Aircraft Orders

Hmmm.... Billions agree with you? I think not, unless they're the billion whose cars were pulled off the road in China.

Considering how much nuclear power is in use in Europe, Japan and North America, and that's where quality of life & use of high-speed rail transportation networks seems to be the highest, I'd say that you're a little off on your guess there, Wing.

I'd rather see nuclear expanded an alternative than see the government subsidize billions to grow feedstocks intended for gas tanks instead of viable food that could go to feeding humans and livestock.

And I'd much rather see BLM give in on their opposition to building some solar arrays out in the desert. A single array 100 miles x 100 miles in size could provide the majority of the country's electric requirements, and we have unarable space in California & Arizona which get enough year round sun to make it work. But it would cost trillions to manufacture, process, and maintain.

I don't get the opposition to a drilling platforms, since they're only visible for the duration of the drilling. Once the wellhead is capped, there's hardly anything visible from a distance.
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #32
Disagree in that those billions didn't put those facilities there - a handful of government people did. I highly doubt they polled, let alone paid any attention to, anyone's opinions. As with most things of this nature, it is about the money.

I agree with and understand the solar options as well as the fact that based on our current technology and understanding, it is just cost prohibitive. Most new ideas are. Regardless of cost today, it will still require some type of expenditures to find the cheaper alternatives.

Now, once a type-o is in circulation, sometimes there is just no fixing it. So I said billions of cars when CLEARLY I meant millions, and it is - millions. (Under a two-month plan that started Sunday, half of the capital's 3.3 million cars will be removed from city streets on alternate days, depending on whether the license plate ends in an odd or even number.) - CNN Beijing Report. But like I said, a few of you are having fun with "billions" so why spoil your weekends?

As for the drilling platforms, I don't think the opposition is so much in the appearance as it is in the fact that we just can't trust the people doing the drilling not to make a mess, or have a spill then walk away and hang the taxpayers with the tab to clean it up. History has an awful way of repeating itself and the last thing we need in hurricane country is a bunch of oil rigs dangling off shore. We all saw what Katrina did to the platforms in the gulf and the Florida/atlantic coast gets hit with a helluva lot more weather than Louisiana or Mississippi.

For the last several years, we've spent time on the AL beach not far from the entrance to Mobile Bay. On a clear night there are 15-20 rigs lit up offshore, including a decent sized one only 3 miles right off the beach. Sure, I'd like the pretty empty ocean view, but in the end, everyone had a great time on the beach everyday and the rigs were nothing more than streetlights in the distance. I never saw one tarball or any pollution whatsover except for my overlooked beer cans. Dolphins and fish seemed abundant although there may be some issues with Ag runoff.

I also fly over the northern gulf. After Katrina, it wasn't long before every rig was lit up again and back in place directly where a Cat5 storm went through. I agree to hold the drillers feet to the fire on spill prevention, but I have to admit they've done a pretty good job.

eolesen is also dead on on solar in the west. I also get a great view out there while flying, not through a scratched crappy 8x10 plastic window in back, but through the big glass ones in front. There is a unbelievable amount of isolated land available, but only the goverment can take the risk to jump start solar on a massive scale. I look at it like Eisenhower pushing the US interstate highways. He did it for national security reasons, not for future Cracker Barrel sites. Solar should be the same.
I think if they were to do solar power which I think we should by the way, it would prorably start out west.
Another factor is the recent center fuel tank inerting AD requirement for all 121 aircraft built after 1991.

The 737-800's coming off the assembly now incorporate the AD. How many MD-80 aircraft do we own built after 1991? What is the cost of compliance with the AD?
MD-80 aircraft are exempt from this AD.
I thought the inerting requirement only applied to models certified after 1991, and not necessarily when it was assembled.
I thought the inerting requirement only applied to models certified after 1991, and not necessarily when it was assembled.
No. It has to do with where the A/C packs are installed in relation to the fuel tank. They built MD-80's until 2000. Other aircraft that are exempt are B727, DC-10, MD-11, and Fokker F-100.
Interesting. Do existing 747 models have to be retrofitted? That might explain some of the glut of used -400's on the market (which were mainly replaced by 777s).
Interesting. Do existing 747 models have to be retrofitted? That might explain some of the glut of used -400's on the market (which were mainly replaced by 777s).
Aircraft that are only in passenger service must be retrofitted. You are also correct that is limited to aircraft produced after 1991. However, they have also exempted aircraft that are in cargo only service and aircraft that more than likely be out of passenger service by the time the rule comes into effect. However, I believe the -400's are on the market for economic reasons rather than the cost of possible retrofit.
I do agree with Joe about the 744's being on the market due to economic reasons because if you can help it you don't fly a 4 Engine plane these days with the fuel prices at $112 a barrell and with the 77W now.