From Home to Holiday: Why Accessible Travel Must Follow the Whole Journey
A Deaf traveller should not lose access each time they move from one part of a journey to the next.
Caption: Accessible travel should follow the whole journey from leaving home to arriving at the holiday destination.
Alt text: A Deaf woman travels from home to a holiday destination. She communicates with a taxi driver, watches airport information presented by a photorealistic sign-language signer, uses live captions with cabin crew on a plane, and signs to hotel reception through a mobile phone.
A Deaf traveller recently shared a video from Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG). The screen showed information in American Sign Language (ASL), including which airport gate/tram to take, where it was going and when to board.
I nearly scrolled past it. Then I stopped and thought about what that screen could mean for a Deaf person travelling alone.
Airports rely heavily on tannoy announcements. When something changes, an announcement is made and everyone adjusts. If you are Deaf, that information may never reach you. You may notice other passengers standing up or moving towards another gate, but you do not necessarily know why.
Seeing the information in ASL means that a Deaf traveller does not have to wait for somebody to notice that they are confused. They can receive the information for themselves.
That is a small change with a much bigger effect: greater confidence, independence and dignity.
What does “real time” mean?
At CVG, AI-generated ASL is used for live airport tram departure and safety information. My understanding of the process is:
Airport data → text → AI-generated ASL video
The airport’s audio announcement and ASL output may both be triggered by the same operational update. That is different from assuming that the system listens to every tannoy announcement and translates the audio directly.
The distinction matters. Airport systems already hold structured information such as destinations, departure times, gate numbers, delays and boarding status. That data can be used to produce information in different formats for different passengers.
But real-time access also depends on latency - the delay before the accessible information appears. If a gate or tram changes suddenly, how quickly does the updated ASL reach the screen? Information can be accurate but still fail a passenger if it arrives too late.
Caption: Airport operational data can support both spoken announcements and real-time sign-language information on public screens.
Alt text: A Deaf traveller with luggage watches an airport screen showing a photorealistic ASL signer and a gate-change message. A public-address speaker and airport information systems are visible nearby.
Sign language is more than matching words
The digital signer at CVG is photorealistic rather than a traditional cartoon-style avatar. Appearance matters, but understandable sign language requires much more than making the person on screen look real.
ASL and British Sign Language (BSL) are distinct natural languages. They do not simply follow English sentences word for word. Meaning is carried through signing order, facial expression, non-manual features, classifiers, aspect, description and the use of space.
If a system only stitches individual signs together in English order to follow the timing of an announcement, the result may look like signing without producing natural or fully understandable ASL or BSL.
This is why Deaf leadership must go beyond inviting Deaf people to test a nearly finished product. Deaf signers should help shape what information is translated, how it is structured, how quality is measured and where the
technology should-or should- or should not- be used.
The journey does not begin at the airport screen
One accessible display is useful, but it is only one moment in a much longer journey.
Think about travelling from Destination A to Destination B from leaving home to reaching a hotel or holiday accommodation:
Can I communicate with the taxi driver?
Can I understand a last-minute change at the railway station?
Does the airport tram provide visual information as well as spoken announcements?
If a lift stops unexpectedly, can I contact the emergency operator without relying on audio?
Can I understand the safety information and announcements on the plane?
Can I ask the cabin crew a question privately?
When I arrive, can I communicate with passport control, baggage staff, another driver or hotel reception?
Accessibility should follow the person through every handover. It should not disappear when they walk away from one specially equipped screen.
Put the person first, not the device
Deaf and hard-of-hearing people are not one group with one preferred solution.
Auracast can broadcast public audio to compatible hearing aids, earbuds, headphones and smartphones. This could give some passengers much clearer access to announcements. It is an important option, but hearing aids do not meet every Deaf person’s needs. Some people do not use them, some receive limited benefit from them, and others need or prefer information in sign language.
Some travellers want captions. Some prefer typing. Some use ASL or BSL. DeafBlind travellers may need tactile communication, haptic alerts or one-to-one support.
Good accessibility starts with a simple human question: How do you prefer to communicate?
Only then should we choose the appropriate technology or support.
Caption: Different people need different communication choices. Technology should support the person, with human help always available.
Alt text: A Deaf traveller signs while communicating with an airport staff member. A phone displays translated text, a tablet provides live captions, a video relay interpreter is available behind them, and another traveller uses a hearing aid.
The mobile phone as a bridge
Most travellers already carry a mobile phone. That makes it a practical bridge between different parts of the journey, without requiring every Deaf person to find and buy a specialist device.
A phone could provide live captions, text communication, visual alerts, journey updates or a connection to a qualified interpreter through a video relay service (VRS).
Google Pixel 11 adds another direction. Google DeepMind’s sign-language-to-text model, SL2T, allows an ASL user to sign into the phone’s camera and produce written English through Gboard or Live Transcribe:
ASL → phone camera → written English
A Deaf traveller could ask, “Which gate do I need?” or “Has my tram changed?” The member of staff could speak and have their response displayed as captions.
The public ASL screen gives information to the traveller. Sign-to-text gives the traveller a way to respond. Together, they show why accessibility must be two-way.
Latency matters here as well. Translation must appear quickly enough for a conversation to feel natural. Accuracy, privacy and a clear way to correct misunderstandings are equally important.
What about the plane?
Access cannot stop at the boarding gate.
On an aircraft, internet access may be unavailable or unreliable. Airlines therefore need dependable offline options: captioned and signed safety information, visual alerts, accessible seatback content, text-based crew communication and clear emergency procedures.
A passenger should not have to hand over an unlocked phone containing personal information simply to ask for water, explain an allergy or understand a change to the journey. Communication tools should protect privacy and keep the traveller in control.
Technology should extend choice
The complete accessible journey might include:
Airport information presented in ASL or BSL on public screens
Tannoy audio delivered through Auracast for passengers who choose it
Staff speech converted into live captions
Sign language translated into text for a simple two-way exchange
Visual and haptic alerts in trams, lifts, terminals and aircraft
A qualified human interpreter through VRS or in person
This is not only a discussion about avatars. It is about people, information and communication and how screens, captions, mobile devices, hearing technology, sign language and interpreters can work together.
For simple, low-risk information, technology may offer more independence.
For complex, private, urgent or safety-critical communication, a qualified human interpreter must remain available. The same principle is especially important in hospitals, where a misunderstanding can affect consent, diagnosis, treatment or safety.
AI should extend access, not remove the right to human support.
From home to the destination and safely home again
No single device will work for everyone. No single screen can make an entire journey accessible.
The goal should be a connected communication journey: from home to the station, through the airport, onto the plane and onwards to the final destination. At every stage, the traveller should have understandable information, a way to ask questions and a clear route to human help.
That is what human-first accessibility means to me: listening to Deaf and hard-of-hearing people, respecting different communication preferences and designing the whole journey around real lives, not around one piece of technology.
It means more choice, more confidence and less dependence on somebody happening to notice that help is needed.
Comments