The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. In the headlines this Tuesday, the death toll in the California plane crash rose to 85. Seventy-nine are now known dead in the sinking of a Soviet cruise ship. The United States and the Soviet Union exchanged more charges over the arrest of an American reporter on spy charges. And Eastern Airlines will lay off 1,500 employees in a major cost cutting effort. We will have the details in our news summary in a moment. Robin?

ROBERT MacNEIL: After the news summary, we have a major focus section on the aftermath of the California air disaster. With representatives of airline pilots, private flyers, and a congressman, we examine whether private planes are a menace to airliners. Then part two of our week long series on education. Tonight's documentary report looks at the problem of school dropouts. News Summary

MacNEIL: The death toll in the Cerritos, California, air disaster now stands at 85 with the discovery that 18 people were killed on the ground. Sixty-four people aboard the Aeromexico jetliner and three in a small private plane also died when the two aircraft collided on Sunday, showering flaming wreckage on the houses below. We have a report by Peter Grauman of public station KCET, Log Angeles.

PETER GRAUMAN [voice-over]: All of the people killed on the ground were in two neighboring houses. Three family members died in this home, and 15 people attending a party next door all died when the fuselage of the Aeromexico DC-9 smashed down on this once quiet neighborhood. Flags at Cerritos City Hall were lowered to half mast this morning as civic leaders declared their sympathy for the victims' families.

MICHELLE OGLE, City Information Office: Mayor Knabe would like everyone to know that the city is in mourning for all of those who died in the planes and on the ground, and we will do as a city whatever is possible to repair the lives and the homes in the area of the incident.

GRAUMAN [voice-over]: And in the disaster-stricken neighborhood, residents were talking about the friends and neighbors they have lost -- people their children grew up with.

GAIL GROSSMAN, Cerritos resident: Kids have grown up together, we've car-pooled to different things -- preschool and everything. And we've known them all. We all moved in together. We all put our fences in together.

MacNEIL: The National Transportation Safety Board said today it was not certain that the pilot of the small plane had actually suffered a heart attack, as was reported last night. At a press conference late this afternoon, John Lauber, in charge of the NTSB investigation, said radar and voice records showed the pilot of the Aeromexico jet had been advised about a minute before the collision that an aircraft on visual flight rules was in his area. That aircraft showed the 1,200 code found on the transponder of the downed private plane.Lauber said a short time later, another aircraft popped up on the radar screen.

JOHN LAUBER, National Transportation Safety Board: Two aircraft, okay? When Aeromexico first makes the call, very shortly after that, Los Angeles Tracon gives them the traffic call, "Traffic ten o'clock, one mile, northbound, altitude unknown." All right? That's one -- one VFR aircraft. The other -- and we don't know whether the traffic called in that case was, in fact, the Piper aircraft involved in the accident or not. We haven't been able to reconstruct the path of the radar data path back that far at this point. So we don't know whether that aircraft was, in fact, the accident aircraft. Then the second aircraft was the VFR traffic that called up -- the pop up.

Questioner: Would the Aeromexico pilot have been able to see either that call about ten o'oclock or the Piper?

Mr. LAUBER: That remains to be seen. There are so many variables that we'll have to look at before we can make a determination of that that it's impossible to answer at this point.

MacNEIL: Lauber also confirmed that the air traffic controller was momentarily distracted by a third aircraft. When he returned to deal with the Mexican plane, he got no response. The so-called black box recorders from the airliner arrived in Washington for examination by the NTSB. An official said both had been severely damaged by impact and fire, and it's uncertain how much information they will provide. The least damaged recorded cockpit conversations. The more severely damaged box tracked aircraft movement. Investigators also said that the two aircraft apparently collided almost head on, left wing to left wing, in a clear sky. Jim?

LEHRER: There are now 79 known dead in the Soviet cruise ship disaster, but authorities in Moscow said another 319 passengers were still missing. The passenger liner Admiral Nakhimov sank Sunday night, 15 minutes after it was stuck amidships by a Soviet cargo ship in the Black Sea. There were 1,234 people on board, of whom 836 were rescued.

The other major Soviet story is the continued detention of U.S. News & World Report reporter Nicholas Daniloff on spy charges. The magazine's publisher, Mortimer Zuckerman, said the arrest was outrageous. He was in Moscow trying to secure Daniloff's freedom. Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole also sent a telegram to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev demanding Daniloff's release. In Moscow, a Soviet spokesman denied U.S. charges the reporter was framed. He said Daniloff was caught red-handed with secret Soviet government documents. Back in Washington, State Department spokesman Charles Redman was asked if the Soviets might be looking to exchange Daniloff for Gennady Zakharov. He's the Soviet United Nations aide arrested in New York August 23 on spy charges.

CHARLES REDMAN, Defense Department: We can't rule out that the Soviets are trying to influence the Xakharov case by arresting Daniloff. The two cases, however, are completely different in nature. The Zakharov case will be prosecuted on its merits in strict conformity with U.S. law. With regard to Daniloff, his detention on trumped up charges isn't warranted. And, as I've said, we've called for his immediate release.

LEHRER: There was no immediate comment from the State Department on wire service reports concerning the Western hostages in Lebanon. The report said the terrorist group known as Islamic Jihad had accused the United States of intervening in an effort to release a French hostage. The charge said a U.S. envoy insisted the remaining U.S. hostages be involved in the deal, and it fell through.

MacNEIL: In business news, Eastern Airlines announced it was laying off more than 1,500 employees to help cut costs by $160 million. The airline which is trying to counteract heavy losses this year, said the cuts would not hurt service. An attempt by Texas Air to take over Eastern has been stalled by the federal government.

The Commerce Department reported a sudden increase in factory orders in July, but attributed it mainly to military contracts. The increase, 2.2%, was the largest in 8 months.

LEHRER: The U.S. Secretary of Education put in a good word for elementary schools today. William Bennett marked the opening day of school by visiting an elementary school in the Washington area. He also issued a report saying elementary education is not the disaster area of American education many believe it is.

