Another AP Winner: GPS could save airlines time and fuel
10-09-2008, 10:17 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,096
Another AP Winner: GPS could save airlines time and fuel
AP IMPACT: GPS could save airlines time and fuel - Yahoo! News
This is another award winning performance from the AP. He even manages to blame the evil Bush admin (just a little sarcasm people ... relax!).
I never knew GPS would make my life so great (triple air traffic capacity, reduce delays by at least half, improve safety, curb greenhouse gas emissions, quicker landings, as well as reduce noise by 30 percent).
-Fatty
This is another award winning performance from the AP. He even manages to blame the evil Bush admin (just a little sarcasm people ... relax!).
I never knew GPS would make my life so great (triple air traffic capacity, reduce delays by at least half, improve safety, curb greenhouse gas emissions, quicker landings, as well as reduce noise by 30 percent).
-Fatty
10-10-2008, 12:20 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 836
I never knew that cars and cell phones had better technology in them then airplanes. This article would have you believe that almost no aircraft in the US have GPS or RNAV capability when that clearly is not the case. Conveniently burried at the bottom is a short paragraph about the major issue, overcrowed airports and overcrowed airspace around airports. Don't forget about other issues such as noise abatement procedures that reduce the available airports to aircarriers, the operating times, and restricts the variety of departure and arrival routes. Or increased air traffic caused by growth of the air industry and changes in operating practices (read eliminating a few mainline narrow body trips to a destination in exchange for two or three times more RJ flights to the same destination at more frequent intervals).
10-10-2008, 03:48 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Turning off the spigot....
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by Clue32
I never knew that cars and cell phones had better technology in them then airplanes.
10-10-2008, 10:56 AM
#5
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Eagle FO, ERJ
Posts: 85
It's hard to think of another industry that is as representative of the mass media's willful ignorance and half-assed research as aviation. It really puts a spotlight on just how inept they are--they don't understand, they don't care to understand, and they think they're doing such a great job when they simply reproduce what they are told by others who either don't understand or have an agenda. It really would be nice to have a press that played the role of a leading brain instead of an enslaved robot-brain.
10-10-2008, 11:26 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 433
Originally Posted by Clue32
I never knew that cars and cell phones had better technology in them then airplanes. This article would have you believe that almost no aircraft in the US have GPS or RNAV capability when that clearly is not the case. Conveniently burried at the bottom is a short paragraph about the major issue, overcrowed airports and overcrowed airspace around airports. Don't forget about other issues such as noise abatement procedures that reduce the available airports to aircarriers, the operating times, and restricts the variety of departure and arrival routes. Or increased air traffic caused by growth of the air industry and changes in operating practices (read eliminating a few mainline narrow body trips to a destination in exchange for two or three times more RJ flights to the same destination at more frequent intervals).
Last edited by Dashdog; 10-10-2008 at 12:17 PM.
10-10-2008, 11:45 AM
#7
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 82
Hank Krakowski, the FAA's head of the air traffic system, called it "one of the largest project management challenges the federal government has had since we put somebody on the moon."
What a crap statement! If this was really a priority it could be done well within 5 years! Maybe the FAA needs a REAL leader and not a bureaucrat that tries to liken this task to going to the moon.
What a crap statement! If this was really a priority it could be done well within 5 years! Maybe the FAA needs a REAL leader and not a bureaucrat that tries to liken this task to going to the moon.
10-10-2008, 12:08 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: G550 Captain
Posts: 1,206
Originally Posted by Waldo11
Most newer cars definetley have better technology then the F-16. I know my iPhone has more processing power. Sad but true.
Samething with avionics. Little single engine propeller Diamond Stars have better MFDs than the B737s' or A320s'.
10-10-2008, 02:21 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 890
Originally Posted by weirdbiz
It's hard to think of another industry that is as representative of the mass media's willful ignorance and half-assed research as aviation. It really puts a spotlight on just how inept they are--they don't understand, they don't care to understand, and they think they're doing such a great job when they simply reproduce what they are told by others who either don't understand or have an agenda. It really would be nice to have a press that played the role of a leading brain instead of an enslaved robot-brain.
10-11-2008, 11:07 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,096
Originally Posted by Dashdog
I believe the article was referring to the "NextGen" ATC system that would be GPS based instead of radar based. It was not referring to GPS on aircraft. I thought the article was intended for the general public that probably knows next to nothing about NextGen (like some of the folks on this forum), and in that context, was well researched and informative. If you guys are going to constantly whine about the press, you could at least pay a little attention first.
Most commercial aircraft flying today are RNAV capable and can fly direct (with or without GPS). The problem is that ATC can't handle everyone doing this. But this is not the real problem.
What the article fails to address is that the highways in the skies aren't the problem, the arrival/departure routes and the runways are. Until we increase the number of takeoffs and landings per hour, shaving 5 minutes off your flight time because you were able to fly direct means that you're going to enter holding 5 minutes earlier.
-Fatty
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Atreyu
Regional
16
08-11-2008 10:10 AM
