Posted on 08/13/2006 8:39:23 AM PDT by robert jones
One way to end terrorism on airplanes would be to have separate planes for baggage. With a minimal crew and no one else on board, an inexpensive baggage plane would not be a very attractive terrorist target. Without baggage the passenger plane would be as safe from internal attack as possible. Terrorists could only sneak on board with nonmetallic objects that they have swallowed or that they can, um, stuff up their rectums.
A simple-minded implementation of such a scheme would be to halve the number of passenger flights, an inconvenience that many would put up with for the sake of eliminating the inconvenience currently attending the flying experience. Our free enterprise system, however, would surely find improvements.
Here's how we can get around the "added fuel cost" problem:
Simply fill the cargo holds with passengers and the passenger cabins with luggage on the luggage-only planes.
If done properly, this would add close to zero extra cost. Though we would probably have situations where we cannot have an exact 1:1 ratio of passengers to luggage, in which case airlines can contract with FedEx and UPS (and other overnight carriers) to completely fill the baggage planes with cargo. This might actually turn this into a money-making endeavor for the cash-flow starved airlines.
Now as for stashing the passengers in cargo holds, this is not as inhumane as it sounds. Cargo holds can be pressurized and lighting can be added at little extra cost. After all, we ship our pets in the cargo holds. Why not passengers at cut-rate fares?
I'm thinking that in order to maximize the number of passengers in the cargo hold, we can be placed in "human cages" similar to those sleeping compartments over in Japan (where you can literally climb into a coin-operated sleeping compartment that is stacked several high). This would allow the compartments to be secured to the aircraft so that they do not slide around during the flight. Passengers could be issued (by the airline) a paper barf bag, a plastic bag (for urination and/or defecation) and a small bag of cheese and crackers along with a bottle of water. Passengers would be allowed to take one book (for reading) but that is it.
We could probably double or triple the passenger capacity of passengers right there (and stash all their luggage on the other plane). Similarly, the overhead carry-on luggage compartments could be converted into low-cost passenger compartments.
So under this system, if you want a regular seat, you pay full fare price. But for less price, you could elect to be stashed in an overhead compartment or you could buy a compartment in the cargo hold. This would have the effect of making flying affordable for just about everybody.
I believe the cruise ships of old used to stash passengers in "steerage" for a cut-rate fee.
Time to bring this concept back.
Speaking for myself, I would probably elect to fly this way going forward should such a system be implemented. Even though I could afford a seat, having my own private compartment in the cargo hold would afford me some privacy and I would not be subjected to inane conversations from my seatmates.
Better yet, what if no one was allowed baggage? If you want to take clothes etc. to your destination, ship it via FedEx or UPS. You'd actually stand a better chance of having it there for you when you arrived then you do now. Ticket cost can be cheaper because there will be less weight and the airlines can take more passangers.
Okay, but I guess you're going to put passengers in the cargo hold of that one plane.
And you're going to have all the passengers waiting around the airport for their luggage to arrive on a different flight.
Now, explain to me how this saves money. Two planes, one filled with passengers in the cargo hold, and one with suitcases in the passenger seats.
I'm missing the cost savings here.
Double the cost of flying?? Hardly. Double the number of planes in the air?? The stock holders of the airlines would just love that.
OK, others have taken their shot, here's mine.
A second airplane would probably be late - twice the traffic density to a given destination. And as for cutting flights in half - they make you sit on peoples' laps now the aircraft are so full.
And I don't like standing there at the baggage area waiting for my stuff. I sometimes do quick turnarounds, and even when I don't, every minute is one I could be doing something else and getting the trip over with. So I carry on for all trips less than a week. And my damned bag goes UNDER THE SEAT so I'm not one of those morons with blank looks stuffing a too-big roller in the overhead. Smart packing and an iron at the hotel can work miracles...
That ain't gonna fly.
How about nekkid passengers and crew and a full cavity search? Even that won't stop a mechanic messing with the wires or such.
Get your own airline.
A database of totally vetted citizens, and doing away with the trillion$ burden made necessary entirely on account of muslims is a much more rational answer.
Not a bad plan!
How about we put luggage in the mailbox, and robert jones into a remedial logic school?
how about if the airlines get the Federal government to build a network of pneumatic tubes between all the world's airports? Then we can load all the luggage on cargo jets and stick passengers in the pneumatic tubes, like on the Jetson's?
Putting passengers in the cargo hold will just give terrorists another easy opportunity to being down planes! Anyone who watched the last serious of 24 knows that all you have to do is pull out a couple of wires down there and you can control the steering of the plane!
I used to work for Fedex for 14 years. You'd be surprised how many people ship their their luggage to the destination and have it waiting for them at their hotel or where ever before the recipient arrived. I noticed it alot after 9/11 because people were tired of dealing with security checks. This can be $$$ though.
Are you a government employee?
Faulty reasoning. The number of necessary planes remains the same. The primary constraint of airliners is not the number of passengers, but the total weight. I do not know this for a fact, but I am willing to bet that the weight of freight and luggage exceeds passenger weight.
In addition, the amount of fuel needed for any given trip (and thus the efficiency in the use of fuel) is directly proportional to the total weight of the aircraft.
1.) You have them register with the airlines as to their religiion, sure they can lie but you can also use profiling to weed out a lot of them.
2.) Airlines are private entities and therefore can discriminate agaisnt whom ever they choose. They are not bound by the 1st amendment. The 1st applies to laws passed by congress not policies set by private businesses.
3.) I don't recognize islam as a religion but a death cult, so even if congress passed a law forbidding the practice of islam in the US I would be happy with it.
4.)Not all countries go by our consitution, actually I think we are the only ones who do, and therefore can implement what ever rules they like in regards to death cults.
5.) If I were you I would be more worried about whether I was going to live through my next airplane flight than I would be about whether I violated some killers rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.