WingFlaps wrote:
On Mar 7, 10:08 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:
On Mar 7, 8:02 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Mar 6, 2:20 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Mar 6, 7:20 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Mar 5, 6:57 pm, Steve Hix wrote:
In article
,
Dan wrote:
On Mar 5, 2:49 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
Weren't you the guy that was also suggesting that the runway be subject
to a walk down before every take-off?
For major airports, radar is being developed,
but I think dogs could do it faster and better.
Ken
Dogs?
Instead of using FOD-detection radar, I suppose.
I would use the words, "in competition".
Allow me to enumerate the main advantage of using
dogs to search the runway and return the scraps or
bark at said debris for a doggy biscuit.
Suppose a doggy gets run over, then all those cute
animal rights activists chicks will show up at said
airport flashing their tits to protest animal cruelty.
Then said airport and it's airlines will sell more tickets
to people who want to see said tits.
A recent marketing study performed by the Randy
corporation, actually confirmed that male passengers
would rather look at tits than radar, except for the
queers, so this system may not work well in Frisco,
but otherwise, everywhere else doggies are competitive.
Oh, and let's not forget the children. Would you want
to take your kids through a dreary airport with no dogs,
or one that has happy dogs running all over the runways
creating joy for the children, while saving lives.
Lassie would be proud...snifles.
Ken
Are you ripping MY IDEA off? What's the big idea -either give me
credit or I'll send around my brother to turn you into lasagna with
extra tomato paste.
Cheers
Sure it's your idea.
Dogs would love the work, they'd find every screw and
washer that normally gets sucked threw the engines.
(Boeing estimates $4 billion damage per year from
runway debris).
I think it's worth an experiment.
Ken- Hide quoted text -
I think small dogs would be better than big dogs. The eat less, drop
smaller turds that will not make such a mess of the terminal windows
(a jet blast problem), do less damage to engines and props when sucked
into them, and will make less of a bump when run over. Their only
disadvanatge is that they would be less of a deterrant for the hoards
of terrorists wanting to get to the apron. This migh be offset by
having aggressive packs of little dogs trained to attack any one who
does not have an identification badge. When the dogs get older they
could be retired to the pie factory for processing and then sold to
asia to thelp the balance of payments. What do you think?
Cheers
I can see the headlines now........

"Three hundred and fifty killed in crash of DC10 on take off at Kennedy.
Investigators are puzzled by an initial report of strange evidence of
small dogs found to have been sucked through the engines."


Well we can fix that. We'll train them to rrun away from jet engines
as well. If just one small dog once in a while is a bit slow we'll
send him to the meat pie faactory early.

Cheers

Make sure the dogs aren't too small. They're using Perigrin Falcons now
for bird control. The falcons LOVE fresh meat!! :-))

--
Dudley Henriques