CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA

Martin writes:

Why don't you read what he wrote? "A GPS tracking unit is a device that uses
the Global Positioning System ..."

I did, but he apparently did not, since he seems to think that the GPS itself
provides a tracking function, which is a common and rather serious
misconception. Nothing in GPS allows a user to be tracked.

John Kulp writes:

You're completely dense. You change the flight paths. They're in the
AIR not on the GROUND like the runways. Got that?

During take-off and especially approach, the flight paths are necessarily
aligned with the runways, since aircraft cannot instantly turn after leaving
the runway or instantly turn just before touching down. Thus, there are
flight paths that are inextricably linked to runway positions. The only way
to change them is to reposition the runways.

The pilots don't know how the planes work.

Apart from the most general principles, yes.

They just sit there like robots staring out the window while
some ghost flies them.

No, but during automated phases of a flight (which means most phases, today),
they don't have a lot to do. Still, that's better than requiring them to keep
their hands on the controls for eight hours at a stretch, in a number of ways.

They use GPS overseas all the time but they don't know how to use them.

They use GPS everywhere, but they don't have to know how it works to use it.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

As I understand it, this is one type of issue that could be greatly improved
when true "free fly" routing is in place. Take off in any direction that
will meet the needs, and not worry about the airways.

It depends on how much of the congestion is en-route, and how much is in
approach and departure. Free flight would help in the former case, but it
wouldn't make much different in the latter case.

Additionally, although truly random free flight would eliminate en-route
congestion, it would also raise costs, since most random, free-flight routes
are going to be longer than the optimal route. There would be a tendency for
everyone to try to fly the shortest route, and then the congestion would
return.

Babbling nonsense.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

That's like saying a Ford F-150 pickup truck can't be used as a ski
boat because Ford deliberately designed it that way.

Not quite. The GPS is a receive-only system. It allows users to determine
their positions without transmitting anything to anyone, which provides
stealth and also gives the system unlimited user capacity. There isn't any
way to get a transmission function out of GPS. All tracking systems are more
complex systems in which GPS merely plays one part.

This was all by design. The DoD wanted the capacity and didn't want their
troups to give themselves away every time they checked their positions.

Point totally missed.

GPS was designed to be a locating system, period.

The fact that a locating system doesn't provide user tracking or
warm up muffins is irrelevant.

The US military (and probably all the other major militaries) have
troop tracking systems.

And guess what, the tracking systems don't provide location data or
warm muffins either. GPS provides the location data.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

GPS was designed to be a locating system, period.

It's a system that allows users to locate themselves. It doesn't provide any
information to third parties.

Martin writes:

How interesting. Transponders transmit the planes location obtained from a GPS
receiver.

Transponders are not part of GPS. I can write my location on a notepad, but
that doesn't make my notepad part of GPS, either.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

GPS was designed to be a locating system, period.

It's a system that allows users to locate themselves. It doesn't provide any
information to third parties.

No ****?

How about classical music, weather, satellite photos, talk radio,
wireless internet, baseball scores?

As I said, GPS was designed to be a locating system, as in where the
**** am I, period.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:

writes:


GPS was designed to be a locating system, period.


It's a system that allows users to locate themselves. It doesn't provide any
information to third parties.

Imagine what would happen if the GPS infornmation could automatically be
transmitted somewhere else........... Oh wait, that does happen.

mrtravel writes:

Imagine what would happen if the GPS infornmation could automatically be
transmitted somewhere else........... Oh wait, that does happen.

Not within GPS. There are systems that contain GPS as one component that
transmit such information using other components of the system. But again,
that's independent of GPS.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

John Kulp writes:

You're completely dense. You change the flight paths. They're in the
AIR not on the GROUND like the runways. Got that?

During take-off and especially approach, the flight paths are
necessarily aligned with the runways, since aircraft cannot instantly
turn after leaving the runway or instantly turn just before touching
down. Thus, there are flight paths that are inextricably linked to
runway positions. The only way to change them is to reposition the
runways.

The pilots don't know how the planes work.

Apart from the most general principles, yes.

They just sit there like robots staring out the window while
some ghost flies them.

No, but during automated phases of a flight (which means most phases,
today), they don't have a lot to do. Still, that's better than
requiring them to keep their hands on the controls for eight hours at
a stretch, in a number of ways.

They use GPS overseas all the time but they don't know how to use
them.

They use GPS everywhere, but they don't have to know how it works to
use it.


More unadulterated bull ****.

Take a look on YouTube and see the 747 landing at the old Kai Tak
airport in Hong Kong. He is turning at the runway numbers to land in the
TDZ.

On an IFR departure, turns can commence at 400' AGL. It is going to
be a short runway on a very hot day at MGTOW not to be 400' AGL by end of
runway. Hell, I fly a small plane out of a 3,000' runway and can be 800'
AGL by the end of runway. I don't have anywhere near the climb performance
of a jetliner.

You don't have to constantly keep your hands on the controls of an
aircraft even a light aircraft without an autopilot. There is a reason
aircraft control surfaces have trim capability, you moron.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)