FAA Goes after Chicago on Meigs

"Fred" wrote in message ...


Reclaimed from water, just like Boston's back bay section. Certainly hasn't
been
an obstacle to building skyscrapers *there*!

Same for a significant portion of downtown San Francisco.

Vaughn

Fred writes:

Wasn't Meigs prominently featured in that Microsoft flight game?

Yes, but only a tiny minority of the population uses that flight game.
Even so, they probably outnumber pilots by ten or a hundred to one.
And overall, both groups together don't even make a dent in the
demographics of the overall population.

In other words, most people would say yes to a park, and no to an
airport.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:20:11 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote in :

In other words, most people would say yes to a park, and no to an
airport.

Unfortunately, it requires statesmanship, insight, and leadership to
encourage the populace to acknowledge the necessity for a vital
component in this nation's transportation infrastructure. The
impossibility of acquiring replacement real estate for a municipal
airport gateway to the aerospace transportation system of the future
is the crucial issue in the airport closure debate. I have yet to see
any arguments opposing that fact.

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:21:48 -0700, BTIZ wrote:

Funny.. I remember my history books telling me they traded away a whole
island for some beads and blankets... Manhattan ... that does not sound
like stealing to me

Have you ever seen that island? I'd take the beads and blankets.

- Andrew

P.S. Of course, it was probably nicer back then.

Larry Dighera writes:

Unfortunately, it requires statesmanship, insight, and leadership to
encourage the populace to acknowledge the necessity for a vital
component in this nation's transportation infrastructure.

Maybe. But are you sure your interest in aviation hasn't biased your
viewpoint? People who see aircraft as just a means of getting from
place to place, and will never set foot in anything other than a
commercial airliner, are going to have a really hard time seeing the
utility in a little airport like Meigs. The vast majority of the
population never comes anywhere near general aviation; in fact, most
people don't know that it exists.

The impossibility of acquiring replacement real estate for a municipal
airport gateway to the aerospace transportation system of the future
is the crucial issue in the airport closure debate. I have yet to see
any arguments opposing that fact.

How do you know that general aviation is the wave of the future?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Larry Dighera writes:

The impossibility of acquiring replacement real estate for a
municipal airport gateway to the aerospace transportation system of
the future is the crucial issue in the airport closure debate. I
have yet to see any arguments opposing that fact.

How do you know that general aviation is the wave of the future?

Have you done any travelling lately? There are a lot of companies, from
Honda to Eclipse to Cessna and others who are betting that, given a
reasonable alternative, people won't put up with the time and hassle of
using hubs that are 180° away from where they ultimately want to go.

Neil

Neil Gould writes:

Have you done any travelling lately? There are a lot of companies, from
Honda to Eclipse to Cessna and others who are betting that, given a
reasonable alternative, people won't put up with the time and hassle of
using hubs that are 180° away from where they ultimately want to go.

Which means what? I don't see the connection.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

Have you done any travelling lately? There are a lot of companies,
from Honda to Eclipse to Cessna and others who are betting that,
given a reasonable alternative, people won't put up with the time
and hassle of using hubs that are 180° away from where they
ultimately want to go.

Which means what? I don't see the connection.

Regional jets and the smaller light jets such as the above companies are
introducing can use the shorter runways of GA airports, and therefore
become more efficient ways to travel. While it's early in that curve, the
idea is based on the already successful corporate jet enterprises (that
also use GA airports). So, it directly answers your original question
about the viability of GA.

Neil

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:20:55 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote in :

Larry Dighera writes:

Unfortunately, it requires statesmanship, insight, and leadership to
encourage the populace to acknowledge the necessity for a vital
component in this nation's transportation infrastructure.

Maybe. But are you sure your interest in aviation hasn't biased your
viewpoint?

My viewpoint is based on the future path NASA and the FAA have
outlined he

http://ncam-sats.org/NCAMNews/SATSFS-2004-07-1.pdf

The SATS concept offers an on-demand, point-to-point,
widely distributed transportation system. It relies on
advanced four to ten passenger aircraft using new
operating capabilities. Such a system promises improved
safety, efficiency, reliability and affordability for small
aircraft operating within the nation's 5,400 public-use landing
facilities. Nearly all of the U.S. population lives
within a 30-minute drive of at least one of these airports.