WILLIAM BENNETT, Secretary of Education: In the first few grades especially -- K through 4, K through 3 -- things look good. Most of our younger students are learning to read, to write, and to perform basic mathematical functions. But something seems to happen between the first few grades of elementary school and its conclusion. In general, as our elementary schools get older, as our children get older, their performance begins to decline. And by the time they reach the upper grades, we begin to amass data from international comparisons in which our students lag behind those from other nations in mathematics, in reading, and in other areas.

LEHRER: The other first day of school story was about teacher strikes. Some 45,000 students were affected by such strikes in four states -- Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania. Others have been called in school districts in Rhode Island, Washington State and Massachusetts.

MacNEIL: Federal prosecutors today charged Tennessee banker, C. H. Butcher, Jr., and James E. Steiner with conspiracy to commit income tax fraud. It was the latest in a series of federal and state charges against Butcher, following the collapse of his Southern industrial banking corporation three years ago. Three days ago, the two were acquitted of fraud charges.

In Naples, Florida, tobacco heir Steven Benson was sentenced to two consecutive life terms for the bomb deaths of his mother and adopted brother. The 35 year old Benson has no hope of parole for 50 years. He could have received the death sentence. The prosecution said he killed the two and wounded his sister with pipe bombs, because he believed his mother was about to cut him out of her $10 million will.

And in Los Angeles, Cathy Evelyn Smith, a former back-up rock singer, was sentenced to three years in prison for injecting drugs into the late John Belushi, the comedian. She had pleaded no contest to the charges.

LEHRER: Finally in the news of this day, three Dutch balloonists set a new transatlantic crossing record. They flew from Newfoundland to a wheat field in the Netherlands in 51 hours and 14 minutes. The balloon crossed the coastline near the town of Velsen. The crew had to drop lead weights in an effort to gain altitude. Some of them smashed through roofs below, but nobody was hurt. The balloon was travelling nearly 30 miles an hour when it approached the landing spot seven miles further inland. It was a rough landing, but none of the three Dutch balloonists was injured seriously. It was the first time that Europeans had made the crossing in a balloon.

And that's it for the news summary tonight. Now it's on to a major discussion of air safety questions raised by the Los Angeles air disaster. And to an education report by John Merrow on the dropout problem. Overcrowded Skies

MacNEIL: Our principal focus tonight is what the California air disaster reveals about the safety of commercial airliners flying near small, private planes. As we reported, investigators said today it was not certain that the pilot of the small plane that collided with the Aeromexico jetliner had actually suffered a heartattack, as had been reported yesterday. The pilot of the Piper aircraft, William Kramer of Los Angeles, took off from Torrance Municipal Airport shortly before noon on Sunday. The Aeromexico airliner was descending to land at Los Angeles International Airport. The collision occurred at 6,200 feet over Cerritos, California. The skies of Los Angeles are among the busiest in the nation. In addition to Los Angeles International Airport, there are seven other commercial and military airports in the area -- a situation some safety experts had warned could lead to a major incident. Jim?

LEHRER: We're going to get the varied views of four people with special perspectives on the questions raised by the Los Angeles tragedy. First, Henry Duffy, president of the Airline Pilots Association, the union for 39,000 commercial airline pilots in this country. He has been a captain with Delta Airlines for 20 years.

Captain Duffy, what does the preliminary information add up to you, as far as what may have caused that accident?

HENRY DUFFY, Airline Pilots Association: Well, it tells us perhaps that the general aviation airplane was not following all the rules for the terminal control area where he was. I think that's an important determination that the National Transportation Safety Board has to make, because we're either going to have to broaden the rules and make these terminal control areas even more safe, or if in this case we had someone that was violating the rules, it's a completely different situation. Jim, I think the --

LEHRER: Terminal control area means literally that map that Robin just talked over. That's a terminal control area. All those -- all those small airports and the big airport?

Mr. DUFFY: No. Actually, it's kind of a key that's designed around the Los Angeles International Airport, which is a high density area, to ensure that all of the airplanes operating in that area have two way radio communications and that they're transponder equipped in order to tell everybody and tell the controllers where each of the aircraft are.

LEHRER: So, from your perspective, and it's been established thus far, that plane should not have been where it was when that Aeromexico plane came down.

Mr. DUFFY: Not without having established two way radio communication.I think the important thing here, at least as far as the airline pilots are concerned, is there is technology in existence right now that could have avoided the accident. The airborne collision avoidance systems have been under development for some years. They just have not had priorities put on them. We need in the cockpit the technology to see out in front of us and spot airplanes that are on collision courses, give us an alert in the cockpit, and then let us take the evasive maneuver necessary to avoid that other airplane.

LEHRER: Well, what about a system that allows it to get even that close to where you need collision avoiding system in the cockpit?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, I think, you know, the collision avoidance system in the cockpit is certainly the backup. We don't need to do away with any of the rules that we've got now. What we're saying is, the old see and avoid system -- the system that pilots have used over the years -- just doesn't work in these high density areas. And certainly pilots need to continue to look out and try to visually spot other aircraft, but in areas like Los Angeles, where you have smog and restrictions on visibility and a lot of airplanes, and everybody's very busy, we need the latest technology to help us.

LEHRER: Is it standard operating procedure in that kind of situation for the copilot or the pilot or somebody to be looking around all the time, or are you looking at instruments? What's it like landing at Los Angeles International?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, it's busy, first of all.

LEHRER: But what -- busy doing what?

Mr. DUFFY: Well --

LEHRER: Looking inside or outside?

Mr. DUFFY: First of all, you're in more than you'd like to be, just because you're constantly changing communications radios, you're doing -- changing navigational radios, you're doing pre-landing checklists. And so while theoretically you're supposed to be able to keep your eyes outside, you've got to get the other stuff done too. I mean, everybody is trained from the first time they sit down in an airplane to look outside and to keep their heads swiveling and looking around for traffic. But you've also got to get everything done inside, and it just gets too busy sometimes to look out.

LEHRER: What about the system, Captain, that is designed to keep private aircraft out of the way of airliners in crowded situations. Obviously, it didn't work in Los Angeles. Is that a problem from your perspective?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, I think it's a problem. I think we've got to find out why the general aviation airplane penetrated the TCA -- the terminal control area -- without making the proper communication. I think once we learn that or if maybe the communications was lost somewhere -- I mean, that's happened before too. We've got to find out where the flaw was, then we'll find out how to fix it.

