A story this week from the NBC News site pointed out that
there really isn’t any one agency with the ability to declare any particular
airspace off-limits for reasons of safety or anything else. There is a United
Nations aviation agency, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),
headquartered in Montreal, that issues warnings and advisories to all member
nations, but the ICAO has no ability to impose or enforce no-fly zones. Individual
countries can declare their own airspace unsafe, but can’t be compelled to do
so according to treaties dating back to the end of World War I, and Ukrainian
authorities had declared the route Malaysia Airlines M17 was flying to be safe.
Various military coalitions have declared no-fly zones over the years, but
there is no such group involved in the Ukrainian civil war; The Netherlands are
part of NATO, but Ukraine isn’t…
Ultimately, the only thing most pilots have to go on are
temporary restrictions, usually called Notices to Airmen or NOTAMs, which can
be issued by (or occasionally about) specific airports or air corridors by
local air traffic controllers or national aviation agencies. No US carriers
were flying through Ukrainian airspace at the time because the FAA had issues
such a warning, but there is no consistency over what constitutes a credible
threat from one country to another, or even one controller to another. And
meanwhile, every airline in the world is under pressure to control costs (and
keep fares low), which means using the fastest and more direct routes possible between
destinations – even when that means flying over a warzone populated by
trigger-happy pro-Russian idiots…
Now, we should probably note that with the exception of the
United States and a handful of other countries, most national governments don’t
have the intelligence assets available to assess the threat levels present along
various air routes, let alone the airlines from that country. It might be
possible to avoid all flight routes that pass through even questionable
airspace, but only at the risk of driving airfares to a price level that will
exceed what the public is willing to pay, thus losing all customers and
eventually bankrupting the company. The truth is that air travel can never be
made completely risk-free, and consequently every airline has to find a balance
between risk and profitability that it is willing to accept. And with no
International standard to follow, some companies end up making bad choices…
It’s easy to criticize Malaysia Airlines for flying over a
war zone, but at this point in history the collection of local, national and
international warning systems – none of which has any authority over anyone but
the home country’s airlines – is so ridiculously complicated and miserably
ineffectual that it can’t really be described without the use of the word “cluster”
in there somewhere. And even if it becomes possible to appoint an international
agency to actually restrict unsafe air corridors and give the definitive word
on destinations, that still won’t protect carriers or their passengers from
rapidly-shifting lines of battle, missile batteries that aren’t supposed to be
in a given area, or idiots lobbing random projectiles into the general area of
somebody else’s airport…
No comments:
Post a Comment