Bush unveils plan to improve flight woes
11-15-2007, 12:31 PM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 52
Bush unveils plan to improve flight woes
Wasn't aware there was "restricted military air space above the East Coast". Is He talking about talking above FL60? DC ADIZ?
http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/15/news...ines/index.htm
What do you folks in the trenches think will solve the delay/Cancelation problems? Good luck over the next week.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/15/news...ines/index.htm
What do you folks in the trenches think will solve the delay/Cancelation problems? Good luck over the next week.
11-15-2007, 01:02 PM
#3
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 52
I guess my point of the question is that most airports are 5 Lb bags and we are trying to cram 10Lbs of "stuff" in them. If they allow more direct routing, will that ease or add to the problem?
I guess to the man on the street, all military airspace is restricted.
I guess to the man on the street, all military airspace is restricted.
11-15-2007, 01:24 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Against
Posts: 275
Originally Posted by SenecaDriver
Wasn't aware there was "restricted military air space above the East Coast". Is He talking about talking above FL60? DC ADIZ?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ty/vacapes.htm
Active Warning Areas and MOAs are restricted as far as IFR traffic is concerned. And if you're bumbling through there VFR, you're a prime candidate for a Darwin Award.
Last edited by StripAlert; 11-15-2007 at 01:37 PM.
11-15-2007, 01:37 PM
#5
Ben Salley
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Left
Posts: 924
question?
I'm very curious about this. The un-informed American public has accepted that the airlines are the culprit. They assume that the airlines like to pay crews to wait on congested runways, hold over FAK and divert to Newberg. The lack of intelligence among the public doesn't perplex me, especially since Nov '99, but why don't airline execs counter these allegations with the truth....the ATC system is antiquated and totally unable to handle today's level of traffic. Opinions please.
11-15-2007, 01:45 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 2,934
There isn't just one problem.
The ATC system is one.
Frequency is another. Why have two RJ's go from one destination to another 20 minutes apart full when one 737 would take care of the route and probably fill up?
Why use the hub and spoke system?
Why have 150 flights scheduled to arrive and depart in an hour when the airport can only handle 140 in perfect weather?
The ATC system is one.
Frequency is another. Why have two RJ's go from one destination to another 20 minutes apart full when one 737 would take care of the route and probably fill up?
Why use the hub and spoke system?
Why have 150 flights scheduled to arrive and depart in an hour when the airport can only handle 140 in perfect weather?
11-15-2007, 03:04 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: L Side
Posts: 409
This is by no means a complete synopsis of the problem, but here goes:
-The ATC system is archaic and has not kept pace with growth
-Air traffic controllers are in short supply and the government has done little to correct for that (not flame, just fact)
-Air carriers have gone too far in their effort to connect Everytown, USA with their hubs
-Air carriers have given the public too many departure times to/from Everytown on regional sized aircraft
-The ATC system is archaic and has not kept pace with growth
-Air traffic controllers are in short supply and the government has done little to correct for that (not flame, just fact)
-Air carriers have gone too far in their effort to connect Everytown, USA with their hubs
-Air carriers have given the public too many departure times to/from Everytown on regional sized aircraft
11-15-2007, 03:22 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: ERJ CAPT
Posts: 227
Several Years ago, circa 1998, when I worked in a different part of the industry, the Airlines were begging the DoD via the DOT to just give up about a 50 mile wide swath of this airspace to reduce delays associated with Northeast operations. At the time the feeling was that it could provide one of the single biggest improvements in airborne capacity, and reduction in delay. Needless to say, DoD was not interested.
Something that has always amazed me is that after the findings on 9-11 we found out that they were only 2 fighters armed and available to protect the entire East Coast of the US. What exactly were they using all that airspace for? I guess if I knew they would have to kill me!
Onfinal
Something that has always amazed me is that after the findings on 9-11 we found out that they were only 2 fighters armed and available to protect the entire East Coast of the US. What exactly were they using all that airspace for? I guess if I knew they would have to kill me!
Onfinal
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
