Ha, are you kidding? The only concern of the airlines would be to do security screening as cheaply as possible. Their solution would be to have the gate agent ask you if you're a terrorist as they scan your boarding pass. As long as you didn't say "yes", you're safe.
So concerned about it, in fact, that they made damn sure the pilots aren't subject to these ridiculous machines. I fly on average 19 days a month, and I have NEVER been through one. Never will, either.
No, no, you've got it all wrong! It's a driverless car! It should pull out IN FRONT OF the red-light runner! Then it would remove the jerk from the driver pool without injuring any innocents! It's perfect!
It's not too big a deal for commercial aircraft since computers do the majority of the flying, but it can be dangerous for manually flown small aircraft.
This is complete BS. The only time a computer is flying a commercial aircraft during the landing phase is when the weather is so bad that you wouldn't be able to find the airplane with a laser.
The public has this myth that all planes are controlled by computers. I fly commercial jets for a living. The autopilot rarely goes on below 10,000 feet. The only time it's used during approach/landing is if the weather is bad. (This frees up the pilots for more important things like finding the runway).
I have personally been hit by green lasers three times on approach to major airports. Let me tell you, it's not fun. Fortunately, if you look away rather quickly you can move past the laser before you're in too much danger. (The average jet is doing ~150mph on short final).
Still, it's a legit problem, and anything they can do to put the fucktards who are doing this away is a good thing.
You are obviously clueless as to how an airline is run.
They could not have just "flown the planes if they wanted to". Despite scheduling the flights, EVERYTHING is handled by computers now. Those flight plans you mentioned? Yep, filed by a dispatcher USING A COMPUTER. The performance calculations that determine how much fuel that flight plan will require? Yep, computer.
Add to this the fact that the computers also control gate assignment, weight and balance, baggage routing, etc etc. There is NO WAY a modern airline can run their entire operation without computers. PERIOD. It's just not possible.
Dirigibles are more efficient and afford their passengers more space than planes. Their speeds are half of jets, but they can land on a dime and don't need much in the way of infrastructure....
What the hell dirigibles have you been flying on? Half the speed of jets? The ERJ-145 cruises around.74-.78 mach... I'm pretty damn sure there aren't any airships doing.37M... I'm pretty sure you're lucky to get 100mph out of one, let alone the 300+ that would be "half the speed of jets".
I hate to tell ya, but liability has a lot to do with this. (I am, in fact, an airline pilot). We're instructed to keep the sign on unless we're 150% sure that the air will be smooth ahead. The reason for this is if the sign is on and we hit a nice big chunk of turbulence, it's YOUR fault if you bounce off the ceiling (because you were disobeying the sign). Whereas, if the sign is off you end up with a broken leg and a concussion from that bag that fell on your head, the airline gets sued for not telling you to sit down first.
Sounds like you ran into an overly cautious captain.
Dear god, man. Don't tell them this. Seriously. The last thing we need is another dumbshit senator deciding that general aviation is a threat and trying to institute some new dumbshit rules (or close off the airspace within 100 miles of any major city), etc etc... Remember what happend to Meigs in chicago? yeah.
This is the kind of retarded response someone who has NO familiarity with the airline industry would post. The problem with monitoring, say, cockpit conversations is that it opens up pilots to retaliation by the airline and liability in the event of an incident.
For example, certain pilots make it a point to be very safe and write up any maintenance issues they find on their aircraft. The airline hates this. Maintenance items found at airports where there is not a maintenance base are VERY costly to the company in delayed flights and $$ for contracted maintenance. The airlines hate these guys.
However, there are some other types who are "company men". These pilots are willing to ignore such items until they get the plane back to the hub. Airlines LOVE these guys. However, they routinely fly suspect airplanes with paying passengers in the back...
Now, if the airline were allowed to review cockpit recordings, which group of pilots do you think they would find reasons to fire, and which would they like to keep around? The end result would be a less-safe system, and many ruined carreers of GOOD, HONEST pilots.
(And yes, I am an airline pilot, I know how this stuff works)
Yes, and that will absolve Blizzard of liability just like "But, your honor, she SAID she was 18" would absolve someone of liability after picking up that blonde at the club...
