We really have a great deal of sympathy for anyone currently stranded by the almost total shutdown of European airspace.
Andy Hockley, a Brit who lives in Czikszerada/Miercurea Ciuc in Romania and who blogs here is one such stranded passenger. His attempts to get from Cambridge back to Romania (and now to Berlin) can be followed on Twitter.
We’ve missed enough flight connections and been snowed in too many times not to know that not getting home when you really want to, or need to, is distressing.
We once spent a day at Frankfurt airport with a six-month old baby in tow because although our flight from London arrived on time, it had to wait an hour for a parking berth at the terminal. In the meantime our connecting flight to Bucharest took off. Why is it that when you want them to be delayed, flights have an annoying tendency to take off on time?
Sod’s law.
But we have no sympathy for the increasingly prevalent idea that somebody has to be responsible, that this is somebody’s fault.
Sometimes, shit really does just happen.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
“But we have no sympathy for the increasingly prevalent idea that somebody has to be responsible, that this is somebody’s fault.”
EXCEPT when it’s clearly bullshit, as is every other type of millennial angst we’re being fed lately: swine flu, bird flu, catastrophic climate change, what have you. So yes, someone SHOULD be politically responsible for the economic losses and human misery wrought in the name of non-existent threats. Our societies are being infantilised and nanny-bullied into paralysis by the extent to which public policies are dictated by irrational panic — without anyone paying any sort of poltical price.
So what, it’s all a conspiracy to stop us from flying? No, not buying it. That’s one conspiracy theory too far.
But, will over-cautious governments keep planes grounded after it has become OK to fly? Quite possibly.
Of course it’s not a conspiracy. But it’s over-reaction and distorted perception of risk enshrined as the dominant principle of policy-making. Here’s another (micro-) example: in my partner’s office, staff are not allowed to sip hot drinks from open containers (ie, tea mugs are out) or to go up and down stairs without holding on to the banister.
A former head of the French pilots’ union has commented that he flew back and forth through months of soupy skies generated by Mount Pinatubo back in 1991, as did tens of thousands of other planes. And what happened? Nothing, of course.
So if the British government insists on banning flights when tests, past experience and common sense show clearly that there is no danger whatsoever, then someone at ministerial level has made a disastrous policy call and should take the blame by resigning and/or being financially liable. If you run a big factory and close down production because you’ve suddenly decided that thee mouse droppings pose an intolerable threat to health, will the shareholders not kick your butt? Of course they will.
The precautionary principle as applied today is the refuge of the ignorant and science-averse. So it’s all very simple: idiocy in decision-making should not go unpunished. I fail to see where the conspiracy comes in.
Apart from the fact that I’m waiting for half a ton of merchandise which should arrive here by air, people should consider travelling by ship.
The problem with airplanes is that when they do fall, the chances for someone to escape the accident alive are 0. I’m a person who believes in chances and estimations. A lot. Whenever I had the slightest chance to succeed in something I usually succeeded. That’s why I’ll never put my ass in any airplane in this life.
Air space should be used only by cargo flights. Passengers should use cars or trains or ships.
The stupid thing is that they won’t even let passengers to carry a parachute. At least I can jump and play my chance. But if something happens the only thing I can do is watch until I die.