On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:25:24 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

TMOliver writes:

Currently, radar ATC is structured so that all a/c follow charted
"corridors" enroute to destinations. It is assumed that a GPS-based system
will allow direct flight paths, saving substantial time and distance.
Because of the possibility of inoperative GPS systems in individual a/c, the
radar system will have to remain in place and be maintained.

What provision is made for failing GPS systems aboard aircraft? One aircraft
misreporting its position could cause serious trouble for an entire region.
One aircraft or transmitter deliberately sending out false information could
be a terrorist's dream.

Completely silly, of course. It's called redunancy.


Your compehension of reality is pretty limited, then. There are plenty of
runways and no real overload of a/c. The problem occurs with too many
flights coming and going from the same destinations at peak times.

And why isn't that correlated with the number of available runways? Twice the
runways means roughly twice the capacity.

Talk to the government who has been ripping off the airline trust fund
for years. Maybe they will print some money for building more and
better airports. Which is what it was passed for in the first place
before the thieves discovered it.


A 737 with 150 aboard is several magnitues chaper to operate that 1 747 with
300+.

Several orders of magnitude? Meaning _at least_ 100 times cheaper? What are
the exact costs, and where did you find them?

Check the web. Where you'll find out that 4 engined planes aren't
anywhere near as efficient as two engined. Have much less fuel
efficient engines,, etc.


Airlines chose equipment and flight schedules to attempt to meet
customer demand. Obviously, any improved system based on hub/spoke
operations, the "norm" for US domestic service, will likely mean longer
layovers as flight "blocks" are speced to reduce crowding. Smaller a/c are
however here to stay and are the mainstay of furure planning by airlines.

That's just what they said about 747s.

Uuh. that was about 40 years ago ace when it was true.


"Jumbos" are suitable only for limited routes requiring consistent passenger
levels and types of service.

There suitable for all sorts of service, if you don't need a departure every
15 minutes.

Sure they are. That's why all the airlines use them. Right.


Woulkd you care to describe those.....

Flying many small planes instead of fewer large ones. I look forward to your
details on operating costs.

Oh, this has been all over the news. Go find it yourself. CO's CEO
was just on the Today show a week or so discussing it.