Airport congestion

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by cube, Jul 10, 2016.

  1. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #1
    - Landing fee should be proportional to wake separation
    - There should be a penalty proportional to the maximum capacity of the plane model compared to the maximum capacity in the category
    - There should be a penalty proportional to how many seats the plane has compared to the maximum for the model
    - The landing fee should be proportionally distributed among passengers according to their seat footprint.
    - There should be a penalty proportional to how noisy a plane model is
    - There should be a penalty proportional to how energy inefficient a plane model is
     
  2. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #2
    How come only the workers and customers have to take the hits? Especially when customers don't own the craft or take responsibility for flying it and the airport is a private company and not owned by the people. The businesses I ran, I took responsibility and absorbed unwanted costs, I didn't make customers suffer by "proportionally" increasing anything. Is that not part of capitalism?
     
  3. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #3
    Passengers can choose to fly with a more efficient airline or at a less congested airport.
     
  4. AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #4
    What? This makes no sense. Not everyone has that luxury.

    By NYC, you have LGA/EWR/JFK, but that's not the case everywhere else.
     
  5. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
  6. AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #6
    No. You're missing my point.

    What I'm trying to say is that some people can't just go to a "less congested" airport. There are plenty of areas in the US where there is one major airport for a certain geographic area. There's no way around the congestion.
     
  7. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #7
    The congestion can happen because of an ineficient use of the airport. This is what the thread is about.

    If there's a good option for an expansion or an additional airport to be built, you can vote for that.

    Finally, you can always move.
     
  8. AutoUnion39, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #8
    Sure, are you going to foot the bill?

    No one is going to move so they have access to a less-congested airport. That's (probably) far far down someone's list.
     
  9. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #9
    Our airports don't need more fees to discourage overcrowding. They need to be modernized. I've been in third world countries with nicer airports than the US has.
     
  10. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #10
    There are some initiatives going on to make the ground more efficient, but the situation is too tight now in some places anyway. This is what the thread is about.
     
  11. AutoUnion39, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #11
    Yeah, I'd agree with this. I've been to HYD in India. Significantly better run than most US airports I've been to recently (LGA, EWR, JFK, IAD, BOS, etc)

    It's not just the US. I find LHR a complete mess, even the "new and efficient" Terminal 5.
    --- Post Merged, Jul 10, 2016 ---
    What does that even mean? Can we get that in English?
     
  12. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #12
    name one, please.
     
  13. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #14
    you mean india, where guards armed with ww2 machineguns guard the airport entrance and don't let you in unless you have a 'print out' of your ticket? yep, really nice.
     
  14. AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #15
    Oh, I take it you speak from experience?

    I've actually been there. You haven't.

    Move along.
     
  15. appleisking macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    #16
    There are already many people who opt for other means of transportation for shorter distances especially with low gas prices and avoiding the TSA lines. Everything you're suggesting would just overburden our roads if you make air travel too expensive or burdensome.
     
  16. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #17
    Your fuel taxes are too low, your cities too sprawled, and you lack proper public transport.
     
  17. Snoopy4, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #18
    None of what you propose here is meaningful. Landing fees are but a tiny component of the cost of business for a carrier. And why would you want to penalize a carrier for having fewer seats in a plane? Flying is uncomfortable enough as it is, why do you want to penalize comfort and push carriers to shove more of us in the sardine can. That's insane.

    Aircraft noise is in decline and efficiency continuously improves, so your last two points are useless. Aircraft are 20 year assets. Why would you propose something so wasteful as to penalize something that is 10 years old (the nominal generation shift for aircraft with regard to noise and efficiency). So they waste more resources on replacing planes ahead of their time? That's wasteful.
    --- Post Merged, Jul 10, 2016 ---
    This whole thread is just silly bro. I'm out.
    --- Post Merged, Jul 10, 2016 ---
    LOL. Your fuel taxes are too high, your cities too crowded and your public transport is still laughable.

    Thanks for playing.
    --- Post Merged, Jul 10, 2016 ---
    Time zones coupled with flight times and when people are willing to travel causes congestion more than anything at an airport. It drives the entire schedule.
     
  18. D.T. macrumors 603

    D.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Location:
    Vilano Beach, FL
    #19
    Holy hell, preach!
     
  19. AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #20
    Awesome. Thanks for solving all our issues.

    You're going to foot the bill for all of these problems right?
     
  20. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #21
    I haven't? are you some kind of know-it-all? LMAO
     
  21. AutoUnion39 macrumors 601

    AutoUnion39

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    #22
    You wouldn't be making dumb and clueless statements like that, if you've actually been there mate.

    I bet you think India is just like Pakistan and Iraq right?
     
  22. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #23
    well, what you call 'dumb and clueless statements' are a FACT.

    granted I don't know ALL of india, but in the mumbai airport for example the guards bar your entry unless you 'prove' you are going to travel. you know, to avoid 'unpleasants' roaming around that gorgeous lobby, i guess.

    had a hard time there once as, you know, printers are things from the 90s and kinda hard to get to on-the-go, and roaming internet is flakey at best, all I could get was bad 3G.

    but managed to get my BA reservation 'onscreen' on my phone and they allowed me inside.

    out of curiosity, just tell us what is in every hotel or major building down there? as you seem to be so experienced...

    meh
     
  23. MarkusL macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2014
    #24
    I demand at least WW3 machine guns like in the US.
     
  24. cube thread starter macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #25
    Noisy is a relative concept: dBA / number of seats
     

Share This Page