|
Post by frenat on Mar 3, 2007 9:31:26 GMT -4
As expected, Rocky/David comes back with a seagull post saying everything could have been planted And also goes back to the same picture that has been shown multiple times to be too blurry to see anything. Do I really need to post the zoomed in photo again? The one where I didn't add any info to it that shows it really was too blurry to see anything identifiable? Does anybody have any doubts anymore that Rocky/David is anything more than a troll?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 3, 2007 9:36:42 GMT -4
What reduction in time? You still have to hand off all these airliners across the system, and they still have fly time. And this is assuming the Canadian airports had significant unused potential (which would be unusual for any airport, particularly re runways capable of handling airliners). Just as an example see how Gander International Airport in Canada managed the emergency of landing 39 of these planes.Now imagine the same kind of planning in every international airports in the USA and other in Canada. www.ganderairport.com/911.htm
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 3, 2007 9:46:39 GMT -4
If anything sending all the planes to Canada would have slowed things down. Our airports can only handle so much traffic at once, throwing thousands of additional jets into the works would have created delays. If planes had been allowed to land at American airports the burden would have been dispersed allowing the planes to land sooner.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 3, 2007 9:46:50 GMT -4
So that small white jet was part of a search order mission.Is there any datas available about that search mission?
Have you actually bothered to read this thread? I posted details of it about 2 pages back.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 3, 2007 9:53:49 GMT -4
If anything sending all the planes to Canada would have slowed things down. Our airports can only handle so much traffic at once, throwing thousands of additional jets into the works would have created delays. If planes had been allowed to land at American airports the burden would have been dispersed allowing the planes to land sooner. First ,I never said all the planes but hundred of them which were suppose to land in USA DIVERTED ON SEPT. 11, STRANDED FLIERS MAKE ENDURING CONNECTIONS Some of 200 Planes Rerouted, Many Got to Newfoundland; By Clare Ansberry, Staff Reporter of the Wall Street Journal www.ganderairport.com/911e.htm
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 3, 2007 10:57:22 GMT -4
My point is that sending planes to Canada doesn't speed up the process of getting all planes on the ground, it just shifts the burden and ultimately makes landing take longer. It doesn't matter whether it is two hundred planes or two thousand, if airports are forced to deal with higher traffic than normal it takes longer to land the planes.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Mar 3, 2007 14:20:54 GMT -4
IIRC the flights diverted to Canada were all international flights destined for the US. Those flights either returned to their country of origin or landed in Canada. Canada has about 1;10th the population of the US and presumably had about 1;10th the airport capacity September 2001 thus it would have had little excess capacity for absorbing US domestic flights, and I never heard of any domestic flights sent there, even if a few had been it would not have made a big difference.
The order to ground all US flights was issued at around 9:40 UAL 93 crashed at 10:03 or 10:26. It’s not unreasonable that some planes still would have been in the air 23 or 26 minutes later, especially a small private plane in western Pennsylvania. The closest airport, Jonesboro, and the biggest in the area, Pittsburgh, had been closed, Cleveland might have been closed too. I imagine priority would have been given to jetliners over Lear jet type planes.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 3, 2007 15:51:54 GMT -4
So that small white jet was part of a search order mission.Is there any datas available about that search mission?Have you actually bothered to read this thread? I posted details of it about 2 pages back. No I started with page 7 The only thing I find is The Dassault Falcon 20 does have a military look to it, and is used by the French Military (Hmmm, perhaps I need to return to my "The French did it" claims.) Do you have any references than that plane was on a search order mission in the aera? Edited OK I finally find it on page 6 That clarified the point. A link to your post would have been appreciated
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 3, 2007 16:07:17 GMT -4
My point is that sending planes to Canada doesn't speed up the process of getting all planes on the ground, it just shifts the burden and ultimately makes landing take longer. It doesn't matter whether it is two hundred planes or two thousand, if airports are forced to deal with higher traffic than normal it takes longer to land the planes. Of course, but they dont have to deal with departures only the landings.Thus making the planes circling the airport aera until they were authorized for landing one after the other.How long it take to landing an airplane and safely clear the landing aera ready for another plane? 2 minutes more or less. That is why I refer the Gander airport example about how they managed the emergency.I imagine this was done in US airport too.ie they have converted a runway to a temporary aircraft parking ramp. -------------------- www.ganderairport.com/911.htmOn September 11, 2001, 39 heavy aircraft were diverted to Gander International Airport when airspace was closed in the United States because of tragic terrorist hijackings. Runway 13/31 was converted to a temporary aircraft parking ramp. Edited to fix a quote
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Mar 4, 2007 17:50:31 GMT -4
As already pointed out the flights diverted to Canada were predominantly (if not entirely)planes for overseas flying ito the US. Find us evidence of domestic flight diverted to Canadian airports.
Produce calculations showing that all planes in western Pennsylvania, which had two closed airports, even small private planes, should have landed within 26 minutes of the order.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Mar 5, 2007 4:11:56 GMT -4
Two minutes to clear a runway?
I have to....I can only...have you flown recently? Have you BEEN to a major airport? Two minutes? When you are trying to put more planes there than it was ever designed to handle?
|
|
reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Mar 6, 2007 12:30:30 GMT -4
I guess turbonium gave up. Hooray we win!
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 6, 2007 18:01:11 GMT -4
He's just waiting for us to forget so he can start from the beginning again.
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 7, 2007 2:44:37 GMT -4
Two minutes to clear a runway? I have to....I can only...have you flown recently? Have you BEEN to a major airport? Two minutes? When you are trying to put more planes there than it was ever designed to handle? How long do you think this take to clear the runway ...based on the procedure describe below. travel.howstuffworks.com/air-traffic-control3.htm"Once you've landed, the local controller directs your plane to an exit taxiway, tells your pilot the new radio frequency for the ground controller and passes your plane off to the ground controller." edited spelling
|
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Mar 7, 2007 6:38:01 GMT -4
There is a minimum safe landing interval between aircraft, depending on the size and type involved, in order to avoid wake turbulence. A large aircraft can land fairly quickly after a small one, but a smaller aircraft needs to wait longer to follow a larger one down.
|
|