That is complete crap. The reg that states passengers shouldn't "congregate" near the flight deck door is in regards to in-flight. Sounds like another flight attendant who doesn't know what the hell she's doing. I am an airline pilot and I'm always happy to have passengers up by the cockpit (on the ground, obviously). If you ask, you can even get a picture in one of the seats if you wait 'till we're completely deplaned...
Let me be the first to say that aviation doesn't use the metric system for speed or altitude measurements. You get your clearances in feet, and your speed restrictions in knots. (nautical miles per hour).. Deal with it.
You are correct. The plane largely takes care of itself, except for emergency situations. These new rules will create a lot of very bored pilots.
No, what this new rule will do is create a lot of pilots who are now forced to violate a regulation in order to PREVENT an unsafe condition from occurring. (Namely, falling asleep.)
When you can be expected to be on duty for 16 hours a day flying as many as six separate legs, fatigue is DEFINITELY an issue. Sometimes the difference between an alert pilot and a sleeping pilot is keeping your mind busy/active during that "boring" cruise phase.
I think this patent thing is getting a little ridiculous... "portion of a gaming input device having an illuminated region"??? They have a patent on a controller with a LIGHT on it??!?!?!?!!?
While the nextgen plan is a good thing, the rest is crap. We can get legislation to ban laptops, but we can't get the HORRENDOUSLY dangerous rest regulations fixed. How about NOT giving in to the airline lobbyists for once and actually doing something to make air travel SAFER????
Slashdot Mirror
Ha, are you kidding? The only concern of the airlines would be to do security screening as cheaply as possible. Their solution would be to have the gate agent ask you if you're a terrorist as they scan your boarding pass. As long as you didn't say "yes", you're safe.
So concerned about it, in fact, that they made damn sure the pilots aren't subject to these ridiculous machines. I fly on average 19 days a month, and I have NEVER been through one. Never will, either.
I keep volunteering to be bumped, but the gate agents feed me this line about the plane "needing" both pilots.
See, the thing is, he did "get it". "It" of course, being a large infusion of cash from the industry benefiting from the DMCA.
But they play an increasingly smaller part in piloting planes.
Are you shitting me? I happen to be one of these neural net processors, and that statement is a HUGE load of crap.
No, no, you've got it all wrong! It's a driverless car! It should pull out IN FRONT OF the red-light runner! Then it would remove the jerk from the driver pool without injuring any innocents! It's perfect!
It's not too big a deal for commercial aircraft since computers do the majority of the flying, but it can be dangerous for manually flown small aircraft.
This is complete BS. The only time a computer is flying a commercial aircraft during the landing phase is when the weather is so bad that you wouldn't be able to find the airplane with a laser.
The public has this myth that all planes are controlled by computers. I fly commercial jets for a living. The autopilot rarely goes on below 10,000 feet. The only time it's used during approach/landing is if the weather is bad. (This frees up the pilots for more important things like finding the runway).
I have personally been hit by green lasers three times on approach to major airports. Let me tell you, it's not fun. Fortunately, if you look away rather quickly you can move past the laser before you're in too much danger. (The average jet is doing ~150mph on short final).
Still, it's a legit problem, and anything they can do to put the fucktards who are doing this away is a good thing.
You are obviously clueless as to how an airline is run.
They could not have just "flown the planes if they wanted to". Despite scheduling the flights, EVERYTHING is handled by computers now. Those flight plans you mentioned? Yep, filed by a dispatcher USING A COMPUTER. The performance calculations that determine how much fuel that flight plan will require? Yep, computer.
Add to this the fact that the computers also control gate assignment, weight and balance, baggage routing, etc etc. There is NO WAY a modern airline can run their entire operation without computers. PERIOD. It's just not possible.
(And yes, I do fly for an airline.)
From a pilot's point of view, that looks hideously unstable and unbelievably unsafe... But I'd sure as hell go fly it. It also looks AWESOME...
You mean people actually created twitter accounts with their REAL NAMES??!??!??? If you're that stupid, you deserve it!
Dirigibles are more efficient and afford their passengers more space than planes. Their speeds are half of jets, but they can land on a dime and don't need much in the way of infrastructure....
