Posted on 05/17/2010 7:54:05 PM PDT by Stoat
There are others.
I think "plane works" and "no clinkers" are very important.
European airspace is simple as well, I've flown there for many years. Crossing borders in Europe is not a big deal and is seamless to the aircraft and takes no notice of the population of a country. Kind of like shared airspace between Canada and the United States. . .flights corss over and back all the time, no great shakes.
While national controllers “control” their airspace, it is a shared duty depending upon flight details. So, I think the concern you raise about European airspace really don't apply here.
Just curious, what’s a “clinker?”
When you burn down a lump of coal the unburnable parts are called “clinkers”. FOr the most part “clinkers” are large chunks, but there’s no rule that says you can’t also include volcanic ash in the category ~ particularly when the same volcano is tossing rocks the size of Volkswagens.
“‘I am very concerned that we have decisions on opening and closing of airports based on a theoretical model,’ “
Theoretical models using inaccurate data are the same methods bureaucrats and snake oil salesmen are using to stampede the public into man caused global warming hysteria.
Wow. . .please let me know when a Volkswagon-sized chunk reaches 20,000’. . .that would be something to see, for sure, and probably more dangerous than an Oklahoma hailstorm.
Could be pretty dangerous. I believe Yellowstone does that quite normally when it goes off. Fortunately it doesn’t explode very often.
The problem is that here in England the prevailing winds haven't been, er, prevailing. For many months we've had an unusually prolonged succession of northerlies, on the Eastern side of large North Atlantic high pressure systems. These brought us an exceptionally cold winter, a cold dry spring...and the ash. The prevailing moist, mild Atlantic southwesterlies have been rare visitors recently: although this week we're at last beginning to get some warmer westerlies.
Excellent. I like and agree with all your minimums and we might add some more value added items like a functioning bathroom, snacks, water or other beverages, etc. But at a bare minimum yours work fine.
So we have no regulatory agency overseeing flight safety from maintenance to pilot quality to security. You and I own an airline together. As our marketing director how do you suggest we advertise (truthfully as fraud is always illegal) our airline to our clients?
Would we emphasize our Six Sigma maintenance program? How often our planes are refurbished? Our flight safety record? Our AAA insurance company in case of any loss? How modern our fleet is? That covers (1) & (2).
How about the years of flying experience of our pilots? Their training and hours on the aircraft they fly? Our hiring procedure in which we only employ teetotalers as pilots? That we random drug test? That covers (3) & (4).
Next we could emphasize our pilot’s training in inflight combat on board an aircraft and their proficiency with small arms. We might mention that we randomly place our own security people trained to Mossad levels of lethality in combating terrorists or that our flight crew is similarly trained. We might emphasize our passenger and baggage screening programs. How about that for (5) & (6)?
Finally, we would mention that since absolute deregulation of air travel we’re part owners of the Air Traffic Control system and have purchased from the now privately owned airports our own “gates” owned like residential/commercial condos by our airline guaranteeing us clutter free run ways, ontime departures/landings, etc.
All that is something we’d do outside of the “regulators” purview just to compete. Why wouldn’t it work?
Agreed. My understanding is that the airlines tested this aspect themselves and proved that their engines weren’t at any great risk.
What private options are available for this kind of assessment?
My point is that for the most part the market can resolve these kinds of issues without the heavy hand of government. We want government to intercede in cases of clear abuse, fraud, and collusion.
In those cases the punishments should fit the crime, even to the point of holding the appropriate executives liable, dissolving corporations for egregious abuses, or bankrupting them in courts.
Those threats above are enough to make me want to run our airline safely, not to mention the profit motive, no?
BTW, what should we call our airline? ;-]
So, who's the consumer to believe?
Funny how the inaccurate volcanic ash predictions come from the same Met office that is so aggressively promoting AGW through mathematic predictions.
They expect us to change our lifestyles to stop predicted warming, yet they can’t accurately predict where an ash cloud will be a few hours in the future.
I am a big fan of watching their hands while ignoring their mouths. I use the surgeon all the nurses use, so in this case I’d fly the airline/route all the pilots use.
Who wants to die.
What do we call our airline? I want to get our logo started and order cards asap!
You probably can develop (if not now buy) an air sampling probe for your aircraft that measures some parameters related to dust/smoke/ash/tephra quantitatively. Consult with your engine manufacturer (and that company’s engineering design specifications) and then determine a comfortable margin of safety and avoidance protocol for situations when your instrumentation reads above a certain threshold.
This same Met Office botches forecasts in a high-profile way quite regularly. Their hot and snowless winter turned into a severely cold one featuring unusually persistent deep heavy snow. Their “barbecue summer” featured persistent cold and frequent heavy rain. I’m sure that they’ll find some “global warming” excuse to explain how their often wrong computer models erred, but their computer models forecasting extreme doom from “global warming” are undeniably perfectly accurate.
“So we have no regulatory agency overseeing flight safety from maintenance to pilot quality to security. “
FAA.. .perhaps?
They have that responsibility (except for the “security” part, DHS has that). Now, if you want to talk about effectiveness, that’s different, as the FAA has in place flight examiners that NEVER WERE PILOTS (because they fill diversity quotas).
The aircraft manufacturers and engine manufacturers.
Thus far, all report none to absolute minimal potential or real damage when flying in conditions as they exist over Europe. Over 1,000 flights have been conducted with Boeing aircraft alone, with no passengers, and they all come back no damage.
Indeed.
Alas, we are not talking about the capability of the engines but instead the ability of a cloud of volcanic ash to damage them.
For all anyone knows the Germans actually took their aircraft AROUND the clouds and not through them. The Belgians probably imagined they were giant sausages in the sky and barged on through the clouds.
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.