Just dandy

And what result do they intend to have from this?
 
flyer770 said:
All the airports shut down, of course. No more flights of anything anywhere.
Click to expand...
And as rail catches up with the times it might actually be feasible to some extent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Really I detest this kind of stuff. You buy property under an approach path or near airport and then complain about noise?

I have the same opinion about people who buy next to a highway.

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
 
Ryanb said:
Get real. No it won’t.
Click to expand...
Some places it might. Things are looking serious between Dallas and Houston and I wouldn’t be shocked to see a pretty significant ridership. Short hauls would make some sense, especially if lines and wait times are shorter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This Gizmo is brilliant. What an easy way to $cam the chem trail loons and "I need to speak with your manager" soccer moms.

1.16M complaints at 15 clicks a month for $5 monthly subscription or whatever... Lots of cheese.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
 
RyanShort1 said:
Some places it might. Things are looking serious between Dallas and Houston and I wouldn’t be shocked to see a pretty significant ridership. Short hauls would make some sense, especially if lines and wait times are shorter.
Click to expand...
Someone ran the numbers on that one and it would need full passenger loads at $500 a ticket to pay for it.
 
Amtrak Boston-New Haven-New York-Phili-DC seems like it should be a decent train line with great ridership, but it’s ridiculously expensive. I can get from Connecticut to DC faster and much cheaper by aircraft. I don’t see that changing anytime soon.

I see self-driving cars replacing aircraft for short trips like that before trains do. And I don’t think we’re anywhere close to that either.
 
yetti said:
Someone ran the numbers on that one and it would need full passenger loads at $500 a ticket to pay for it.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying I like it, but I do think it is going to become a reality. It’s not like airlines and airports don’t get public funding, either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There are numerous airline routes around the country where high speed rail would make more sense from a time and convenience standpoint in my opinion. If I could make the trip in the same total time or even a little longer and not have to deal with all of the issues that surround airline travel, I would do it every time.
 
View attachment 70437
murphey said:
Article on Avweb with link to entire article on the Washington Post website. Push a button, complain to the FAA about airplane noise.

Just what we don't need. Fortunately, the emphasis is at the major airports....but just wait...

https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Small-Device-Drives-Airport-Noise-Complaints-232064-1.html
Click to expand...

This is why flying cars, passenger carrying flying drone, flying _________ will never be legal in your backyard.

The sad part is, the folks bitching about airplane/airport noise would probably jump on owning such machines if they were affordable and practical, no matter how noisy it is.


Right now in Lincoln NE, this whole space is being developed into high priced apartments, right under the traffic pattern of the busiest runway. Its the largest apartment project I've seen in this area, all ready served by some very large apartment complexes.

​
 

Attachments

  • apartmntsJPG.JPG
    apartmntsJPG.JPG
    152.1 KB · Views: 28
Last edited:
SkyDog58 said:
There are numerous airline routes around the country where high speed rail would make more sense from a time and convenience standpoint in my opinion. If I could make the trip in the same total time or even a little longer and not have to deal with all of the issues that surround airline travel, I would do it every time.
Click to expand...
Why do you think TSA would not become involved in that?
 
Salty said:
Why do you think TSA would not become involved in that?
Click to expand...

I don’t see the TSA increasing their involvement in rail service much more than they already have which is pretty mild compared to the crawling up your butt that they do at commercial airports. Roving patrols and random checks are far less of a hassle than the security checkpoints.

Besides TSA isn’t the only issue with airline travel.

Trains have multiple entry and exit doors so you don’t have that stupid process of channeling through a single door.

Train terminals are not typically the sprawling mess that airports are. The distance you have to drag your bag is so much less.

Trains typically will take you from downtown to downtown rather than a terminal several miles away.

The time from your arrival at the train terminal until the train’s departure is far less than at the airport.

No old battle axe walking down the aisles pushing a cart and being a pain in the ass.

