Letters to the Editor
-
Hard to solve this problem without functioning railways
Patrick Smith tends not to mention this, but at least one reader comment always does: you can't run a transportation system uniquely on airplanes and highways and hope to achieve high volume of passengers carried, a low degree of congestion, and best fuel efficiency.
Most of those small regional planes clogging up the airports are travelling distances that could be covered in almost the same time downtown-to-downtown by modern trains. In most parts of the developed world, that's the way things are actually done, for a high proportion of trips.
Now since the airlines have already outsourced so many of their flights to regional carriers, why can't they go the extra step and outsource to train services? In the U.S. and Canada there aren't very many rail corridors that work any more, but there are a few.
If they thought about it a bit, some airlines might gain themselves a competitive advantage by lobbying for and financially supporting the construction of strategic rail links, and making them part of their network in place of hopelessly overcrowded air corridors.
-
What about small Airlines in small Airports?
Patrick,
Good article. I've also noticed the expansion in regionals in ever bigger numbers on ever bigger routes. As someone who is 6'2", I find myself hunched over while walking down the narrow tube aisles and sitting in narrow immovable seats for longer and longer trips. No fun.
A question for you: when these regionals travel between smaller, less utilized airports, does that result in a reduction in the loads at bigger aiports, or is it adding just a greater load to the ATC system?
For an example, in my own home market in Central New Jersey, Pan Am (yes, someone is flying with that most venerable name, complete with the famous Blue Globe logo!) is flying between mighty, mighty Trenton-Mercer County Airport and Hanscom Field near Boston.
When I have to go to the Boston area, it's a dream to drive 10 minutes to the airport, park for free right next to the terminal building and walk right to gate security. Does that really relieve the burden on Boston Logan and Newark Liberty?
By the way, it is a little eerie to sit in a BAE Jetstream 3100 Turboprop and hear the captain welcoming me to "PanAm Airways Clipper Class Service nonstop to Trenton, New Jersey."
-
I'm getting used to it
Newark is my home airport, and I've grown accustomed to fairly lengthy delays on my trips home. Typically my return flights are scheduled to arrive in the late afternoon or early evening when the weather is at its worst. Sometimes I'm delayed when the weather is gorgeous, and the explanation is simply "too much traffic going into the New York air space" and we've got gridlock.
I experienced a four hour delay into Newark from Las Vegas yesterday, including an unexpected stop in Cleveland for refueling after we had spent about 90 minutes in a holding pattern over Michigan. The reason was thunderstorms that closed Newark for some time in the early evening. It's just what I've come to expect in the summer. The weather will be bad, and I'll be delayed.
If those are my expectations, and the airline gives me enough information, I can deal with it and not get stressed out. I have to give Continental a lot of credit for keeping me informed yesterday. By the time I arrived at the airport I had received three emails explaining why our departure would be delayed, with updated departure times. And once in the air, the pilot made announcements approximately every 20 minutes once it was clear we'd be further delayed.
So often, that's all it takes. Just tell us what the heck is going on! If it's bad weather, we can deal. We don't want to fly into dangerous weather either.
-
Thank You, Oh Thank You...
... for calling DCA Washington-National. Even my father -- a staunch Republican -- was against naming it after Reagan. "The airport serving the Nation's Capital shouldn't have *anyone's* name attached to it", he would say, and I agree.
-
arbitrary regional/mainline divide
One of the weird things about the prevalence of "regional" flights on longer routes is how it's now kind of hard to predict when you'll get what. Last summer I flew from Baltimore to Minneapolis and back The first leg of my outbound trip was BWI to Philadelphia -- a route I was shocked discover even existed, considering it can be covered by train in an hour -- and was further stunned to find was served by a 737 (half empty, natch). Coming back, the first leg was a 2+ hour flight from MSP to Charlotte -- and was on a tiny RJ operated by America West Express.
-
Congratulations on your new flying job!
Congratulations Patrick,
It's clear how much flying means to you, and frankly, I wish I had a flying job....
Congrats again.
(And the Dreamliner is one very very pretty aircraft.)
-
Yeah, sincere congrats, Dude
Wow! You can again get your ya-ya's out by flying. I'm truly happy for you. And maybe a dollar or two per hour more than frying burgers!
You deserve better pay, but I hope it doesn't cut back too much on your getting the info out to us peasants.
Maybe Salon should pay you more, given that about 25% of why I continue to subscribe is "Ask The Pilot".
Thanks for all of it, and carry on.
Dan Prall
-
Some thoughts on aircraft size,airline classics,and one on the A380...
When compared to first echelon airline aircraft of the 1940's and 1950's the RJs do have comparable pass.cap.capabilities.It would surely be much more of a thrill to walk to and board a Connie or Douglas Seven Seas from SomewhereUSA to AnywhereUSA however. :-) The RJs fail to impress in that manner.
Certainly todays RJs have more reliable service cycles/hours and powerplant DNA and general comfort levels though.
One can imagine how crowded American airport aprons and skys would be with 1950's era aircraft ferrying todays flying public numbers to and fro at propliner speed and operation levels. The current scheduling compression would likely become even more onerous and delay/cancellation prone. Yikes!!
The Boeing Stratocruisers,Lockheed Connies and Douglas -6 and -7 types typically had passenger carry caps in the 50-80 to perhaps at very most 100-105 seat range.Cabin noise levels, general cabin air quality levels and vibration harmonics would have been in most ways inferior[ for those who like prop driven birds substitute 'more colourful' for inferior :-) ] to any of todays turboprop/turbofan equipped aircraft.
Any of these 1940's through very early 1960's firstline aircraft would have given any current regional carrier players a lot more mechanical gremlins to herd day in and day out. Keeping a four engined propliner in flyable order was labor intensive and having a PW WaspMajor or Wright TurboCompoundCyclone drop out of a four engined full power pre-takeoff power-up spelled immediate doom. For those of us who have seen how regional twinjet ops can subside into a maze of cancelled/missed flights because the flight deck is having avionics/computer trouble...well...you know. :-)
The Boeing Dreamliner displays an array of features and qualities that may in time grant it admittance to the classic airliner hall of fame. Two powerplants,up to date airframe ideas and build-plan with reduced fuel needs and airline biz bottomline friendly economics for operation/support/pass.cap./range-load capabilities. It appears to be newest manifestation of the venerable 1930's DC-3 outstanding forwardthink qualities.Yet it still may prove to have a limited run in view of ever increasing fuel costs,airline bottom line fixation and new or coming noise/climate/reduced emissions/less fuel use considerations. The return of propellers may still take place.
The Airbus 380 somehow seems ungainly in the style arena. Sort of has a Convair C-99 look stylewise. It is not strikingly formed like a Connie nor has it the glamour of a Stratocruiser.
I do think the upper deck nose area should have featured more of a second cockpit look with a forward facing glass gallery. Also the midsection upper fuselage area could have featured some more innovative glass design usage. Lacking any design signature similar to the Boeing 747's upper fuselage forward rise the A380 just seems to lack any definitive design cues or wow! factors other than giantism.
I give Airbus a C on A380s style/design "look". The A380 lacks the curves of a Connie or the future-rama eye appeal of the Stratocruiser. The A380 is indeed big but lacks any touch of sensuality or FlashGordon wow! factor.
If most A380s come with mega 700-800 pass.cap. setups and not the luxe interiors being displayed at this stage of A380 preview/firstlook publicity rollouts they will labor even more to achieve any classic aircraft design legacy highlighting. :-)