ODS-1 Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 By the way, here is that 7e7. It's really not all that special lookin to me, but supposedly it will be much more fuel efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 Originally posted by Hoblow@Jan 19 2005, 10:30 PM The international airport here in Melbourne just announced they'll be using them to fly from Melbourne to L.A. They're also going to spend a shitload of money on widening the runways so they can actually fit the planes on there. I deal with the smaller airbuses, A320's, through work and those things are pretty big when you stand right next to them. The diameter of one engine on these new babies is bigger than an A320. Holy shit. Quoted post http://www.e-flight.com/airbus/a320-air.jpg I wonder how many of times you'd have to multiply the seats in this to equal one a380. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 By the way, i'm just borrowing this image so don't remove it because of the copyright thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermdog Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 The next Terrorist Attraction..coming to an airport near you!! Not hating, just conversating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kr430n5_666 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 fucking demons on those aircrafts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAustin Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Originally posted by Hermdog@Jan 20 2005, 10:38 AM The next Terrorist Attraction..coming to an airport near you!! Quoted post I was thinking the same thing. You can only hope that they took that into consideration and made the cockpit far beefier than any before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 blaazed Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I dont fuck with planes ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIST2CUFFS Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 gambling in the air, i wonder if they will have problems with different gambling laws around the world???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAustin Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 or will they be able to get away with it due to it being airspace? interesting question. just don't get caught counting cards...you may find yourself being thrown out a door without a parachute over the pacific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Mang Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 i would hope that with extra room for more passengers that ticket prices would drop dramatically. but i don't see that happening any time soon... especially with the way airlines are doing yep.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 Originally posted by FIST2CUFFS@Jan 20 2005, 02:21 PM gambling in the air, i wonder if they will have problems with different gambling laws around the world???? Quoted post That way after you've gambled away your life savings you can just waltz on back to the emergency exit and jump out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 22, 2005 Author Share Posted January 22, 2005 Originally posted by fermentor666+Jan 20 2005, 01:03 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fermentor666 - Jan 20 2005, 01:03 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'> Originally posted by Nekro@Jan 20 2005, 04:24 AM <!--QuoteBegin-fermentor666@Jan 19 2005, 11:02 PM Either way, planes are still pretty much the worst of vehichles for the environment. Quoted post Are you fucking kidding me? American-made SUVS are the worst vehicles for the environment for a multitude of reasons. Do airplanes require large amounts of wilderness be paved? Do airplane passengers and pilots litter? Do airplanes move one person at a time and get 15mpg? Ideally, we would pretty much abolish the suburbs, establish subway systems in all our cities and have a system of magnetic levitation trains connecting nearby cities and jet service to far away ones. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen any time soon. Quoted post Airlines require quite a bit of wilderness paved and flattened to allow for them to land. They are also produce quite a bit more noise pollution then an SUV does. Airline passangers and pilots do litter, though not while in a plane. Some airplanes do move one person at a time, but since we're discussing jumbo jets in particular, I'll say no. I just recently read a statistic, that unfortunatly I can't for the life of me dig up right now, that claimed one jumbo jet flight across the ocean is the equivalent to 20,000 cars travelling at rush hour. Maybe not 20,000, but somewhere in at least the tens of thousands, I can't particularly remember. An big airplane runs on a hell of a lot more full than an SUV and if you'll notice, they get refueled after every flight. SUV's are definitly wasteful and obnoxious and 90 percent of the time belong to people with no practical use for them, but that doesn't mean that airplanes can't share the blame. So no, I'm not -fucking- kidding you. Either way, I'd be much more excited about someone creating a jumbo jet that runs on an efficient fuel source than I am about this. Quoted post [/b] Actually, not all planes refuel after every flight. Sure, the big ones do, because they just carried 500 people half way across the face of the earth in 7 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.yuck Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 Originally posted by GrimeyLife1@Jan 20 2005, 01:53 AM i bet plane tickets for this big bastard are pricey Quoted post I dont know i was watching tv and saw something about these big bastards a few months ago. The guy who makes them says that they should get around the same fuel economy, or they run on a different cheaper grade of fuel. Either way, it is supposed to work out so that the price of tickets is cheaper because they can fit so many more people on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferris Bueller Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Airbus is the future. Fuck a twenty year old Boeing or McDonnel-Douglas. And the whole ho-hum about pollution is retarded. If you compare the US's highway system (look at an atlas if you're too dumb) to Europe's, there is quite a difference. Public transportation is retarded here. I still don't understand why we're not rocking full electronic intercity trains like Germany or Japan. Yeah, there is the Acela Express, but that's shit. Fucking lobbyists won't let society progress because it will thin out their wallets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepyceas2- Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 one way from boston to florida = $49 planes are safer and are