One nit

Post #268,138 by jake123 9/20/06 11:00:55 AM Reply	One nit I'd be very surprised if it's more efficient or safer than trains, though of course in NA we've let our rail infrastructure go to such an extent that the upfront costs of bringing it back online would be a major capital investment that would only pay off over the long term... and my experience of business here in NA (I include the business community here in Canada in this assessment In Spades) is that they're not very good at looking at the long term like that. Most of the studies I've seen of cost per passenger mile shows that rail beats almost everyone hands down; the only problem is that it does take longer to get from point A to point B. On the plus side, if you have a good rail infrastructure and good carriage, that time can be more pleasant than it is in any other form of mass transportation. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #268,163 by mmoffitt 9/20/06 3:00:53 PM Reply	Nit granted. But airline travel is still the safest "per passenger mile" of any mode of transportation. I'm sure with adequate infrastructure support, rail travel would be the safest. bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #268,165 by bepatient 9/20/06 3:58:59 PM Reply	But still...you ignore one point You can get to more places now for less money than was ever possible in one stop during regulated travel...with much greater frequency. The problem you insist is that you can't fly non-stop Fort Wayne to Ontario...and this makes deregulation bad. You're off your rocker:-) Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #268,355 by mmoffitt 9/22/06 2:23:39 PM Reply	No. The problem is not that I can't fly to ONT direct. The problem is that the entire aviation industry is in a shambles. Deregulation was a leading cause of that. Why? Because the Fed backed out. We don't have the Fed demanding that FWA have DC-9/DC-10/Boeing 737/etc. service - there are no direct flights anymore. So, there are fewer aircraft orders, so there are fewer aircraft mfg jobs, fewer mechanics jobs, etc. We all paid taxes that supported all this - once. We don't anymore. Aside: And there is, in fact, a down side to this wrt to travellers as well. Under regulation, airlines had to compete on service. They all cost the same, so how did one decide which airline to travel? The one with the best service/food/on time rating/etc. But that's an entirely different matter and it won't be too long (if such isn't the case already) that no one will remember when it was "fun to fly commercial." Aviation is in its last stages and deregulation was a leading cause of the cancer that will result in its death. bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #268,358 by bepatient 9/22/06 3:26:10 PM Reply	Funny I'd talk to Boeing and Airbus first. And Bombardier and Embraer. The first 2 are sold out through 2011. even with the airbus disaster that is the 380. And your argument continues to run counter to the fact that there are more flights with more frequency now than before. Yes, there is less point to point flying between secondary and tertiary cities. And the elimination of that financial burden fueled the capacity expansion that allowed for the increases. And the complete disaster of airline management to control that growth caused the industry to collapse. To many flights with too much frequency led to low load factors...and the decline in travel post 9/22 combined with the increase in fuel and labor costs created the perfect storm leading to this current problem. Everyone looks at Southwest as the "great example of point to point". You DO realize that almost all of their profit in this century is due to financial hedging, don't you? Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #268,372 by Ashton 9/22/06 7:26:49 PM Reply	They may be on way out.. anyway___hyperbolically related to your 'cancer' quip - Depending on how much (how good / how convincing..) become the studies of effects of stratospheric jet-fuel residuals: remember the study made in the days after 9/11? (Because it was the first time in decades, it was possible..) Nova gave it an hour, a few months back. "Dimming of intensity of visible light" over recent decades (and the instruments for comparing such measurements are pretty elementary.) What was different? One thing: NO JETS OVERHEAD. None, nada, zippo. Etc. 'Course we can and likely shall rationalize the indispensability of jillions of commercial flight-miles and $$$$ - after all, we just don't Do long-term anything. But this cat is out of the bag: and it's only a little-early for deciding that the effects are nontrivial. Just a load o' Physics Fun to be fleshed out. Quantization should be er, a gas - especially in a culture that is being inculcated with associating science with the Debbil, and is expecting trumpeters to descend any old day now - playing Taps. 'Course what do I know -?- maybe Corporate-science IS the Debbil; lucky we invented that all-purpose icon..
Post #268,375 by Another Scott 9/22/06 8:18:59 PM Reply	There were some post 9/11/2001 studies on this. Having almost all air traffic grounded for a few days allowed a comparison to be made of the effect of aircraft on clouds, etc. E.g. [link\|http://facstaff.uww.edu/travisd/pdf/jetcontrailsrecentresearch.pdf\|Contrails reduce daily temperature range] - a 1 page article from Nature. Basically, the contrail clouds reflect light during the day and act as a blanket at night to reduce the maximum daily temperature range. The temperature range was about 1 degree C larger when the planes were grounded than the 3 days before; 3 days later (when the planes were flying again) the temperature range was about 1 C less than the 3 days before 9/11. The sky was interesting those 3 days. We may be the last people to see such a sky over cities in the US. Cheers, Scott.
Post #268,379 by drewk 9/22/06 8:46:44 PM Reply	And I was too busy moving to notice === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #268,639 by mmoffitt 9/25/06 3:24:22 PM Reply	Interesting. Thanks! bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell

Welcome to IWETHEY!