Weather delays are practically unheard of.

That’s basically it.
 
Eric Stoltz said:
This Gizmo is brilliant. What an easy way to $cam the chem trail loons and "I need to speak with your manager" soccer moms.

1.16M complaints at 15 clicks a month for $5 monthly subscription or whatever... Lots of cheese.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Exactly, took a minute or two to find the details, but this is a for profit company. I am going to create a button for idiots.....I will be pressing that all of the time.
 
Personally, for the billions that California is spending for their High Speed Rail they could have improved air travel in the state immensely, along with public transit improvements to get to and from the airports.
 
Trains are a religion for some people. Their objective is to have trains as such, and they are not interested in any kind of better transportation. Add to that, trains are often considered "more green", regardless of how green they actually are.

At least it's not a monorail.
 
Monorail? Aren’t they awfully loud?

Trains are more green, if you’re considering how many miles you can move a ton of load per gallon of diesel burned. Fantastic for freight, and railroads today haul more tons per year than ever before and make nice profits doing it. They suck for passenger traffic on anything more than commuting maybe 50-70 miles or so. I’d hate to think how bad traffic would be for commuters in San Francisco or Chicago or NYC without commuter rail. But between the metro areas, high speed rail is impractical at this time. China, Japan, and Europe have the population density to make it profitable. Here, only the east coast does, but the current corridor is too convoluted to ever become high speed. I’ll support better and more consistent funding for Amtrak though.
 
flyer770 said:
I’ll support better and more consistent funding for Amtrak though.
Click to expand...

Why should Amtrak receive more funding when virtually no one rides trains except in the NYC-DC corridor? If their budget was increased, they would just lose more money.
 
3393RP said:
Why should Amtrak receive more funding when virtually no one rides trains except in the NYC-DC corridor? If their budget was increased, they would just lose more money.
Click to expand...

As long as Congress continues to mandate that Amtrak keep service throughout the country you are correct. Multiple times over the years, Amtrak was told by Congress to find a way to become financially independent. One method was to raise prices on the east and west coast routes to subsidize the central part of the country. Ridership dropped, that program ended. Second solution was to drop almost all east-west bound routes with a mandate that each route pay for itself. Congress blocked that one; multiple times.

Tim
 
Let's replace it with this button, maybe they won't notice:


bacon.png
 
Doesn't Amtrak get Federal money?,....read taxpayers money
 
Gary Austin said:
Doesn’t Amtrak get Federal money?,....read taxpayers money
Click to expand...

Don’t airports get Federal money?,....read taxpayers money

Don’t highways get Federal money?,....read taxpayers money




We fund transportation projects because they provide a good return on their investments. Public transport of all sorts is a rounding error in this country, and while I am definitely not advocating waste (indeed, I’d love to see a total bottom up review of every single agency in government-not just budgetary, but mission as well) I don’t see this as a waste compared to so many other projects we have going on or proposed. And I’d hate to see a lot of small airports get some budget cutters who complain about federal dollars being wasted for GA, and airport spending should only be for airports that serve airlines. Private ATC, anyone?
 
skier said:
Amtrak Boston-New Haven-New York-Phili-DC seems like it should be a decent train line with great ridership, but it’s ridiculously expensive. I can get from Connecticut to DC faster and much cheaper by aircraft. I don’t see that changing anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Different opinion here. I ride Amtrak from DC to NYC regularly.

Acela is pricy, but it is priced competitively with the airline shuttles. It is faster, too, to midtown (LGA to midtown can be brutal depending on the time of day). Mor legroom and none of the TSA nonsense.

The Northeast Regional is much, much less expensive and only takes about 20 minutes longer between DC and NY. It's also a nice ride. No worries about traffic or tolls.

The issue between NY and Boston is the condition of the tracks through Connecticut, which are owned either by Metro North or the state of Connecticut, I've forgotten which. Adequate for commuter rail but doesn't support the higher Amtrak speeds. The tracks in RI and Mass support higher speeds. The track between from DC-Philly-NYC support higher speeds.