What the hell dirigibles have you been flying on? Half the speed of jets? The ERJ-145 cruises around .74-.78 mach... I'm pretty damn sure there aren't any airships doing .37M... I'm pretty sure you're lucky to get 100mph out of one, let alone the 300+ that would be "half the speed of jets".
I thought "This is the same way we're removing terrorists from Iraq!". But wait, different kind of shell...
I hate to tell ya, but liability has a lot to do with this. (I am, in fact, an airline pilot). We're instructed to keep the sign on unless we're 150% sure that the air will be smooth ahead. The reason for this is if the sign is on and we hit a nice big chunk of turbulence, it's YOUR fault if you bounce off the ceiling (because you were disobeying the sign). Whereas, if the sign is off you end up with a broken leg and a concussion from that bag that fell on your head, the airline gets sued for not telling you to sit down first.
Sounds like you ran into an overly cautious captain.
Dear god, man. Don't tell them this. Seriously. The last thing we need is another dumbshit senator deciding that general aviation is a threat and trying to institute some new dumbshit rules (or close off the airspace within 100 miles of any major city), etc etc... Remember what happend to Meigs in chicago? yeah.
This is the kind of retarded response someone who has NO familiarity with the airline industry would post. The problem with monitoring, say, cockpit conversations is that it opens up pilots to retaliation by the airline and liability in the event of an incident.
For example, certain pilots make it a point to be very safe and write up any maintenance issues they find on their aircraft. The airline hates this. Maintenance items found at airports where there is not a maintenance base are VERY costly to the company in delayed flights and $$ for contracted maintenance. The airlines hate these guys.
However, there are some other types who are "company men". These pilots are willing to ignore such items until they get the plane back to the hub. Airlines LOVE these guys. However, they routinely fly suspect airplanes with paying passengers in the back...
Now, if the airline were allowed to review cockpit recordings, which group of pilots do you think they would find reasons to fire, and which would they like to keep around? The end result would be a less-safe system, and many ruined carreers of GOOD, HONEST pilots.
(And yes, I am an airline pilot, I know how this stuff works)
Yes, and that will absolve Blizzard of liability just like "But, your honor, she SAID she was 18" would absolve someone of liability after picking up that blonde at the club...
Yeah, I can't imagine how forcing minors to put their real first and last names on the internet could POSSIBLY backfire... Brilliant idea.
That is complete crap. The reg that states passengers shouldn't "congregate" near the flight deck door is in regards to in-flight. Sounds like another flight attendant who doesn't know what the hell she's doing. I am an airline pilot and I'm always happy to have passengers up by the cockpit (on the ground, obviously). If you ask, you can even get a picture in one of the seats if you wait 'till we're completely deplaned...
We're allowed to bring our toothpaste/shampoo through security, too!
...metric, please.
Let me be the first to say that aviation doesn't use the metric system for speed or altitude measurements. You get your clearances in feet, and your speed restrictions in knots. (nautical miles per hour).. Deal with it.
You are correct. The plane largely takes care of itself, except for emergency situations. These new rules will create a lot of very bored pilots.
No, what this new rule will do is create a lot of pilots who are now forced to violate a regulation in order to PREVENT an unsafe condition from occurring. (Namely, falling asleep.)
When you can be expected to be on duty for 16 hours a day flying as many as six separate legs, fatigue is DEFINITELY an issue. Sometimes the difference between an alert pilot and a sleeping pilot is keeping your mind busy/active during that "boring" cruise phase.
I think a lot of those wall-street types would suddenly admit to everything they've done wrong if you confront them with a big enough Python...
I think this patent thing is getting a little ridiculous... "portion of a gaming input device having an illuminated region"??? They have a patent on a controller with a LIGHT on it??!?!?!?!!?
While the nextgen plan is a good thing, the rest is crap. We can get legislation to ban laptops, but we can't get the HORRENDOUSLY dangerous rest regulations fixed. How about NOT giving in to the airline lobbyists for once and actually doing something to make air travel SAFER????
Wouldn't this fall under that little-used "Powered Lift" category? Looks to me like they already have standards set up for it!