LEHRER: As a general thing, Captain, do you and your fellow airline pilots sit up there sometimes wondering if there are little general aviation planes in your area that you don't know about coming below you, either side of you or whatever?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, we're concerned, just as the general aviation pilots are concerned. I mean, sometimes there are just too many airplanes up there. The controller tries to tell us and tries to give us the information as to where the airplanes are. A lot of times we look out, we don't see anything. And that's why we're saying we need the electronic technology in the cockpit that provides us, after all, with the same information that's now being fed to the ground controller. Ground controller gets this information and then has to relay it to the pilot in the cockpit. That's one extra link that we don't need in that chain. We need the information coming straight into the cockpit, an alert device that then tells us how to take an evasive maneuver to stay out of the way of the other airplane.

LEHRER: Is it your conclusion that if that instrument had been in the cockpit of this Aeromexico plane, there would never have been a collision?

Mr. DUFFY: Absolutely.

LEHRER: How do you know that, sir?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, we have seen the technology. They have tried it out. They've tried it out on test beds. And it works. And the only thing we're lacking is a priority and funding and a push from the Federal Aviation Administration to get this to the development -- through the development stage to the point where we can get them installed in the cockpit. The time's now.

LEHRER: All right. Captain, thank you. Robin?

MacNEIL: For another view, we have John Baker, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, a Washington-based lobby group with more than 250,000 members. Mr. Baker is a former assistant administrator at the FAA and a pilot who has logged more than 11,000 flying miles, some as an air force fighter pilot.

Mr. Baker, do you think the system for separating commercial flights from private or general aviation flights is adequate in the light of Sunday's accident?

JOHN BAKER, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association: I think, as Captain Duffy said, Robin, Sunday's accident is almost irrelevant so far as that question goes. Statistically, I would have to say the answer is yes. We have been keeping records on airliners since 1939. Over that period, including Sunday's accident, we have had eight midairs in which there were fatalities in the airline aircraft. The last one prior to this was 1978, and in that time frame we probably ran something over a billion flight operations. So statistically, the system is working. This particular accident, I think Captain Duffy pretty well has hit it on the button -- we have to find out why that airplane was in the air space. The terminal control area is the most rigidly controlled air space in the United States. There is no reason for an incursion in there unless there was confusion on the part of the pilot, equipment failure of some kind, or, indeed, a medical problem. I find that somewhat hard to accept, however.

MacNEIL: I'm told that I said that you'd flown 11,000 miles. I meant 11,000 hours, speaking of statistics.

Mr. BAKER: You're right.

MacNEIL: Well, if it's such an anomaly, what do you say to Robert Nieto, the secretary general of the Aeromexico employees union who said today, "Smaller planes frequently go through controlled air space in the United States without advising controllers."

Mr. BAKER: I find that quite an interesting observation, because most of us who have flown in Mexico go in with the perception that it's "You all watch out once you cross the border." And for them to criticize the world's best air traffic system, I find hard to accept.

MacNEIL: Well, whatever happens in Mexico, is it accurate to say that this frequently happens in this country?

Mr. BAKER: No, it's not accurate. We run something in the order of 200,000 operations a day in this system. The pop up or the inadvertent incursion into controlled air space does happen. There's no question about it. But not necessarily in a hazardous fashion. It's one of those anomalies that shows up as being nonstandard operation.

MacNEIL: What do you say to Captain Duffy, that the old see and avoid system just doesn't work any longer in crowded conditions like Los Angeles.

Mr. BAKER: I won't accept it categorically, but I think pretty clearly, from your carrier perspective at least, the TCAS -- The Collision Avoidance System -- has legitimate requirement. I think it's part of a whole series of areas where we've had a shortfall on the part of the federal government in terms of modernizing the air traffic system, automating it, making it less labor intensive, giving us the new equipment which will do a myriad of different things for us. So I think we're probably in accord on that issue.

MacNEIL: Well, you -- so are you endorsing his call for the installation of these collision avoidance electronics?

Mr. BAKER: I will make a qualified endorsement in the sense that it depends on what burden falls on the other users -- economic burden -- because the airborne equipment that the air carrier will be carrying is very expensive. If, indeed, a passive system is acceptable from the general aviation perspective -- either the transponder or the new Mode S transponder, when it comes along in the modernization system -- the answer's yes.

MacNEIL: So you'd be in favor of airlines installing active systems, but having passive ones in general aviation. Is that --

Mr. BAKER: Surely. To alert the people with a very sophisticated system as to the location of the other aircraft.

MacNEIL: What do you think about the adequacy of the actual air traffic control system? It seemed to me a moment ago you were saying that that isn't up to date.

Mr. BAKER: It's not up to date, but not for the reasons I think you're probably implying. The system is safe; it's terribly inefficient. And the reason it's terribly inefficient, the industry -- both the air carrier and general aviation -- in 1982 accepted a tax program putting money into a specialized trust fund for the specific purpose of modernizing the air traffic system so it can accommodate to the increasing demand across the country and the increasing sophistication of both air carrier and general aviation. Into that trust fund we have now pumped billions of dollars from the users -- the airline ticket tax on the airline passenger, the fuel tax on general aviation. Those monies, unfortunately, are being played politics with by the Office of Management and Budget. They're impounding it to make it appear as though the federal deficit is somewhat less than in fact it actually is. We're sitting with an $8 billion surplus right now, even though we have billions of dollars of un-met needs in terms of modernization of the air traffic system, airport improvements and the parallel efforts that are necessary. We also have serious question regarding the FAA's competence in terms of implementing this modernization. It was sold to the aviation community on the basis that basically it was a state of the art system, and if you -- or an off the shelf system. "If you give us the money, we can -- we'll implement this system." Well, we're now four years into that, almost five years into it, and we find out, indeed, it was a state of the art system, and they are not having much success in terms of implementing it.

MacNEIL: Yeah. We asked the FAA to appear tonight, but they said that they were going to leave all speaking to the National Transportation Safety Board until this accident was investigated. We'll come back, Mr. Baker. Jim?

LEHRER: Next, the view of John Nance, a former Braniff Airways pilot and air force reserve pilot. He wrote a book that was highly critical of the nation's air safety situation. It was titled Blind Trust.He joins us from public station KCTS, Seattle.

