I had a three-hour layover in SeaTac airport on Monday and another similar layover today. The layovers are almost long enough to justify flying in and out of SeaTac. However, there are several reasons why I didn’t opt to travel that way on this trip. One is that if I drove myself to SeaTac, I would have had to pay for three days of parking in the garage there, which would have been a hassle. I would have had to drive our pickup because Susan needed to drive our car in my absence. The way my flights worked out, flying in and out of Bellingham, made it easy for Susan to drop me off at the airport on Monday morning and meet me when my flight arrived this evening.

Having time in SeaTac allows me to watch people, which I enjoy. I’m looking forward to transferring between my arrival gate and departure gate without the pressure that can occur when connections are tight. I’ll see how the day goes, but I’ll likely have supper in the SeaTac airport.

I noticed at SeaTac on Monday that will capture my attention this afternoon that Alaska Airlines is experimenting with robotic wheelchairs on the C and D concourses, where I will be. I was curious about them on Monday. The chairs are motorized and programmed to take passengers with mobility challenges between gates. They appear to have a touchscreen display on the right armrest, and I suppose that the user can sit in the chair and use the display to direct the wheelchair to the appropriate gate. They are amazing. They make a musical sound when they are in motion and slow down when they sense traffic. They will stop rather than be involved in a collision. Several questions came to my mind as I watched them.

My first question when seeing them was about the Sky Caps, which previously provided the service by wheeling passengers in manual wheelchairs. Do these new robotic chairs signal a decrease in the number of jobs in the airport? It would be sad if the effect of the technology were to eliminate jobs that people need to earn rent and grocery money. On the other hand, being a Sky Cap is a mostly thankless job that is physically taxing, and perhaps the automatic wheelchairs enable people to move onto better jobs.

My second question is about how the users direct the chairs. The chairs could be directed to go from one gate to another. That would be relatively simple programming because the physical distance can be mapped. The airport has wide walkways that allow wheelchairs to pass even when there is a lot of pedestrian traffic. What if a passenger needs to stop at a restroom? Is the wheelchair sophisticated enough to get the passenger to the correct location and wait while the user takes care of their need? This could be done because the D concourse has a lot of private bathrooms that both genders can use. Those bathrooms are all accessible to wheelchair users so that a button can be pushed, and the wheelchair can drive inside. It would be easy for the wheelchair to signal the door to open with a mechanism similar to a garage door opener. It would, however, have to be sophisticated enough to sense when a restroom is occupied and choose another restroom even if it isn’t the closest one.

Alaska Airlines is introducing the wheelchairs as an experiment. Using them in more airports and locations at SeaTac airport may be interesting. Many of those areas have far fewer accessible bathrooms that any gender can use, so programming the chairs for many airports would be problematic. Their use may depend upon extensive remodeling. The D concourse at SeaTac was recently remodeled, including the replacement of all the bathrooms.

Travel already tends to isolate us. It seems counterintuitive. We wait in lines to pass through security, sit in crowded waiting rooms, often without sufficient seats for the number of people, and get into airplanes where the seats are close together. I’ve felt awkward sitting in an airline seat, wondering if I am giving my seat mate enough room while resenting that I am so crowded. And yet, we tend not to talk to each other when flying. At least I try to greet my seat mates, but many people traveling choose not to speak to their fellow passengers and say just enough to tell a server what beverage they choose. An automated wheelchair doesn’t offer any conversation to a user. Such a device might increase the sense of autonomy and freedom for one who needs to use a wheelchair for mobility. I have yet to speak with anyone who has used one, so I don’t know how the users feel about the devices. I have also wondered what happens when there is a flaw in the software or a machine breakdown. All machines are subject to failure from time to time. Even if the wheelchairs are designed to be very reliable, a user might need help from a technician. I wonder if the wheelchair can summon a replacement if it needs to shut down for a low battery or some other reason.

Like many technologies, robotic wheelchairs have advantages and disadvantages. I’m amazed at the creativity and imagination of the designers and engineers who built the machines. I’m intrigued by the test that Alaska Airlines is conducting with them. It will be interesting to see if they become common with other airlines at other airports.

When motorized wheelchairs first became available, some questioned their practicality. They might have wondered if the chairs would go too fast or have problems colliding with pedestrians. Nowadays, motorized wheelchairs are common in many places. Their advantages for users outweigh the challenges they have created. Innovation often results in challenges.

For today, I’ll enjoy the novelty, and perhaps I’ll find a way to start a conversation with someone using one of the chairs to learn about their experience.