Unfortunately, if municipal airports are closed (currently occurring
at the rate of two per month), it will doom those municipalities to
exclusion from the future air transportation system unless they are
able to build new airports, but where will the find the necessary
vacant land?


http://sats.nasa.gov/

NASA's SATS Program
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in
partnership with the Department of Transportation/Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and state & local aviation and airport
authorities, leads a new research & development program for
developing and demonstrating technologies needed for a Small
Aircraft Transportation System (SATS). The project's initial
mission is to prove that four new operating capabilities will
enable safe and affordable access to virtually any runway in the
nation in most weather conditions. These new operating
capabilities rely on on-board computing, advanced flight controls,
Highway in the Sky displays, and automated air traffic separation
and sequencing technologies.


http://ncam-sats.org/
Resolution of the Aerospace States Association
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED
SAFE SMALL AIRCRAFT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (SATS)
• WHEREAS a variety of forces are converging to reduce the
effectiveness of the nation's existing highway and hub-spoke air
transport system to meet the growing needs of short distance,
inter and intra-state travel; and
• WHEREAS these forces include the maturing of the hub-spoke air
transport system, the increasing gridlock on the nation's
highways, and the increasing value of human time; and
• WHEREAS the nation has an existing infrastructure of 17,000
airports for small, General Aviation Aircraft, of which at least
5,000 could be modified to meet the nation's emerging short
distance transportation needs; and
• WHEREAS the Federal Government, acting through NASA, has
undertaken cooperative technology development efforts with the
nation's General Aviation industry to develop a new era of
aircraft capable of effectively using these 5,000 airports; and
• WHEREAS the investment in, and control of ground infrastructure
associated with such airports is under the jurisdiction of the
nation's State and local authorities; and
• WHEREAS the Federal Government has offered to develop, with
State governments, the means to upgrade those 5,000 airports with
new capabilities, such as Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and
link them together into a system to be known as the Small Aircraft
Transportation System (SATS); and
• WHEREAS the development of a SATS has the potential to generate
transportation-driven economic development benefits; and
• WHEREAS the coordinated development of a SATS would be of
substantial benefit to the State governments in meeting the
transportation needs of their citizens; and
• WHEREAS it is the purpose of the Aerospace States Associations
to identify, support, and assist in the implementation of
aerospace policies which involve coordination between the Federal
and State governments,
• NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Aerospace States
Association endorses and supports efforts by the Federal
Government to undertake the planning and implementation associated
with the creation of a Small Aircraft Transportation System
(SATS).
Resolved this 19th day of July, 1999 by a unanimous vote of the
members voting.
The Honorable Joseph E. Kernan (Lt. Governor, Indiana)
Chair


People who see aircraft as just a means of getting from
place to place, and will never set foot in anything other than a
commercial airliner, are going to have a really hard time seeing the
utility in a little airport like Meigs.

Lack of insight and greed are the cause of the closures of so many
municipal airports.

The vast majority of the population never comes anywhere near general
aviation; in fact, most people don't know that it exists.

That is destined to change. Of curse it requires creative insight to
appreciate a new transportation system, but it will happen despite
those with their heads in the sand.

The impossibility of acquiring replacement real estate for a municipal
airport gateway to the aerospace transportation system of the future
is the crucial issue in the airport closure debate. I have yet to see
any arguments opposing that fact.

How do you know that general aviation is the wave of the future?

Read the SATS information available at the links above.

Surely you don't believe that the air transportation system is
destined to remain static, do you?

Neil Gould writes:

Regional jets and the smaller light jets such as the above companies are
introducing can use the shorter runways of GA airports, and therefore
become more efficient ways to travel. While it's early in that curve, the
idea is based on the already successful corporate jet enterprises (that
also use GA airports). So, it directly answers your original question
about the viability of GA.

A great deal of additional infrastructure would be required at many GA
airports in order to make them suitable for ordinary commercial
airline services, irrespective of the type of planes used. Just
flying planes that can accept a shorter runway would only cover the
tip of the iceberg.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.