![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Restoration | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel Supplements | Jetnw | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 15th 04 07:50 AM |