Mr. Nance, Mr. Baker says that what happened in Los Angeles is an anomaly -- that the system is safe. Do you agree?

JOHN NANCE, author: Well, I agree the system is safe, but it's not as safe as it should be, and I don't think what happened in Los Angeles surprises any of us -- those of us who have been watching the system and know that the concept of see and avoid, as Captain Duffy said and as I think maybe Mr. Baker somewhat endorsed, is really a bankrupt concept. It was in 1956 with the crash over the Grand Canyon, it was in 1977 with San Diego, and it is today. You can not mix that type of air traffic.

LEHRER: Why not?

Mr. NANCE: Well, because, for one thing, and the most important element I think, is that you've got an aircraft that's doing 200, 250 knots, you've got limited visibility, you have all the tasks in the cockpit that Captain Duffy talked about. And it is simply playing a roulette game to say that the pilots up there in any given phase of flight -- on approach or departure -- are going to be able to spot all the traffic that is pointed out to them. I wish I had a dollar for every aircraft that's been pointed out to me on a flight deck. "Ten o'clock, northbound, two miles, altitude unknown. Eleven o'clock, southbound --"

LEHRER: That's -- excuse me. That's exactly what this pilot was told -- the Aeromexico pilot was told a minute -- I think a minute and 15 seconds before this crash. "Ten o'clock, altitude unknown."

Mr. NANCE: Altitude unknown. And when you're given that kind of information, you've got to take your attention off what you're doing in the cockpit and look around. You've got a background of a city to try to compare it to. What I'm saying is not that you can not see these airplanes, but it's just that you can't see them with consistent certainty. And therefore, when you're dealing with the lives of many passengers and many people on the ground and the poor folks in general aviation up there, you're playing a roulette game. We have to keep the traffic separated. We know that, and that's why we have a terminal control area. My concern is that we're not doing it quite right. We're not putting enough effort into it, and we may have ATC complications.

LEHRER: What kind of complication?

Mr. NANCE: Well, air traffic control. Now, we don't know whether or not this was a factor in this particular accident. My friends at the NTSB have taught me well in not speculating too early. But it does call to question the fact that the FAA, as Mr. Baker said -- and I agree with him entirely -- is not completely up to where it should be in air traffic control in terms of manpower, money, management technique, and especially equipment. And I couldn't agree more about this airways fund of $8 billion being locked up and with which there are political games being played. That has to be released.

LEHRER: What about Mr. Baker's point that there have only been eight collisions involving general aviation and airliners since 1939, so what's the big deal?

Mr. NANCE: Well, I love to argue statistics, because statistics tell you what happened yesterday. They don't give you a look at what's going to happen tomorrow. They don't tell you how many times you've had near misses and close calls. With all due deference to the fact that I'm sure his eight collisions is correct, we have had probably hundreds, if not thousands, of times that evasive action at the last minute saved the situation. What I'm concerned with is how many times we have pop up traffic, how many times we come close. And you'd have to define close, but I think we have been seeing with even the statistical analysis of the FAA in the last number of years that those numbers have been increasing. It doesn't mean, again, that we've got an unsafe system. But what it means is that we are not doing the job of finding the way of separating this traffic. And whether we do it with a combination of new equipment in the cockpit or whether we do it with new rules to separate the air space or a combination, it's going to take a lot of intellect and a lot of thought.

LEHRER: Do you think that the major -- by the way, let's define pop up. Pop up means any airplane that just comes out that you didn't know was going to be there, right?

Mr. NANCE: Yeah, right. A signal that shows up on a radar scope.

LEHRER: Okay. Do you favor the first approach, which is to try to separate these planes better in the first place, rather than some kind of cockpit collision system, as Captain Duffy outlined?

Mr. NANCE: I think that's the bedrock. You're got to get to that first. How can we keep them as far apart as possible? Not deny the private pilot the opportunity to fly in the air space, but keep these folks separated for everybody's own good. Now, Captain Duffy's idea -- or not idea; it's certainly an ongoing project -- but his statements about the collision avoidance system, certainly. I love new gadgetry, and anything we can do up there is great. But we've got another problem, Jim. And that is, we're in the deregulated period in which airlines are going bankrupt and don't have money to even do the proper level of maintenance. The FAA's recent fines of numerous airlines underline that. So how are we going to provide them with the money to put these things in the cockpits, even if we could wave a magic wand and get the FAA to certify the program and get it underway? That's a long time down the road, I'm afraid, and we're going to have to have a more stable airline industry to be able to pay for such things.

LEHRER: Mr. Nance, thank you. Robin?

MacNEIL: Finally, we get a Congressional perspective from Kansas Democrat Dan Glickman. Congressman Glickman is a member of the House Transportation and Aviation Subcommittee. He represents Wichita, Kansas, where an estimated 60% of the nation's private planes are built. Congressman Glickman joins up from public station KPTS in Wichita.

Congressman, do private pilots pose a threat to commercial aviation as things are at present organized?

Rep. DAN GLICKMAN (D) Kansas: No, but I do think we have some problems in the system that have to do with inadequately financed and staffed air traffic control system and the failure by the FAA to bring on current technology to enable planes to avoid colliding with each other -- commercial and general aviation airplanes. And in addition, I think we've had somewhat a degree of sloppiness on the part of the FAA to enforce its current rules. So all of these things together, I think, have created a more dangerous scenario than what we like to have had and like to have had in the future. But I don't think the fact that you have general aviation planes flying in the skies in and of itself endangers the flying public at all.

MacNEIL: Well, is the situation such that unless there is some chance, we can in LA or other congested airport areas where the two kinds of traffic come very close together -- we can expect more collisions?

Rep. GLICKMAN: I think so, and it worries me very much. Five years ago today, I held a hearing in Van Nuys Airport in Southern California -- one of the most budy airports in the country -- on the issue of collision avoidance systems. And this followed a crash in San Diego of a PSA 727 that was a midair collision. At that time, the FAA promised us in those hearings that they would move ahead forthwith and expeditiously on a system of developing coldevices available to them in order to avoid midair collisions. This would be in addition to ground control from the current air traffic control system. Because of a failure to spend the money in the airport trust fund and because of this great love affair with gadgetry where everybody wants more and more sophisticated technological wizardry, nothing has been done. Five years ago today the FAA promised we'll move ahead with collision avoidance systems. To date nothing has been done.