nowhere close to being a problem for pollution, its like sayin fish's shit is water pollution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRON KING Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 pics to show of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRON KING Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRON KING Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRON KING Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 I love how you people say that airplane pollution is not a problem, and is like "a fish shitting in the water". Here are some facts: http://www.areco.org/4-98testimony.pdf - A report from the "US Citizen's Aviation Watch" which makes the claim that "According to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency...O'Hare is one of the top hazardous and toxic emissions polluters in Illinois." I'd quote more but it's in PDF format. There are plenty of facts in there about how bad airplane and airport pollution is that are all cited. http://www.acpd.ca/acpd.cfm/en/section/fridayfacts/ff/19 Here's some juicy quotes: "3. How much do airports contribute to pollution overall? Many airports rank among the top 10 industrial air pollution sources in their cities (including airports in Los Angeles, Washington, and Chicago). Nationwide, planes at airports emit about 1 percent of smog-forming gases. But while pollution from other sources is stabilizing or decreasing, the pollution from planes at airports continues to grow due to the tremendous growth in air travel and the lack of controls on airport pollution. 4. How significant is pollution from airports compared to cars? One 747 arriving and departing from JFK airport in New York City produces as much smog as a car driven over 5,600 miles, and as much polluting nitrogen oxides as a car driven nearly 26,500 miles. While the government has effectively required cars to undergo emissions inspections (with resulting improvements in emissions and efficiency), airplanes have not received the same scrutiny. Meanwhile, air travel is increasing in popularity twice as fast as car travel and is projected to double within the next 20 years. 9. Should people avoid flying for the sake of the environment? Air travel is an integral part of the transportation system, but consumers should consider alternatives modes of travel, such as high-speed rail, when possible, especially for shorter distances. Consumers can also help by demanding that airports be subject to the same rigorous standards and reporting requirements as their industrial neighbours. " These same points and more can also be found at http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/qairport.asp as well as a few other environmental sites I am sure. http://www.southshorejetpollution.org/ - Close to home for me, a site dedicated to community awareness regarding Logan Airport expansion. From there: "Are you just concerned about noise? Not at all; we are also very concerned about pollutants. We believe the proposed Air Quality Initiative which has been cut from the State budget is essential and needs to include all areas within 15 miles of Logan; not the 5 mile radius that was proposed. It is our intention to fund our own air quality study to demonstrate the dangers to our citizens. We are also very concerned about the impact of the Project to our local economy. Clearly, the increase in air traffic as a result of the construction and use of 14/32 will make the South Shore a less desireable place to live. That will impact tax revenues [housing costs and consumer sales]. The overall impact may be disasterous to business. Studies in the Seattle-Tacoma area and Amsterdam indicate a 10 - 20% decline in real estate values." So, please, people. If you have some facts to back up your statements about airplanes and airports not being a pollution problem, or not being at the same level as an SUV, show me. I'd love to see it. And something more than "Oh, they say it will be more fuel efficient." because that's baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Oh and here is the source for those numbered facts: http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/foc/aairinx.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepyceas2- Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 many airports are a problem, but as far as general aviation is concerned, your average piper warrior isnt as much a factor compared to your suv or car. JFK, O'Hare, LAX are exceptions to the rule. Those are the busiest airports in the world. General aviation is much bigger than those airports, in those select citys, but the proof is there in the document, it is a growing problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 23, 2005 Author Share Posted January 23, 2005 Yeah, I don't think little cessnas and piper cubs are really a menace to the environment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 No, but we're not talking about little private planes. We're talking about big gigantic commercial planes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoTeddyFinger! Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 fucking hippies. without airplanes the world would be progressing so slow that today in 2005 would seem more like yesterday in 1950 or some shit. what do you people care bout the environment anyway, its not like the tsunami killed anyone you care about. pshhhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vare_one Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 them things where at the international aerospace exhibition in dubai last year i was working out there for boeing in there chalet and was doing some hospitality work and we got to go out n get into some of these plains they are fucking awsome the planes them self when staindin next to them are giants the airbus is a beauty of a plane and when seeing it flying thru the sky that big plane sure shocks ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 Without planes, how would we get supplies to tsunami victims? Ships? And trains don't go over the ocean. And besides, when a plane crashes oil doesn't go everywhere in the ocean. And yeah, that airbus is a beauty. But if you fly somewhere, those 727s are old as shit, like from the sixties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS-1 Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 Why haven't we seen more of these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleepyceas2- Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 its pretty ill how a flying ship like that can get off the ground. physics is that shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 No one is saying anything about how we should all stop flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.