In addition to transitioning air traffic controller equipment to GPS rather than radar (A smart move I should think) there's this little gem from the article,
"Embedded in the bill is a "Passengers Bill of Rights," whose centerpiece is a rule requiring delayed commercial planes to return to the gate after three hours on the taxiway. Alternatively, the rule allows the airline to send buses to take passengers off the plane so the aircraft doesn't lose its place in line to take off."
Three hours is still a bloody long time to sit on a plane, but at least there's a limit, and at least I can get on a bus and head to a hotel if I am obviously going to miss a connection.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have been seeing stories about all the flights that were cancelled when the snow storms hit the east coast. The stories tried to take the tone "How dare the airlines cancel the flights." This was the side effect of the new law that fined the airlines something like $18,000 per passenger for waits longer than 3 hours on the tarmac.
What did people think would happen? If the place is snowed in, the flights get cancelled.
I like the new rule, but I think people need to get used to the idea that they may not get their flight if the weather is bad, either where you are taking off, which most people realize, or where you are going, which some people do not, or where you are stopping at on your way through.
posted
I am a pretty laid back person, and it takes a lot to get me angry. So I often get confused when people are furious for silly reasons.
I was flying from Rochester to Chicago, and on to Denver, and there was a massive thunderstorm in Chicago. There was a several hour delay. Some of my fellow passengers were foaming-at-the-mouth furious for the delay.
I was actually laughing at them at one point. I wanted to ask them if they realized that electricity was bolting through the air in Chicago, and that you would have to be nuts to want to be up in the air in a metal tube while that was happening.
Go ahead and get angry when you make a mistake, or someone else does, or when someone caused trouble for you. But please, don't get so upset over something like a weather event.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by msquared: I have been seeing stories about all the flights that were cancelled when the snow storms hit the east coast. The stories tried to take the tone "How dare the airlines cancel the flights." This was the side effect of the new law that fined the airlines something like $18,000 per passenger for waits longer than 3 hours on the tarmac.
Probably not, flights have been cancelled for severe storms for decades and I don't think that this new law had even taken effect at the time.
And you know, it is possible for airlines to delay a departure before they pack people onto the plane like sardines rather than after. Cancellation is not the only alternative to sitting on the runway interminably. High traffic Airports in general need to find a better way to deal with runway scheduling than having planes loaded with passengers physically queue up on the tarmac.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
As someone who has worked rather extensivley with GPS I'm pretty sure that's not a real concern. I'd try to refute the specifics of the article except there aren't any...
posted
People really get mad at the airlines when flights being delayed/diverted due to weather? Do they think the airlines have weather control satellites now?
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: I was actually laughing at them at one point. I wanted to ask them if they realized that electricity was bolting through the air in Chicago, and that you would have to be nuts to want to be up in the air in a metal tube while that was happening.
I would think it would be pretty neat to be in an airplane that is hit by lightning. They are Faraday cages.