Strawman. It's not about shooting people "you disagree with" it's about shooting tyrants who take away your rights... which is a natural right guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

pretty sure those 20 1st graders had a right to life. But I guess your right to a gun trumps a 1st graders right to live. Makes sense. Those kids would have been entering highschool this year, a few years away from being able to drive, excited. Instead their entire lives were stolen from them by a “man” who should have never been allowed to have a gun. All just 11 days before Christmas.

Typically when these naïve people get out of the protection of college and their parents and have to live in the real world their views tend to change to something more realistic. This has been going on for years. Not worried.

The $2T CARES Act was socialism. Doling out that money to corporations, PPP, and state governments was just as 'socialist' as giving it directly to the people, but the govt believed it would be better to target where the taxpayer dollars were distributed rather just cutting every American a $6k check and letting us drive the market. My point is that the US government is nowhere near a "free market" and you're out of your mind if you don't think the US government can and will do something about climate change. What, specifically? I have no idea, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that the airline with the most fuel efficient aircraft will have a massive advantage.

How many workers actually get to keep firearms once the revolution is over? Zero.

Yeah I was going to say the same thing but the very fact we are discussing the merits of Marxism/Communism is disturbing enough.

During the 20th Century and early 21st Century, these governments shot and killed over 100 million of their own citizens who were civilians. These were in multiple countries. Reread that and let it soak in.

True.

our education systems have failed completely when communism/socialism supporters is what’s being produced.

So you’re using stolen weapons as a reason to take guns from legal owners? We should ban planes too. The people in the World Trade Center had a right to live too. . .

Low IQ argument. You said yourself he shouldn't have a gun. The laws on the books should have stopped it, enforcement was the issue

This is what happens when the government runs the schools.... (and this was by design)

We’re totally screwed. We have people in our society who embrace fascism and communism/socialism and have forgotten that we, our parents, and our grandparents fought those ideologies for a reason. South Korea is having the same problem with their youth who don’t want US forces on the peninsula. The older generations remember.


So when do we get pics and specs on the Super Brasilia?

I think you are confusing the philosophy of Marxism with Marxist-Leninist and Stalinist practice as seen in the USSR. You will find almost no one today who defends the actions of Lenin and Stalin and it is well know that authoritarian communism is a disaster for everyone involved.

Not much, but a couple of conceptual images were released in October.

​​​​​​AIN article

The problem is that nobody signs up for the authoritarian flavor of communism when they order but that’s the only dish that has ever come out of the kitchen.

Authoritarian communism is the only kind there is... it goes so much against the fundamental grain of human nature, that it has to be heavily enforced. Naturally once the government acquires a critical mass of power, it's all downhill from there.

The only communist "success story" is the PRC... they keep the communist moniker to rationalize their authoritarian control, while the workers get to live in a free market (that's free so long it directs wealth to the right bosses).

Most other communist regimes have collapsed under the weight of their own authoritarianism. Oh yeah, and the scale of their mass murder makes the holocaust look like a minor civil rights incident.

our education system has failed when people can’t understand the difference between Stalinist Marxism and modern democratic socialism

That's because our school system teaches us how to join the proletariat, not how to think. But for me, I'm an avid fan of Groucho. :p

The maturity of political ideology of the youth as they age has been going on for years... before self created social media bubbles. I worry the formula has changed.

I suspect that taxes can still penetrate those bubbles, it sure did for my wife... she quickly tired of three steps forward, two steps back.

The danger is entitlements associated with those taxes.. it's VERY hard to roll back entitlements.

Sooooo, who thinks props are going to make a come back? I sure hope they do.

Glad we’re back to aviation. I doubt the mainline feeding carriers will go back to props. Mostly based on customer experience, not that there’s anything wrong with a turboprop.

I think you’d need

A. A remarkably good product with a noticeably better cabin. Quieter than a jet, WiFi, ample bin space, more legroom, etc.