MacNEIL: The -- Mr. Nance said that it's going to be, for the reasons he gave -- the financial bind that many airlines are in right now, the time it will take, the expense and so on -- that the more practical thing to do immediately is better separate general aviation from commercial.

Rep. GLICKMAN: I don't think there's one solution. I think we need better separation, but I think we also --

MacNEIL: Well, what would that mean from your knowledge in practical terms? Would that mean enlarging the terminal control areas or --

Rep. GLICKMAN: That would probably mean enforcing the terminal control areas. Those areas now, there are restrictions against uncontrolled traffic entering those areas. And I think that one of the problems we have is a ground control force -- an air traffic control force -- that is so busy -- they're understaffed and the equipment isn't as modern as possible -- that they haven't been able to adequately enforce traffic --

MacNEIL: Well, how would you --

Rep. GLICKMAN: -- isn't permitted to go in there to go in there.

MacNEIL: How would you enforce it? I mean, are private general aviation pilots fined now, or do they have their licenses endorsed or something if they do something like that?

Rep. GLICKMAN: They have that capability of having it happen to them -- either a civil enforcement or perhaps we may need more serious enforcement procedures. But that's one part of the problem. The second problem has to do with the fact that we still need devices in the cockpit that will give a warning -- an alert to pilots that another airplane is approaching.Now, this is in addition to the protection from the ground that is given by reason of the air traffic control system. We have that technology. That technology, if it had been aboard that Aeromex airplane, it would have prevented the crash and saved 85 lives.

MacNEIL: Are you saying it should only be in airliners or it should be in private -- in general aviation planes too?

Rep. GLICKMAN: I think it has to be in all airplanes, but I think -- I agree with Mr. Baker that in a general aviation plane you could have a passive system that would emit a warning without having to be very sophisticated in terms of telling the pilot which way he should go. But I think you have to have it in all airplanes. If you only have it in commercial airliners, then you will not be warned of the private airplane that's approaching, so I think you need it in all airplanes. And as a matter of fact, five years ago, the FAA indicated that they would talk about even mandating these collision avoidance systems in all airplanes. And they have done nothing in the interim.

MacNEIL: Thank you, Congressman. Jim?

LEHRER: Back to you first, Captain Duffy. Do you think they should be in all airplanes?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, I agree with John Baker. If the passive device is installed in the general aviation airplane, we need that in order to make the active device work in the air carrier aircraft.

LEHRER: It would send a signal off that would be picked up in the cockpit of the airliner.

Mr. DUFFY: That's right. But it is essential that the passive device be installed, or the system really doesn't work right in the air carrier aircraft.

LEHRER: All right, let's -- I should have asked you this earlier. Just so I understand, Mr. Nance says these things are very expensive. How much money are we talking about for each one of these systems to go in an airliner?

Mr. DUFFY: Initially, it looks like between $50,000 and $75,000 per active unit, but I want to hold a caution up around that. When we first installed ground proximity warning systems, they were talking about $30,000 or $40,000. But because the FAA mandated them to be installed in all air carrier aircraft, the sheer bulk of that brought the price down to $10,000 per unit.

LEHRER: Mr. Baker, what would the passive thing that you think -- you and Captain Duffy think would be enough -- what would they cost for general aviation?

Mr. BAKER: Well, I think they would be essentially modest in cost, if indeed --

LEHRER: But, like what? Give me a figure.

Mr. BAKER: Well, if the transponder existing in the airplane will suffice -- and that's our hope -- 75% of the fleet currently have transponders. So the additional cost probably would not be significantly greater. Now, there's a certain class of aircraft which clearly --

LEHRER: I'm going to get you to give me a figure if we stay here all night.

Mr. BAKER: Two thousand.

LEHRER: Two thousand dollars for each plane.

Mr. BAKER: Probably. Now, we have 40,000 airplanes in the fleet that don't even have electrical systems. Those airplanes, however, do not fly in the air space we're talking about. One of the problems I had with some of this dialogue --

LEHRER: They've been prohibited? They're prohibited from flying in --

Mr. BAKER: If you don't have radio communication, you can not fly in that air space or in an airport traffic area or any of the other controlled air space areas. General aviation is a generic term. We operate more jets than the airlines do by a significant number. We're a very sophisticated group of users. We fly six times as many hours as the airlines do. So when you keep talking about this little airplane, it's not really descriptive of anything. The little airplane that we're talking about -- the pleasure flyer -- by and large is not in the air space we're concerned about. They don't want to be there any more than the air carrier wants them there, because they're normally intimidated by the environment, and the only time they are in there is to get in and to get out; to access an airport when there's a requirement on the airport. Our airplanes we're flying in the air space, by and large, where the air carriers are heavily concentrated, perform as well as the air carrier aircraft, and they're flown by professional crews, by and large.

LEHRER: Mr. Nance, you agree with that?

Mr. NANCE: I think so, yes. And one thing that Congressman Glick said I want to endorse, and that is that this isn't just a one single solution situation. There are a number of different things, and of course the cockpit system is one of them. It's just that, gentlemen, we've got to look at the reality that it is not something we can put into place in a year or two with the financial situation in the airlines, with the foot-dragging of the FAA. And John Baker, you know as well as anybody, being former FAA, that the bandaid of the FAA to promote as well as to regulate is going to slow them down on this issue. It already has. So I'm saying let's do everything we can. Certainly we ought to have the collision avoidance in the cockpit. It's scandalous that it's taken this long. But we need to move forward on the other fronts as well.

Mr. DUFFY: But Jim, I think it's time we stopped accepting foot-dragging by the FAA. Surely the financial burden of putting the collision avoidance system in is going to be tough on the airlines. But surely the financial burden of an accident like this is tough on the airlines as well. So, you know, I think we've got to put a priority on it.Our people -- our engineering people say we can get this thing in the airplanes in two years. If we don't start now, it's goingto be two years beyond that.

LEHRER: But who pays the $45,000?