I generally can't fly or drive from DC to NYC in eeither the time or cost tha Amtrak gets. But that's not for everyone - if you're going to one of the outer boroughs, other options might be better.

Boston is a different matter. I take the train between them when the weather is down. Cost is comparable to airline, but time is generally longer. And DC to Boston is right around that 500 mile break-point between air travel and ground transportation.

Use the right tool for the job. While I love riding the train, it's not for everyone and outside of the major urban corridors it's not compelling. We'll see if Musk gets the hyper loop in the ground and running. And we'll see if the ancient rail tunnel under the Hudson gets replaced.
 
I used to ride Amtrak between Philly and NYC and really enjoyed it. Far better than being in the back of an airliner. I didn't find the price to be really outrageous - maybe $50 for cheap fares, up to $100 during busier times.
 
Gary Austin said:
Doesn't Amtrak get Federal money?,....read taxpayers money
Click to expand...
Every form of transportation in this country gets government money.

Walking: sidewalks & trails
Biking: Bile routes and bike trails
Boating: USCG, surveys, dredging, etc.
Rail: Amtrak operating subsidy, onership of some tracks & bridges
Air transportation: EAS, ATC, Many airports, protected zones near airports, noise rules
Auto/Truck: highway subsidies, loan guarantees on PPP projects, traffic monitoring, pollution measurement, etc.

And all of them have government tentacles with rights of way, condemnation rights, charters, licensing, regulation, etc.

This forms the basis of certain politicians saying that "you didn't build a company/get profitable on your own". The government is an indispensable part of the the system - we can debate in another forum whether that should be the case or not.
 
zaitcev said:
Yes, please.
Click to expand...
No please. There’s no way I could give enough money to compete with American Airlines to use a spot near DFW for aerial photography if they wanted to outbid me. For $2/passenger they could put $250-600 down to keep me out and our customers’ price for a job would have an astronomical price increase for their location (and in spots where none of y’all want people flying drones). Basically the minute you allow for that there will be people that “own” large swaths of airspace because they can afford to “buy” it from the government. I prefer a system that is at least on paper impartial to large corporations and lets me into airspace when they think I can not affect their workload too much.
And yes, both American and Southwest have been told to hold position until I finished a mission before...
 
Last edited:
Oh, and speaking of Amtrak, remember that the CEO is a former airline executive.
 
Hank S said:
So he's used to losing money, then. It won't be such a shock.
Click to expand...

Airline revenues and earnings have been sharply positive for almost a decade.

In 2009, the commercial aviation industry entered a golden age. Between 2009 and 2017, revenue in the global aviation industry grew at a compound annual growth rate of around 5.9 percent, reaching 754 billion U.S. dollars in 2017. The sector’s improved financial performance is the result of a rising number of air cargo and passenger figures, which in turn are driven by a world that is increasingly becoming more and more affluent and interconnected.

The United States, Brazil, China and the European Union are ranked among the most important markets for air travel. The world’s busiest airports are Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport (IATA: ATL), handling around 104 million passengers annually, and Hong Kong International Airport (IATA: HKG), where about 4.9 million tons of freight is loaded and unloaded per year.

In terms of revenue, the leading airlines worldwide include American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Continental Holdings. The evolution of ancillary revenue streams and automated ticketing technologies, as well as the ongoing deregulation of civil aviation in many markets worldwide have given rise to the emergence of low-cost airlines.

Ryanair - the Irish airline that may even be dubbed an ultra-low-cost carrier (ULCC) - and Southwest Airlines are the main players in the low-cost category, which is attracting a growing customer base. In this segment, many carriers have taken to charging their customers for ancillary services to boost revenue. Low-cost carriers are so successful that upstart airlines such as WOW Air, La Compagnie or Norwegian are trying to enter the market.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top