Read this carefully
09-09-2015, 07:30 PM
#21
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Who could possibly bankroll it? Aren't they trying it in California and unable to fund it, for only one state mind you? Yawn. Aviation won't shrink due to other methods of transit. Not in my working years. It will get supplemented at most.
09-09-2015, 11:52 PM
#22
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 48
Aviation is here to stay: Modular, fast, safe, (comparatively)low infrastructure cost, low environmental Impact besides emissions , and even there we achieve 40 miles per passenger gallon equivalent these days.
09-10-2015, 02:39 AM
#24
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,137
Yeah I think I remember reading about how people said the Wright flyer would never fly, or airplanes would only be good for transporting mail, or how the sound barrier could not be broken, or putting a man on the moon is impossible.
Maybe you would like to reconsider what is or is not possible.
Maybe you would like to reconsider what is or is not possible.
09-10-2015, 03:47 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 4,601
Age 67 is already being talked about in the House and the Senate. I give it until 2017, but I do believe it is coming. I do not however foresee it making a huge impact overall. The train that is the regional pilot shortage is still coming full speed and it's still flying off the tracks.
09-10-2015, 04:24 AM
#26
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Yeah I think I remember reading about how people said the Wright flyer would never fly, or airplanes would only be good for transporting mail, or how the sound barrier could not be broken, or putting a man on the moon is impossible.
Maybe you would like to reconsider what is or is not possible.
Maybe you would like to reconsider what is or is not possible.
09-10-2015, 04:57 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: I pilot
Posts: 2,049
The train in a tube idea is great for high density city pairs... But how are you gonna get from Denver to Calgary for example? Building the infrastructure is possible... Feasible? Airplanes will be around for awhile.
09-10-2015, 05:02 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 4,601
I heard that they were trying (albeit unsuccessfully) to sneak something into this recent legislation.
Also, this from the recent OshKosh:
"FAA spokesman Vecchio "Mike" Pilota announced today at AirVenture 2015 that the FAA is seriously considering raising the mandatory Part 121 retirement age to 67 years. This would align the U.S. with changes in the works in Japan and other countries.
The FAA is very motivated in mitigating the increasing shortage of pilots, and will likely bypass the public comment period in the federal register."
Also, this from the recent OshKosh:
"FAA spokesman Vecchio "Mike" Pilota announced today at AirVenture 2015 that the FAA is seriously considering raising the mandatory Part 121 retirement age to 67 years. This would align the U.S. with changes in the works in Japan and other countries.
The FAA is very motivated in mitigating the increasing shortage of pilots, and will likely bypass the public comment period in the federal register."
09-10-2015, 05:14 AM
#30
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,611
Originally Posted by chrisreedrules
Also, this from the recent OshKosh:
"FAA spokesman Vecchio "Mike" Pilota announced today at AirVenture 2015 that the FAA is seriously considering raising the mandatory Part 121 retirement age to 67 years. This would align the U.S. with changes in the works in Japan and other countries.
The FAA is very motivated in mitigating the increasing shortage of pilots, and will likely bypass the public comment period in the federal register."
I would recommend not believing everything you read on the internet...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lowtimer77
Hangar Talk
19
11-13-2008 02:54 PM
