On Aug 17, 6:52 pm, Bucky wrote:
> 7th incursion in the past year at LAX. Can't they install green and
> red lights at busy airports, like they have for trains? When an
> airplane is ready for takeoff, the runway would have a green light,
> and all the taxiways that cross the runway would turn red. It seems to
> me that a visual signal is much superior than radio communication,
> because radio communication is a one-time event, subject to
> misunderstanding, or plain missing the message. With lights, the
> communication is continuous. (I'm not suggesting to eliminate radio,
> but that lights would greatly augment the communication).
>
> http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/08/17/state/n133551...
you'd think that the airplane insurance companies (if nobody else)
would mandate-require such an elementary ole-fashioned back-up
measure
but perhaps implementing such would amount to a legalistic implicit
acknowledgment of the vulnerability in the customary, established
system THAT HAS APPARENTLY FAILED MORE THAN ONCE OVER MANY YEARS
tenfire runway disaster THAT HAPPENED APPARENTLY before many of you
were born>
meanwhile, the lexington, kentucky, incident will be fought in the
federal and airline bureaucracies and the courts for years, and the
law firms will do well if nobody else
meanwhile, the faa is allegedly sitting-on some kind of state of the
art change, as i recall from a 60 minutes some time ago, which is
surely a much more complicated phenomenon than i could grasp with my
simple mind
while the mourning families whose kin took off from the wrong blue
grass airport--near sunup on a sunday morning for jackson-hartsfiled--
runway might have a suggestion
|