Mr. DUFFY: Well, eventually the travelling public will. But I'm going to assure you that the travelling public would rather have a safe flight and pay the little bit of extra money that it's going to cost than experience tragedies like this.

LEHRER: But as a specific matter, Congressman Glickman, do you believe that the federal government should pay the $45,000 to put one of these machines in each airliner in the country? I don't believe the congressman heard me. We're having technical problems between here and Wichita. But it's not your position. You think the airlines should pay that.

Mr. DUFFY: Jim, I think from the aviation trust fund that comes from the ticket taxes that have already been paid that the research and development that gets it to the production stage should come out of that aviation trust fund. Beyond that, I think the airlines should pay for it as an off the shelf item.

LEHRER: And you're not suggesting, are you Mr. Baker, that the federal government should pay for the general aivation folks to have these things.

Mr. BAKER: No. I think when you start doing that, you're setting a precedent that's terribly dangerous from our perspective. We have tried to keep the monies in the trust fund sacrosanct to do air traffic system development money, airport improvement and safety work.

LEHRER: Speaking of technology, I understand, Congressman Glickman, you can hear me again, right?

Rep. GLICKMAN: Yeah.

LEHRER: How do you think these things should be paid for? How much should be paid by the federal government, how much should the airlines pick up, how much should general aviation pick up?

Rep. GLICKMAN: Well, in the first place, I think the FAA ought to go ahead and finish the research so that we know that these devices are calibrated for collision avoidance systems and we get moving on the air traffic control systems for the ground. They've got all this money -- $8 billion in a pot -- and they don't want to spend it, because it makes the federal deficit look better. And that failure to spend is costing lives. Now, in connection with who pays for these devices, perhaps we could have some sort of cost sharing or joint arrangement whereby both the user as well as the federal government might share in the development of those costs and putting them into the airplanes themselves.

LEHRER: All right. Let's go back now to the second part of this equation, and that's Mr. Nance's point that you can do something in the cockpit, but you also have to do something about separation -- the basic problem. Mr. Nance, how would you go about that?

Mr. NANCE: Well, I think one of the things you have to look at is -- and I have not studied the Los Angeles situation other than just a quick look -- but when you have thin corridors of only 2,000 to 4,000 feet radiating it, it's perhaps something that needs to be looked at in terms of should we thicken them up? Should we give them a better barrier, a better buffer there? I'm not addressing LA, but I'm addressing the whole system throughout the country. Because I know, sitting on those cockpit flight decks or in the flight decks, I have seen so many, many times situations where you were saturated with traffic, and some of it was pop up. The controller is trying to concentrate your attention, but you don't know if you're going to --

LEHRER: But how does that -- but explain to me, Mr. Nance, how that happens. If everybody's following the rules and you've got the right terminal area and everything's just working, why -- how could these planes just come up out of nowhere?

Mr. NANCE: Well, there are very few that actually pop up out of nowhere, but what happens is that the traffic that is moving through the area that is talking to the controller, it sometimes becomes overwhelming. And I think that that's a problem too. What we're talking about here, though, in the LA situation is apparently somebody who was where he was not supposed to be in the terminal control area. And I have heard various -- I suppose any controller would have his own figures -- but I've heard as many as five a week per controller in terms of the pop up targets that appear on scopes. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less. But any of them --

LEHRER: How do you stop that, Mr. Nance?

Mr. NANCE: You have to -- I think you have to educate the private pilots a little bit better. I think you have to provide them more clear maps and other warnings of where they're not supposed to go. And you need to, perhaps, segregate the inflow and out-flux of air traffic into major airports so the corridors maybe are smaller and more defined. I don't know. I have no magic solutions. But it needs to be looked at.

LEHRER: You agree, Mr. Baker?

Mr. BAKER: I think education is the key to the whole thing, Jim. And we work very aggressively, obviously, in that arena. The FAA, in their defense I might add also, has a program called "Back to Basics" in which they are putting out on a regular basis new material to educate the pilot community. We have almost 800,000 pilots in this country of varying skill levels. And it is a formidable education job. That's the underpinning of the whole system -- to recognize the integrity of certain pieces of air space, to recognize that the rules of the road are immutable if safety's going to be observed, and that's an ongoing process, obviously.

LEHRER: Do you feel that the FAA is tough enough on your pilots when they do violate -- when they do pop up?

Mr. BAKER: Well, I think that first an understanding of this -- the aviation system works pretty much like the IRS system does, and that is there aren't enough policemen if we all decide we aren't going to follow the rules. We have to count on maturity and responsibility on the part of the pilot community. And we have a strong incentive; we're the first ones at the scene of the accident. So unless we're suicidal, pretty clearly we're not going to do something that jeopardizes ourselves or anyone else. So almost without exception -- and I would give this gentleman in this tragic accident the benefit of the doubt. I think since he was new to the LA area, it is a terribly complex TCA -- the most complex in the United States in terms of the way the air space is segregated -- the direction he was going, I would think that he probably believed he was clear of that TCA. And it was simply an educational job. He had moved there from Spokane, had not flown in the area a significant amount, and it's tough, complex air space. That's an educating job. And I think all of us have not done as well as we should do in that arena.

LEHRER: All right. We have to leave it there, gentlemen. Mr. Baker, Captain Duffy, Mr. Nance and Congress Glickman in Wichita, thank you all four for being with us tonight. Will We Learn? -- Dropping Out

MacNEIL: Next, part two of our week long education series. Tonight we focus on the dropout problem -- a problem of staggering proportions for the nation's high schools. Nationally, the dropout rate is nearly 30%, or some 1 million students. Among blacks and Hispanics, that rate is nearly doubled. Half of all black and Hispanic students don't graduate. The tendency is often to blame the dropouts, but many school systems are realizing that there's much more they can do to keep students in the classroom, as education correspondent John Merrow found out in New York.

CYRUS DUBOSE: I wasn't recognized. Really you got to be -- you got to do really good to be recognized.

JOHN MERROW [voice-over]: What happened to Cyrus Dubose is not unusual. It's easy to go unrecognized in an urban high school of 3,000 students. And sometimes it doesn't make any difference whether you're there or not. Cyrus has been to school only once this year.

