It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lasers Close Flight Path

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:
apc

posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
But in this case, I think we should ban THIS PARTICULAR laser pointer.

If people can't get them off the shelf they'll just build their own. Probably a lot more powerful too. Treat the entire issue as if they are firing bullets at the planes. But if that were indeed the case, would the proper response be to take away everybody's rifle? Or to first figure out who is doing it and where they are doing it from (this could be done with temporary rigs in the cockpit that monitor the visual field for a source). They would just move around, sure. But how many different places could they go? And in the mean time for all the other planes figure out what laser light wavelength is most commonly used and install the appropriate filters.

When it boils down to it this is an airline problem. The airlines should figure out a way to deal with it rather than turning to their government to take care of them. The government solution is what you initially suggested... just deny everyone the freedom to own nifty laser guns, creating an underground market where the lasers get bigger and badder because hey... they're already illegal. Might as well soup them up.




posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
And the airlines can't afford to take the steps necessary, most of them are hurting too badly right now. They've got planes being grounded for inspections, fuel prices are through the roof and causing MAJOR cost issues for them. We've got most of the major airlines talking about merging with each other just to stay alive in the market. And even if they WERE willing to do something about it, it would take forever to get done. The airlines are probably the only thing slower than the FAA to take action.


apc

posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Then the ones that can't cope with the changing environment fail. As it should be. The stronger airlines that can make the adaptations prosper. This is already happening in the US... the discount airlines are growing and the big dogs, TWA (R.I.P.), Delta, etc are collapsing. Why? Failure to adapt. A vital component to market evolution. Once the airlines that can't handle the cost of dealing with this problem drop out, the survivors' profits will increase from the extra traffic, easily recovering the cost of integrating the appropriate systems and protections.

[insert capitalistic trumpeting here]



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   
The problem is that ALL the airlines, even the small airlines are getting hurt right now. Just that the smaller airlines can handle it better because they ARE smaller. What's going to happen is that Delta, American, United, and the other majors are going to collapse and fail, and then the smaller airlines are going to have to become major airlines to take up the slack, at which point they stop being able to survive because they've had to grow too big. And then THEY fail. And then where are we?


apc

posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Taking trains?

They can figure it out. Just keep the government out of it and everything will be fine.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   
The whole point of the airlines though is convenience. And it's kinda hard to take a train to another country.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
What's going to happen is that Delta, American, United, and the other majors are going to collapse and fail, and then the smaller airlines are going to have to become major airlines to take up the slack.

Why do they smaller airlines HAVE to grow, to take up the slack? Managed properly, why can't they remain a smaller airline, while still achieving a healthy profit?

It's the symptom of today, in the corporate world, that growth has to be a good thing. No way. There is no such thing as continual growth. At some point, a company has to stop growth to achieve long-term viability.

Growth = greed. Let the smaller airlines continue to be profitable, smaller airlines so they are not under any duress to expand their interests more than they need to.

Intelligently managed airlines will find a way to incorporate the costs involved to minimise the risk of laser pointers, while still flying for a profit. Airlines that can't do this will fold, due to por management.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Have you SEEN the number of flights in the United States daily? There is no way that a smaller airline could keep up without growing if the majors were gone. And most smaller airlines fly smaller planes that don't have the range to go international. They'd have to grow by buying bigger planes that could fly across the ocean.

This animation uses snapshots of the FAA Facet radar screen. This is a 24 period over the US alone.

www.edwardtufte.com...

[edit on 3/29/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
And it's kinda hard to take a train to another country.

Cruise ship?

Unless we have viable fuel sources for planes, then we'll see fewer international flights in the future. The tyranny of distance may slow down migration? The world becomes a different place when you can't cross it in less than a day.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
The military is switching to a very good synthetic fuel within the next couple of years. There is no reason that the airlines couldn't either. It uses a method of creating the fuel that can use any carbon based product, then they mix it with a little bit of regular jet fuel, because it doesn't have all the things the jet engine needs in the synthetic, but it works just fine. They've already flown an F-15, a C-17, and a B-52 with it and are testing a B-1 with it.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
There is no way that a smaller airline could keep up without growing if the majors were gone. And most smaller airlines fly smaller planes that don't have the range to go international. They'd have to grow by buying bigger planes that could fly across the ocean.

Alright, imagine I am the owner of a smaller airline and I have 30 planes, say Boeing 737s.

Today, I might have say 25 in service, with a total of 75 domestic flights (I'm guessing) at around 70% seat occupancy. I can easily make profit from this model.