B. Savvy marketing. Highlight why it’s better from a pax perspective than a tired -200 or 145. Make people excited to fly on it. Shoot, just getting rid of a few seats and adding a snack station turned an ancient 70 seater into a 50 seater people are excited to fly on. Also harp on it being better for the environment. You could probably hook a lot of younger travelers who have never set foot in a turboprop before and don’t have the associated bad memories. Plenty of wealthy people float around in Kingairs and Pilatuses- the stigma can be overcome.

If the US population were....smarter?....yes. When “regionals” quit doing ATL-HOU type of legs or when small, Class D airspace-type airports start losing flights, maybe they’ll wake up and happily accept a Q, an ATR, OR, now this was in 2019, a German company was reviving the Do328.

If it's cheaper, people will buy the ticket. They will make clever to them jokes about it as they board or will make disparaging remarks on facebook about having to ride on an "old prop". But the consumer has shown price point is really all they think about when booking a fight.

That's the conventional wisdom in a lot of things, but most US legacies consciously moved to all-jet service on regional routes primarily for (irrational) customer preference. Or at least it was a selling point.

On point B, market it to my generation and the zoomers with pointing out the reduction in per seat fuel usage vs an RJ. That will 100% work with the younger generations. Older ones just do it with the price savings, however minimal, on the ticket.

Antonov’s with WiFi and a keurig in the back. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.

http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/AN2-Colt-1.jpg

Now you are talking! But I like the open cockpit.

Riding on a turboprop is like driving to the airport in a 1980 diesel VW Rabbit. Slow and noisy!

Slow doesn't matter on short stage lengths, and noise can be fixed. The last turboprop I flew was probably on par with the CRJ for noise.

Yes. If a significant portion of the flight time is below 10K, or spent on an arrival/departure with published speeds the flight time difference gets negligible pretty quickly. New prop designs are quite fast by old standards, and can be quiet as well.

I’d think anything below 400nm is better in a turboprop. In the terminal area, ATC loved turboprops because they could keep the speed up longer than jets because they bleed energy easier.

Plus they don't need to get up high to be efficient, so you can hang out in less congested airspace without eating up gas, and on shorter flights you don't waste time climbing. Flights like ORD-CVG or ORD-IND, in a CRJ you waste all this time climbing up at 290 to get a few extra knots and fuel efficiency just to come back down after 20 minutes of cruise flight. A turboprop could level off at 20, cruise a few knots slower, and still get there in roughly the same amount of time while using way less fuel.

I tend to agree, plus if it has WiFi, craft coffee, and the whole “props are lofi cool, you wouldn’t understand” appeal Millennials might even pay moooore to fly on a prop ;).

The new ATR 42 and 72 -600 have a modern glass cockpit, burn half the gas of a CRJ, and with the 6 blade prop they are quieter than a CRJ. You can get them with Enhanced Vision System and wi-if. Most US regionals have a route structure that would be well suited to the new ATR.

Since Airbus owns ATR, the 72-600 sim is located at the Airbus Center in Miami, the PFD/MFD/FMS, and systems are similar to what’s in an A320. ATR training is the Airbus method, which might make the transition to an Airbus a little easier when the opportunity to move up arrives.

I think you’re all crazy; props SUCK as a passenger. Stay lower? It’s more bumpy. They’re loud (if it’s not the outright noise, it’s the drone from the props being out of sync). They smell (you don’t get that gas smell in a jet). They’re small (having little to no overhead storage is one of the greatest sins for pax). They’re dumpy (in a pax mind, jet = sleek, modern, safe. Prop = old, slow, unsafe).

I lived for several years in an area that was only served by props, and I hated it. I would routinely drive 2.5 hours or 3.5 hours to the two closest larger airports so that I didn’t have to ride on a piece of crap prop.

You may be nostalgic for props or like them for whatever other reason, but most pax HATE them.

You completely missed what people on here are saying. Technology has changed since the days of the Brasília and the Slaab. You can make a larger cabin prop with new noise reduction technology and an APU.