CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:46:49 GMT, Marty Shapiro
wrote:


Airlines LIE.

And idiots post baloney like this on the usenet.

You are a moron.

Blah, blah, if the shoe fits (as it does) wear it.


GPS can NOT reduce the minimum safe spacing in trail between aircraft.
That spacing is dictated by wake turbulence and the time the runway is
possessed by only one aircraft, specifically the time from when it lands
until it clears the runway or from when it enters the runway and takes off.

Nobody said that cretin. What was said is that it appears the minimum
distance between aircraft can be reduced significantly and then GPS
can control the spacing. Went right over your head didn't it?


Tells us: How high must an aircraft climb before it can execute a
turn (non-emergency)? If it is more than 0' AGL, then you need to maintain
wake turbulence separation for take off. How about landing? You want to
creep up too close and get flipped by wing vortex? That spacing is
dictated primarily by the size of the aircraft. GPS doesn't address either
of these requirements.

More stupid hand waving by this idiot. Nobody said any of that. See
above for what really was said. Either the minimum spacing can safely
be reduced or not. If so, GPS can safely control the spacing. If
not, not.


Only a moron believes what airline managment says.

Sure generalizing moron. There is no difference between United's and
Continental's management. That's why you won't find anybody at United
who believes one word it's management says while Continental's has had
smooth cooperative labor relations for years. Guess which one is the
better airline. You are a complete moron.


PLONK!

The usual response of an idiot who has been shown to be just that.

John Kulp wrote:



Nobody said that cretin. What was said is that it appears the minimum
distance between aircraft can be reduced significantly and then GPS
can control the spacing.

And that is completely wrong. Once the spacing has been established GPS
is irrelevant in maintaining it. The minimum spacing can not be reduced
from what it is now unless aircraft can be designed to be unaffected by
wake turbulence. And if that happens GPS will still be irrelevant.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:54:52 -0600, Newps wrote:



John Kulp wrote:



Nobody said that cretin. What was said is that it appears the minimum
distance between aircraft can be reduced significantly and then GPS
can control the spacing.

And that is completely wrong. Once the spacing has been established GPS
is irrelevant in maintaining it. The minimum spacing can not be reduced
from what it is now unless aircraft can be designed to be unaffected by
wake turbulence. And if that happens GPS will still be irrelevant.



Well, since you just wave your hands and say so, that must be right.
And, duh, it will be the GPS system that puts the aircraft where
they're supposed to be in the flow so how is that irrelevant genius?

John Kulp wrote:




Well, since you just wave your hands and say so, that must be right.
And, duh, it will be the GPS system that puts the aircraft where
they're supposed to be in the flow so how is that irrelevant genius?



GPS doesn't put the aircraft in the proper sequence and at the proper
spacing. I do, using a variety of techniques that any pilot who has
flown in controlled airspace can tell you about. GPS can help you
navigate to a particular location in space but does nothing to establish
and then maintain a desired spacing.

Newps writes:

[...] Once the spacing has been established GPS is irrelevant in
maintaining it. The minimum spacing can not be reduced from what it
is now unless aircraft can be designed to be unaffected by wake
turbulence. [...]

Does that not just affect in-trail separation?

- FChE

Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Newps writes:


[...] Once the spacing has been established GPS is irrelevant in
maintaining it. The minimum spacing can not be reduced from what it
is now unless aircraft can be designed to be unaffected by wake
turbulence. [...]


Does that not just affect in-trail separation?



Yes, but at the major airports the arrivals start approx 150 nm from the
airport. That's the latest aircraft start to get in trail. At the
busiest times the approach controls will slap a restriction onto the
centers for anywhere from 10-20 miles in trail for aircraft going into
the same airport that will start hundreds of miles from the destination.
Then as they get closer the aircraft streams will be joined together
to their minimum allowed separation.