From today's issue of Parade 'magazine' (in the Sunday paper):

Q: What has gone wrong with air travel?

A: (from Marion Blakey) We're in the safest period in aviation
history, but some of our current system is built on World War II
technology. **Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to
maintain contact with the ground.** It costs time and fuel and is
inefficient.
[emphasis added]

She's safely blaming the politically-correct cause and not the real
culprits. Over-scheduled departures, ground holds due to weather on the
other side of the country, etc.

--

Scott

Growing corn to make ethanol to fuel a car is like heating your house by
burning money in your fireplace. Yes, it can be done but it makes no
economic sense.
"Steve" > wrote in message
...
> From today's issue of Parade 'magazine' (in the Sunday paper):
>
> Q: What has gone wrong with air travel?
>
> A: (from Marion Blakey) We're in the safest period in aviation
> history, but some of our current system is built on World War II
> technology. **Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to
> maintain contact with the ground.** It costs time and fuel and is
> inefficient.
> [emphasis added]
>

tscottme wrote:
> She's safely blaming the politically-correct cause and not the real
> culprits. Over-scheduled departures, ground holds due to weather on the
> other side of the country, etc.
>

Filling the FAA with incompetent minorities and women with
no clue(Including dip **** Blakey) is the reason the FAA is
so ****ed up.

Not Politically Correct

Also, the WWII labor intensive technology is what employs the union labor.
There have been rational proposals for free flight, monitored by computers,
with many improved safety and reduced labor.


"tscottme" > wrote in message
. ..
| She's safely blaming the politically-correct cause and not the real
| culprits. Over-scheduled departures, ground holds due to weather on the
| other side of the country, etc.
|
| --
|
| Scott
|
| Growing corn to make ethanol to fuel a car is like heating your house by
| burning money in your fireplace. Yes, it can be done but it makes no
| economic sense.
| "Steve" > wrote in message
| ...
| > From today's issue of Parade 'magazine' (in the Sunday paper):
| >
| > Q: What has gone wrong with air travel?
| >
| > A: (from Marion Blakey) We're in the safest period in aviation
| > history, but some of our current system is built on World War II
| > technology. **Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to
| > maintain contact with the ground.** It costs time and fuel and is
| > inefficient.
| > [emphasis added]
| >
|
|

(ignoring the ranters)


The point was:

"Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to maintain contact
with the ground."

as an explaination of current IFR procedures.


- Steve



On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 21:22:41 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:

>Also, the WWII labor intensive technology is what employs the union labor.
>There have been rational proposals for free flight, monitored by computers,
>with many improved safety and reduced labor.
>
>
>"tscottme" > wrote in message
. ..
>| She's safely blaming the politically-correct cause and not the real
>| culprits. Over-scheduled departures, ground holds due to weather on the
>| other side of the country, etc.
>|
>| --
>|
>| Scott
>|
>| Growing corn to make ethanol to fuel a car is like heating your house by
>| burning money in your fireplace. Yes, it can be done but it makes no
>| economic sense.
>| "Steve" > wrote in message
>| ...
>| > From today's issue of Parade 'magazine' (in the Sunday paper):
>| >
>| > Q: What has gone wrong with air travel?
>| >
>| > A: (from Marion Blakey) We're in the safest period in aviation
>| > history, but some of our current system is built on World War II
>| > technology. **Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to
>| > maintain contact with the ground.** It costs time and fuel and is
>| > inefficient.
>| > [emphasis added]
>| >
>|
>|
>

Steve wrote:
> (ignoring the ranters)
>
>
> The point was:
>
> "Planes must fly on specific highways in the sky to maintain contact
> with the ground."
>
> as an explaination of current IFR procedures.
>
>
> - Steve

**** poor explanation of IFR procedures. I presume she meant ATC by
"ground." But, I am not sure of that, either.

So, if that is what she meant, then does that mean if I do direct, my
radios short out?

She is totally inept.

tscottme wrote:

> She's safely blaming the politically-correct cause and not the real
> culprits. Over-scheduled departures, ground holds due to weather on the
> other side of the country, etc.
>

Lack of runways, lack of proper runway configuration due to politics and
revamping (again and again) of lighted-airway-days airports.

