On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:25:43 -0700, Scott Moore
wrote:


- Again another promotion of the idea that aircraft have to land vertical,
or drive on streets, in order to be "common".

It would have to be VTOL to truely replace the car whcih is really the
angle the piece was going for. However, to be competative with the
airlines, it does not. I think they touched on both scenerios.



- They were promoting Nasa's HITS program and calling it "future" aviation,
instead of simply going down to Cirrus and showing that most of that technology
is shipping right now.

That's why I'm not concerned about the lack of funding through NASA.
We've got everything needed to implement HITS now. Glass, GPS and
Synthetic vision. We just need FAA guidance for the routes, protocol
and a business case for a company to write the software.

FAA certificaiton of the software is the real problem. It wouldn't
surprise me for it to be in in experimentals 5 years before standard
category aircraft got it.


Just say yes to FAA deregulation


Jim

http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org