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

John Kulp wrote:

GPS was designed and built by the military.


So what?

You said GPS was designed to reduce airline delays. It wasn't designed
for anything of the sort. Nor can it do that.





You can't change basic physics. GPS can

generate some minor efficiencies in getting aircraft to the start of the
arrival which is 150 nm from the airport. Then everybody gets lined up
and fed to the airport. GPS is of little value from that point on in
reducing spacing. How are you going to overcome the basic fact that
2.5-3 miles is the minimum useable spacing, assuming no departures?


Uh, when someone else pointed out that it is currently 5-6miles you
don't call that increased efficiency? Where did you study math?

That additional distance is for wake turbulence and has been pointed out
to you before. Where's the benefit of GPS?

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 12:49:48 -0600, Newps wrote:



John Kulp wrote:

GPS was designed and built by the military.


So what?

You said GPS was designed to reduce airline delays. It wasn't designed
for anything of the sort. Nor can it do that.

I never said anything of the sort. GPS was designed for military
purposes and is being applied to ATC. That's what I said, along with
saying that the FAA and the airlines think that it MAY reduce delays
by up to 25%. Or put up your proof, if you have any, that it cannot
and won't.






You can't change basic physics. GPS can

generate some minor efficiencies in getting aircraft to the start of the
arrival which is 150 nm from the airport. Then everybody gets lined up
and fed to the airport. GPS is of little value from that point on in
reducing spacing. How are you going to overcome the basic fact that
2.5-3 miles is the minimum useable spacing, assuming no departures?


Uh, when someone else pointed out that it is currently 5-6miles you
don't call that increased efficiency? Where did you study math?

That additional distance is for wake turbulence and has been pointed out
to you before. Where's the benefit of GPS?

Uhh, if the minimum spacing now is 5-6 miles and it can be reduced to
2.5 miles that increases capacity and reduces delays.

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?

"Al G" wrote in
:


"Jon" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 31, 9:04 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Marty Shapiro wrote
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
0:

Bertie - Who do you think is the bigger fjukktard - Mxs
or Kulp? Both
seem to by trying real hard for the title of biggest imbecile in
the history of r.a.p., giving even splaps and the fish whose name
we no longer mention a good run for the money.

But splaps provided a slightly different kind of entertainment
'value', including the following which made it into my 'memorable
quotes file:'

"Are they quality products, or did you have some input in their
design?" - McNicoll to Tarver in rec.aviation.ifr

Interestingly, I can't recall Steve ever responding to Mx. Perhaps
this is a useful datapoint, and could be considered for being a
metric in evaluating rank.

Let's call it the 'too insignificant to bother expending cycles on'
metric.

:P

Dunno. Early days yet. I smell a world of promis here though.

And just when we thought it was safe to go outside

[bobbitzed]


Have a day,

Jon


I agree, something should be said for P1, Temp 0. (Pitot, as in no
jets
have 'em)



Please! It was bad enough when they came from the dreaded tarver
hisself.

Bertie

Justin Case wrote in news:Xns99DB6CDF2711EJCPost@
216.168.3.50:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

And you don't even know what GPS is.

Come on, Bertie, John Kulp knows what GPS is and its benefits. For
one, it will automatically increase the size of the airline hubs at a
moments notice. Secondly, the satellites in orbit will help increase
crop production which will eliminate World Hunger.



Yes, but will it ever get him laid?


You just gotta put on your tinfoil hat and listen.



Could never find one that has that certain "dash"

And as my mom always told me, if yer gonna wear a hat ya gotta wear it like
ya mean it.



Bertie

On Nov 1, 3:36 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Justin Case wrote in news:Xns99DB6CDF2711EJCPost@
216.168.3.50:
[...]
You just gotta put on your tinfoil hat and listen.

Could never find one that has that certain "dash"

And as my mom always told me, if yer gonna wear a hat ya gotta wear it like
ya mean it.

Bertie

http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/

The Centurion should transport you whereever you may desire, in
relative style, comfort, and most importantly, protection...


Have a day,

Jon

John Kulp wrote:

Uh, when someone else pointed out that it is currently 5-6miles you
don't call that increased efficiency? Where did you study math?

That additional distance is for wake turbulence and has been pointed out
to you before. Where's the benefit of GPS?


Uhh, if the minimum spacing now is 5-6 miles and it can be reduced to
2.5 miles that increases capacity and reduces delays.


You need to review minimum separation standards so you don't sound so
stupid. Do that and get back to us. You can find them here.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...a/7110.65R.pdf

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.

On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:36:40 -0600, Newps wrote:



John Kulp wrote:

Uh, when someone else pointed out that it is currently 5-6miles you
don't call that increased efficiency? Where did you study math?

That additional distance is for wake turbulence and has been pointed out
to you before. Where's the benefit of GPS?


Uhh, if the minimum spacing now is 5-6 miles and it can be reduced to
2.5 miles that increases capacity and reduces delays.


You need to review minimum separation standards so you don't sound so
stupid. Do that and get back to us. You can find them here.

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...a/7110.65R.pdf

Are you really so stupid you pinhead that you still can't understand
the difference between what the situation is now, which no disputes,
and what it is thought it can be? Answer, yes you are or you wouldn't
continue to post this drivel.