Now, say in a years time, three of my larger competitors have collapsed. What will happen? I'll still have my 30 737s. On any given day, I still may have 25 of them flying around 75 domestic flights, but my seat occupancy will be 99%. I will make more profit than I was previously. In fact, I can raise my seat prices by an extra 10%, as I have competition for them.

Why do I have to grow any more than I need to? I am meeting my full demand for seats and fares, so tell me why I NEED to grow?

I don't want the hassle of growing to meet the International market, as I am completely happy flying my 30 planes on very profitable domestic routes.

No one is forced to grow, if they don't want to. Greedy operators always want more. I now have so much profit, that I can tint the cockpit windows to prevent against laser pointers, so I am still able to fly safely.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Because your competitors DO grow, and get more seat capacity than you, because they snap up some of those 767s that are sitting there cheap now. You are flying 737s that have a capacity of 125 seats let's say, and you're running them at about 120-125 every flight. You have another 50 people a flight trying to get seats on your planes. Your competitor switched from 737s with a 125 seat capacity, to 767s with let's say 250-300 seats. They've doubled their seat capacity or more, so they can get more people on their planes. Suddenly word gets out that they've got more room than you do, so people jump over to them because they can get on the flights they want to get on with them, and not with you, because all your flights are running at max capacity. Now suddenly you're running 80% or less, while they're running 90+%, but not quite full. Then they start doing even better, and expand their fleet further, and add another 5 767s, and STILL run 90+%, while you start running 70% or lower.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Because your competitors DO grow, and get more seat capacity than you, because they snap up some of those 767s that are sitting there cheap now.

So, my competitors grow. Ok, I'm used to that, as I was competing against three larger airlines that have now folded.

Anyway, here's one of your quotes in a previous post:



What's going to happen is that Delta, American, United, and the other majors are going to collapse and fail, and then the smaller airlines are going to have to become major airlines to take up the slack, at which point they stop being able to survive because they've had to grow too big. And then THEY fail.

Going by your reasoning here, I should be glad that my competitors are going to grow, as according to you, they will also fail, as they have grown too big.

So, all the while, I am still a small airline, serving my domestic routes, while all else around me grows and collapses. I'm still turning a profit, without collapsing.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Except that UNTIL they collapse they are going to eat your profit margin, and it's gonna get smaller and smaller. The smaller your profit margin, the more it's going to hurt when fuel costs go up. Or when that AD comes down grounding the 737s for inspection, that doesn't affect your competitors because they got out of flying 737s for bigger planes. At SOME point you will have to grow, even if it's just adding a few more planes, or people aren't going to fly your airline because they can't get seats on your flights, or they have to change their travel plans to match your flights.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
I don't know about Australian constitutional law, but I would guess that if your right to keep and bear arms is non-existent, then your lasers are in trouble.

In the US Constitution, there is nothing that would protect ownership of lasers, either, so if this activity became popular in the US, I would definitely support a ban on laser pointers and putting serious punishments in place for owning one and death for directing one toward an aircraft.

Laser pointers might be convenient for some purposes, but when one or two people could kill a few hundred people with one, it's time to set some rational limits.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
It IS popular here in the US. It has happend a lot here over the last few years. It started here, and spread to some areas of Canada, now it's happening in other parts of the world as well.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Except that UNTIL they collapse they are going to eat your profit margin, and it's gonna get smaller and smaller.

No.

Remember, I was originally turning a profit when I had three major airlines competing against me. All that my new competitors have done is fill the existing void when the big boys collapsed. I'm used to competing and surviving with big-time players against me.

I'll let it go here. You've made your point and I've made mine. I don't need to grow a business, if I don't want to. It's drifting away from the thread topic.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Yeah, you were then because the majors were taking up the slack. Now there's 10 times the demand and a much smaller number of planes and airlines. When word gets out that Carrier B has gone to bigger planes, and expanded, they're going to get a much higher passenger count, just as your passenger count is going to drop significantly when word gets around that people can't get seats on your planes.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
It IS popular here in the US. It has happend a lot here over the last few years. It started here, and spread to some areas of Canada, now it's happening in other parts of the world as well.


Well, we need to do something now, before a 747 chock-full of people is brought down with a $3.00 gadget that is of dubious utility in the first place.

[edit on 2008/3/29 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:14 PM
link   
The problem as I said earlier is finding out where they're coming from, who actually shot the laser, and getting there before they're gone. The airlines can't afford to have planes down while they change the windscreens to something that will block it, and they can't afford to pay for anything expensive to find out where it's coming from, so unless we want to park some kind of surveillance near the runways and watch for where they're coming from, the options are pretty limited.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join