If every major airport was like Denver, we would have a lot less
problems. Obviously, that is an unobtainable ideal, but we could do a
whole lot better than we are doing.

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
...
>
> **** poor explanation of IFR procedures. I presume she meant ATC by
> "ground." But, I am not sure of that, either.
>
> So, if that is what she meant, then does that mean if I do direct, my
> radios short out?
>
> She is totally inept.
>

Hey, give her a break. She didn't enter the aviation industry until she
became FAA administrator.

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
...
>
> Lack of runways, lack of proper runway configuration due to politics and
> revamping (again and again) of lighted-airway-days airports.
>
> If every major airport was like Denver, we would have a lot less problems.
> Obviously, that is an unobtainable ideal, but we could do a whole lot
> better than we are doing.
>

And all of that, and more, was ascertained at US government expense almost
six decades ago.

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

>> Lack of runways, lack of proper runway configuration due to politics and
>> revamping (again and again) of lighted-airway-days airports.
>>
>> If every major airport was like Denver, we would have a lot less problems.
>> Obviously, that is an unobtainable ideal, but we could do a whole lot
>> better than we are doing.
>>
>
>And all of that, and more, was ascertained at US government expense almost
>six decades ago.

So why all this Next Gen BS as a supposed end to flight delays? ADS-B
Out will cost GA owners beaucoup and not benefit them and in my
opinion will have little benefit to commercial ops.

Ron Lee

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
...
>
....
>
> Hey, give her a break. She didn't enter the aviation industry until she
> became FAA administrator.
>
....and she left knowing as much real truth about the system as when she got
there.

--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas

Ron Lee wrote:
> "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:
>
>
>>>Lack of runways, lack of proper runway configuration due to politics and
>>>revamping (again and again) of lighted-airway-days airports.
>>>
>>>If every major airport was like Denver, we would have a lot less problems.
>>>Obviously, that is an unobtainable ideal, but we could do a whole lot
>>>better than we are doing.
>>>
>>
>>And all of that, and more, was ascertained at US government expense almost
>>six decades ago.
>
>
> So why all this Next Gen BS as a supposed end to flight delays? ADS-B
> Out will cost GA owners beaucoup and not benefit them and in my
> opinion will have little benefit to commercial ops.
>
> Ron Lee
ADS-B saves the FAA money by shutting down expensive radar systems.

It won't do a thing for congested airspace. But, it will provide good
survellience in the mountain West and that will benefit a small
percentage of users.

The only real benefit is RNP, and true RNP with small numbers requires
$$$$$ equipment.

Sam Spade > wrote:
>>
>> So why all this Next Gen BS as a supposed end to flight delays? ADS-B
>> Out will cost GA owners beaucoup and not benefit them and in my
>> opinion will have little benefit to commercial ops.
>>
>> Ron Lee

>ADS-B saves the FAA money by shutting down expensive radar systems.
>
>It won't do a thing for congested airspace. But, it will provide good
>survellience in the mountain West and that will benefit a small
>percentage of users.
>
>The only real benefit is RNP, and true RNP with small numbers requires
>$$$$$ equipment.

Maybe...maybe not. I don't think that primary radars will be shut
down. Plus with current transponders being the backup strategy maybe
even SSR radars will not be shut down.

As far as the west where I am I did talk to the ADS office and they
stated that ADS-B will only provide coverage where current radars
exist so there is no current planned improved coverage.

Can't comment on whether RNP will benefit but improved capacity in the
sky is pointless if ground facilities are the limiting factor. See
recent news reducing hourly ops at JFK to minimize delays.

Ron Lee

Ron Lee wrote:

>
> Can't comment on whether RNP will benefit but improved capacity in the
> sky is pointless if ground facilities are the limiting factor. See
> recent news reducing hourly ops at JFK to minimize delays.
>
> Ron Lee
>
>
>

The limiting factor in congested airspace are runways and properly
spaced runways.

RNP could do some deconflicting at an airport like JFK, but the airlines
cannot afford to implement it.

Perhaps after some of them go broke, the surviors cannot afford not to
implement RNP.

For today's benefit of RNP look at the lousy conventional IAPs at KBIH,
then look at the RNAP SAAAR IAP to Runway 30. This does little, if
anything for capacity, but it sure does improve access and safety.