers such as
"fatigue" and "crew rest."
Others were
slightly more extensive.
"Pilots asleep on
flight deck is a problem," one pilot said.
Another suggested that survey workers ask pilots
how often they fall asleep in the cockpit.
The reports
included discussions of pilots' difficulties in
talking to controllers in busy airspace. Air
traffic control "capacity inadequate to handle
traffic load," one pilot reported.
"There are too
many people on the frequency, and they are
causing a safety problem," another pilot
responded.
NASA had refused
to release the data several months ago in
response to a request by the Associated Press,
saying publication might affect the public's
confidence in the airlines. NASA was roundly
criticized by members of Congress and aviation
safety experts for refusing to publish the
survey.
Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), chairman of the
House Science and Technology Committee, said
yesterday that the agency should not have
redacted so much of the data nor released it in
a format that made it difficult to analyze. He
promised more hearings into the matter.
"It was just an
effort to get something out the door rather than
a serious effort to provide transparency,"
Gordon said. "It was heavily redacted, and there
is not much usefulness to the data until we get
more information."
Jim Hall, a former
chairman of the National Transportation Safety
Board, also criticized the way NASA released its
database. "When a government agency is not
transparent with the American people,
particularly on an issue like safety, they are
not fulfilling their responsibilities and
earning their pay," Hall said.
The debate over
the database comes as U.S. commercial aviation
is enjoying its safest period in history,
according to Federal Aviation Administration
officials. The last major fatal U.S. air crash
occurred in August 2006.
FAA officials said
they had no plans to launch an independent study
of the survey. But the FAA is looking at ways to
"integrate the data with the existing data we
have," said Laura Brown, an FAA spokeswoman.
Outside safety
experts said analyzing the database could
provide helpful clues that might prevent a
crash. "I hope that somebody will have the
initiative to crunch the data and be able to put
together trends," said John Cox, a former
investigator with the Air Line Pilots
Association, a major pilots union.