[on camera] I talked to the attendance guy, and he didn't know who you were. Does that surprise you?

Mr. DUBOSE: Mm-hmm. It does surprise me. They should know who I am.

MERROW [voice-over]: Cyrus Dubose is typical of the thousands of students who drop out of high school because they don't get the help they need when they need it. Cyrus is an average student -- above grade level in reading, but poor in math. He was held back once in junior high school. Then he went to Park West, a large high school with a reputation for violence.

Mr. DUBOSE: Didn't hardly know anyone, and there was a much bigger -- a lot of people was there, you know. It's just that I messed up by being with the wrong people and, you know, not doing what I'm supposed to do.

MERROW [voice-over]: Cyrus didn't do much homework. He did cut some classes and clown around in others. Nobody paid much attention, and Cyrus failed again in June. Now nearly 18, he still hasn't completed ninth grade. So he's just stopped going to school and is looking for a job.

Counselor: We have vocational counseling, educational counseling, workshops.

Mr. DUBOSE: Workshops.

Counselor: Workshops. You know what that is?

Mr. DUBOSE: Well, really I was looking for a job.

Counselor: Okay.You know what this is? Vocational counseling?

Mr. DUBOSE: Mmm.Vocational? No, not really.

Counselor: Okay. That's concerning jobs.

MERROW [voice-over]: Cyrus is getting the help he needs from the Manhattan Valley Youth Program, a community organization that's part of New York City's new dropout prevention program. He wants to get his GED -- a high school equivalency diploma -- so he can get a job. So far he's been able to find only short term, low paying, part time work.

[on camera] Do they say, "Are you a high school graduate?"

Mr. DUBOSE: Yeah, most of the times, but, you know, I have to tell them, you know, I'm not. No. I'm not a high school graduate.

MERROW: And then what?

Mr. DUBOSE: Then, you know, they can not -- they can't use me.

Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen, Patrick Ewing.

MERROW [voice-over]: A high school diploma does make a difference in the job market. That's the message the school system is trying to get across with the help of basketball star Patrick Ewing.

PATRICK EWING: Winning at life begins with staying in school.

MERROW [voice-over]: This year New York City is spending $30 million on an ambitious dropout prevention program. This school, Brandeis High in Manhattan, received $814,000 to hire more counselors and social workers. Several corporations have donated dictionaries, calculators and notebooks. And on the first day of school, all students were given T-shirts. Directing thecity-wide effort is Dr. Victor Herbert.

Dr. VICTOR HERBERT, dropout prevention program: We have reached the point that I believe every other youngster entering high school is likely to drop out unless we do something dramatic, effective and efficient.

MERROW: At the risk of sounding skeptical, your campaign of giving kids T-shirts, a free dictionary and then a visit by basketball star Patrick Ewing; that seems cosmetic.

Dr. HERBERT: When you have a hemorrhage, you put on a bandaid, and they you get the medical team in, and you begin stitching, and you begin tying up. You do everything; not just something. And if rewards and incentives are part of the package, do that. But don't only do that. Do it all.

Recorded phone message: Hello. This is Mr. Smith from the Brandeis High School attendance office with a recorded message we would like you to answer. Your child was absent from school today.

MERROW [voice-over]: This computerized telephoning system is one way the schools are trying to keep students from falling through the cracks.

Voice of parent: My child wasn't supposed to be absent today. I have to check with him when he comes home.

MERROW [voice-over]: Careful cross checking of records is also the order of the day. The system hopes to discover that many students now listed ad dropouts actually moved or enrolled in school elsewhere or got a GED. Those changes may lead to greater efficiency, but they don't address the most common student complaint: teacher indifference.

Student: We were actually just a number -- a nine digit number or a four digit number -- to them. They didn't care whether we learned or not. That's the attitude they gave us, at least.

Student: One of my science classes, my teacher used to write on the board all period. Write, write, write. You used to copy everything down in the notebook. He never used to explain nothing.

Student: I needed a school to go to where I was going to be noticed, because if I don't be noticed, I'm the scared type, and I just won't get nothing out of it.

MERROW: Of course, maybe it's impossible. I mean, a school with 3,000, 4,000 students.

Student: I don't think it's impossible. But it seemed like to me they take it and just try to simplify everything. Like say, for instance, I had a sandwich. Teachers would take a slice of cheese, throw it on there, slice of baloney, throw it on there, give me the bread and say, "Eat." Nobody'd want to eat like that.You want to see the sandwich with lettuce, tomato and mayo, you know. You want something delicious; not just slapping the meat up in your face and saying, "Well, eat this." You know, that's how I feel they're doing it with taking education. They just --

MERROW [voice-over]: These students left the high schools they're describing, but they were lucky; they found an alternative high school -- one of the few in New York City. It's called Schomberg Satellite Academy, and it's set up to be as unlike an urban high school as possible. Only 200 students, no passes, and everyone on a first name basis.

Student: Our school really puts an interest in our learning. I'm not trying to sell our school as a dream, but to me it's like a dream, because you get here and everybody's so nice and friendly. Then the teachers, they're always there to help you if you need them, you know.

MERROW [voice-over]: Schools like Satellite cost more -- about $500 more per pupil per year. And there are only 5,250 places in alternative schools in a system with 280,000 high school students.

Mr. HERBERT: Alternative education is a wonderful second base for young people, but I haven't given up on the first base. There's got to be a way to deliver education in the traditional school better. One of the big problems we have is that teachers don't feel they're a part of the school. But it's important to note that I'm not only talking about teachers and counselors; I'm talking very much about community people -- family assistants, social workers, for a number of reasons who need to be involved in the lives of young people.

MERROW [voice-over]: Outside help is needed in the schools, because young people do not check their personal and social problems at the door. Among female students, for example, pregnancy and motherhood are the biggest reasons for dropping out. Most schools do not provide day care programs like this one, yet some form of child care is desperately needed, because most young girls do not grasp the long term implications of having a baby.

LORINDA CRUISE: Half the girls out here have babies because their friends have one or because their boyfriend says they have to have the baby, and then after they have the baby they leave or something like that, and then she can't deal with it no more. So eventually she's just going to drop out of school, because no one's there to help her.

