My God, you are an idiot.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Ty said the FAA is currently unfunded because congress can't agree over subsidies for rural airports and unionization of some federal workers. He then said the board would likely agree on the subsidies. The agreement he implied is that the board consensus would be against the subsidies. The tea party members of the house are also against the subsidies (for the most part) or at least they should be.

Thus Ty anticipated that the consensus here would be with the tea party on the question of subsidies. Thus implying that he is against the subsidies. So it's a little strange for you think he was blaming the current failure to fund the FAA only on "tea party craziness" where he agrees with part of it.

Club, when you next blow through here, can i get a sanity check?

[Adder]

This looks potentially fantastic. Do you think we can squeeze a few million jobs out of it (obviously no)?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

This looks potentially fantastic. Do you think we can squeeze a few million jobs out of it (obviously no)?

Looks like the sort of crap that could empty out hospital beds and lead to a recession.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Michael Lewis on the impeding collapse of the European monetary union.

I'm only partway through, but so far it is very good and very funny.

[Hank Chinaski]

I studied the technical reports on the alleged benefits. then I found something dumbed down for you guys.

http://www.time.com/time/interactive...653542,00.html

This explains why GPS could speed flights, but it doesn't really explain "delays." certainly I can assure you that these advancements will speed flights, but if enacted then the expected flight times will be reduced. Nothing explains why delays will be reduced.

abridged note to adder and Ty- This technology will make flights shorter, but the airlines will then set arrival times earlier. delays won't be reduced. n.b. I am not saying reducing flight times would not be a good thing.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I studied the technical reports on the alleged benefits. then I found something dumbed down for you guys.

http://www.time.com/time/interactive...653542,00.html

This explains why GPS could speed flights, but it doesn't really explain "delays." certainly I can assure you that these advancements will speed flights, but if enacted then the expected flight times will be reduced. Nothing explains why delays will be reduced.

abridged note to adder and Ty- This technology will make flights shorter, but the airlines will then set arrival times earlier. delays won't be reduced. n.b. I am not saying reducing flight times would not be a good thing.

In other words, lots of people say money and technology would reduce delays, but you continue to resist the notion because I suggested it.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I studied the technical reports on the alleged benefits. then I found something dumbed down for you guys.

http://www.time.com/time/interactive...653542,00.html

This explains why GPS could speed flights, but it doesn't really explain "delays." certainly I can assure you that these advancements will speed flights, but if enacted then the expected flight times will be reduced. Nothing explains why delays will be reduced.

abridged note to adder and Ty- This technology will make flights shorter, but the airlines will then set arrival times earlier. delays won't be reduced. n.b. I am not saying reducing flight times would not be a good thing.

You are mental, right?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In other words, lots of people say money and technology would reduce delays, but you continue to resist the notion because I suggested it.

i will respond to your post as best i can understand it. Those of us with technical degrees agree that flights can be shorter, and thus likely also cheaper, with GPS ATC. I'm not sure how much cost could be involved in the switch, as the satellites exist. Perhaps closing the radar spots will result in some jobs lost, but fuck them. We should go to GPS.

but, that has nothing to do with flight delays. If we switch we will have shorter expected flight times, but i don't see why delays would be reduced.

no one in any of the learned pieces I read, or the popular pieces I linked, says delays will be reduced. If flights times are shortened then arrival times will be shortened, then when the flight is 5 minutes late it will still be delayed.

Your bloggers meant "if we make a 5 hour flight 1/2 hour shorter, then the new shorter flights will less likely be delayed if we keep the fiction of the old arrival times." I mean fuck, let's go back to arrival times from the 50s. I bet delta is around 95% on time right now with that as the goal.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

You are mental, right?

hi!

confidential to RT: I've been telling you this, but now you have to act. All competitive environments separate based upon ability. Baseball has minor and major leagues as an example. Adder Gatti and GGG have no business posting on this forum. It's not fair to them. Let's create an instructional thread/board for them to work on developing some ability.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i will respond to your post as best i can understand it. Those of us with technical degrees agree that flights can be shorter, and thus likely also cheaper, with GPS ATC. I'm not sure how much cost could be involved in the switch, as the satellites exist. Perhaps closing the radar spots will result in some jobs lost, but fuck them. We should go to GPS.

but, that has nothing to do with flight delays. If we switch we will have shorter expected flight times, but i don't see why delays would be reduced.

no one in any of the learned pieces I read, or the popular pieces I linked, says delays will be reduced. If flights times are shortened then arrival times will be shortened, then when the flight is 5 minutes late it will still be delayed.

Your bloggers meant "if we make a 5 hour flight 1/2 hour shorter, then the new shorter flights will less likely be delayed if we keep the fiction of the old arrival times." I mean fuck, let's go back to arrival times from the 50s. I bet delta is around 95% on time right now with that as the goal.

Not having Flash on this device, I can't see all of that Time piece you linked, but I can see that the headline is How to Eliminate Flight Delays.

Or, what I said.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

hi!

confidential to RT: I've been telling you this, but now you have to act. All competitive environments separate based upon ability. Baseball has minor and major leagues as an example. Adder Gatti and GGG have no business posting on this forum. It's not fair to them. Let's create an instructional thread/board for them to work on developing some ability.

So several hours later you link to what I linked to and say much of what I said about it, except with blind eye to how greater capacity can facilitate more efficient takeoff and landing, and this indicates that I lack capacity? Interesting.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not having Flash on this device, I can't see all of that Time piece you linked, but I can see that the headline is How to Eliminate Flight Delays.

Or, what I said.

Actually you said a significant portion ofmdelays result from inadequate tech. Hank no longer seems to disagree and is instead now arguing that the airlines will adjust so they are still delayed, just off a more efficient baseline.

In other words he concedes the point but is trying to pretend otherwise.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Adder

This looks potentially fantastic. Do you think we can squeeze a few million jobs out of it (obviously no)?

Maybe they should try it on apes first.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

So several hours later you link to what I linked to and say much of what I said about it, except with blind eye to how greater capacity can facilitate more efficient takeoff and landing, and this indicates that I lack capacity? Interesting.

I almost never look at what you link to. As I say i read detailed technical reports to understand the point, then found a piece for the mob that you could understand. if I found something that you had linked all that means is I was successful in matching what I found to your intellectual level.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not having Flash on this device, I can't see all of that Time piece you linked, but I can see that the headline is How to Eliminate Flight Delays.

Or, what I said.

so in a world where Time magazine is a source of accurate technical analysis you win. In a world that understands technical terms and technical concepts you lose