MERROW [voice-over]: Providing help is not an easy thing to do. Lorinda Cruise dropped out of school for a while, and she had help -- a grandmother at home to watch her son while she went to Brandeis High. Still, Lorinda found it difficult to concentrate.

Ms. CRUISE: It's like school wants you to come, and your baby needs you here, and your first priority is your child. So it's like you really have a choice to make either to go to school or to take care of your child. But if you don't go to school, there's not much you can do for your child as they get older.

DOMINIQUE STEINBERG, counselor: This doctor doesn't have Saturday hours, huh?

Ms. CRUISE: Hm-mm. This is Harlem Hospital Clinic. They're not open on the weekend.

Ms. STEINBERG: That's one of the really big problems, isn't it, for you? I see --

MERROW [voice-over]: Dominique Steinberg, a counselor in the Teen Choice program at Brandeis, is helping Lorinda cope with the conflicting demands of being a student and a single parent. With another child on the way, Lorinda knows that getting a regular diploma will be difficult.

Ms. CRUISE: Sometimes I feel like taking my GED, but it's not worth it, because I need an education. I don't want to walk around looking like a fool all my life. I mean, I don't want to live in an old, raggedy building or something living off of welfare. I want to have a job so when my kids get older, I'll show them that I did for them and not welfare.

MERROW [voice-over]: Lorinda may be unusual in her determination to stay in school, but complex problems like hers are not for the majority of young people in large, urban high schools.

STAN FEINGOLD, Brandeis High School: A very large percentage of our kids haven't got a chance in hell of being a part of what we call the American dream. And I think -- I'll call it the American obligation -- then is to bring them from that place over there.

MERROW [voice-over]: To try to do that, Brandeis and other high schools have created what they call mini-schools -- separate units inside eachh high school that pay personal attention to students who've stopped going to school.

Mr. FEINGOLD: You can be here. It's tough in the beginning, but it's pay off.

MERROW [voice-over]: Stan Feingold, director of Brandeis' mini-school, believes that low self-esteem is a large part of the problem.

Mr. FEINGOLD: Many have reached a point now, they're 15, 16, 17 years old. They can not do work of their grade -- 9th, 10th, 11th grade. It's very frustrating. The frustration leads to anger, the anger to the hostility that can take place in class, the dealing with disciplinarians.And their choice is that or stay out. And right now, staying out may sound good.

Teacher: I'm going to ask you a question to show you how we use language. Where do you live? Denise?

DENISE: I was going to say -- I was going to say my address. I was going to say my address.

Teacher: You were going to say your address. Where do you live, Wayne?

Wayne: Manhattan.

Teacher: Nicole, where do you live?

NICOLE: Hundred fifteenth and Lennox.

Teacher: What's she in?

Student: Manhattan.

Teacher: She could have said New York City, she could have said the United States, she could have said North America.The question you're asked and the answer you give depends on a lot of other things, because you --

MERROW [voice-over]: The mini-school's small classes are designed to make learning a satisfying experience, so that when the students go back to regular classes, they'll be able to succeed. Each mini-school is a small effort in the face of a large problem, not the least of which is persuading young people that getting a high school diploma is worth the effort.

Mr. HERBERT: We know that the possibilities for recognition at the end of the hard job -- meaning that the diploma leads to something -- is not guaranteed. And so you say to a young person, "Sit through geometry, chemistry and physics and biology, even though you don't know why. Do it." And he says, "But I have a cousin who graduated from high school, maybe even college, and he doesn't have a job. Why should I do it?" What's working against me? There must be 50 things working against me.

MERROW: Isn't it possible that maybe we're asking the school to do too much?

Mr. HERBERT: Yeah, it really is possible. But the alternative is that there may be no other place.

MERROW [voice-over]: New York City's dropout prevention program will not be successful overnight. But consider the alternative. We all pay for school dropouts in higher crime rates and increased welfare and unemployment costs. Victor Herbert believes that schools should not only do more fore students; they should also expect more from them.

Mr. HERBERT: I think that in some ways we undersell the resourcefulness. You know, I believe you take any one of the kids you've been talking to in the last few days and put him in Paris with no advance notice and no information, and he will know that subway system in five minutes. You don't do those kind of things without having your resources.I'm saying that frequently the resources are channeled in the wrong direction and that they've got to learn that school, as difficult as it is and needing all the changes that school needs, is still something they've got to do -- that it's worth it in the long run.

MERROW [voice-over]: These young people know that education is worth it in the long run. They left their original high schools, but later found this alternative. They resent being labelled dropouts.

Student: A teenager, he has a roaming curiosity. He wants to absorb as much of his surroundings as he can. You know, just help him in the right direction once in a while. When you see him stray, put him on the right track.Don't push him off. Don't call him a dropout. Don't say, "You are a dropout; you're scum in this society. You ain't nothing. You're a dumb Puerto Rican." I'm not a dumb Puerto Rican. I just made the wrong -- I just took the wrong side of the road for a small time, but I had the sense to come back on the right track.

MERROW: So if I say, "Kenny Carter, dropout," what do you say to me?

KENNY CARTER: I'm not a dropout. I'm probably smarter than you.

MacNEIL: Since our original broadcast of that report last December, New York City's dropout prevention program has completed its first year with mixed results. The dropout rate is currently 36%, down from 41% last year, although some of the reported improvement may be the result of better counting. Of the ten high schools involved in the program, attendance improved at four, stayed the same at two and go worse at four, including Brandeis, where several of the students went to school. The alternative school, Satellite, continues to do well, and Miguel Camacho, Kenny Carter, Ephrin Soto and the other students at Satellite graduated on time. Tomorrow night in this week's series, we concentrate on adult illiteracy.

LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Tuesday. The death toll in the Los Angeles air disaster was raised to 85, amidst reports the pilot of the private plane may not have had a heart attack shortly before he collided with a Mexican airliner. The Soviet Union said 79 people were known dead in the sinking of a cruiseliner in the Black Sea, but 319 others were still missing. And the Soviets and the Americans continued to exchange charges and denials in the case of Nicholas Daniloff, theU.S. News & World Report reporter being held on spy charges in Moscow. Good night, Robin.

MacNEIL: Good night, Jim. That's the News Hour tonight. We will be back tomorrow night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.