Sort of cut myself off at the end of my *coughs* treatise *coughs*, but I did want to mention that some of the other valuable characteristics of the 757 (bigger engines, better hot/high performance, etc.) are things that airline buffs and pilots tend to like, but that airline management tends to not really care about too much. Regarding runway performance, there are very few airports with a combination of heavy demand and short runways, but also limited landing slots (otherwise you just run more flights!). Allegorically, we love that sort of thing - I have fond memories of UA 757's on the DCA-ORD route getting to cruise in about 15 or 20 minutes, but it's hardly relevant to the bottom line for the airline. The extra fuel consumption and higher crew costs (higher seniority pilots for the 757/767 fleets, generally), are noticed by airline management, however. Of course, what does this mean looking ahead? Well, the 737-9MAX is clearly not getting the same level of interest for the

(Written on 11/30/2016)(Permalink)

I've always been on the fence about whether it was a "mistake" for Boeing to shut down 757 production. We often look back at the situation with our modern lenses, but let's step back and look at things from an early 2000's perspective. Here's where the 757 stood in 2002: - The 757 doesn't sell in the same volume as the 737 or 767, not even close. New orders are barely coming in amidst the post-9/11 airline slump, and there don't seem to be any new markets where the 757 could grow into. - We're developing a 767 replacement with a shortened model that will offer comparable seating to the 757-300 with much better range and better economics. - The 737-900 is still new, but airlines seem to be gravitating towards it as a 757 replacement, albeit with shorter range, and it does seem to compete well against the A321 in a way the 757 hasn't. Range doesn't seem to be a problem, as both the A321 and 737-900 trade range for seats. Clearly, the transatlantic market will remain the domain

(Written on 11/30/2016)(Permalink)

Kind of reach to do so in this context though, no? I mean, do you incorporate that into every conversation you're a part of?

(Written on 08/06/2016)(Permalink)

The reality of the modern battlefield, as can plainly be learned from our operations in the Middle East, is that the next-gen CAS aircraft will need to be designed with Counterinsurgency operations as a primary focus. This means durability, long loiter periods, and the ability to get down in the weeds for extremely precise attacks with a mix of munitions. While everyone loves the A-10, the reality is that even it carries too much firepower for the wars we're fighting. The GAU-8 is great for fighting against heavy tanks, but even ISIL (probably the largest, most organized enemy we're likely to face in the next two decades) only has a few commandeered tanks, and none of them are heavy enough or advanced enough that other, lighter weapons can't take them out. The solution may be something resembling the OV-10 Bronco, with more powerful engines (feasible with today's technology) allowing for an internal autocannon (maybe the GAU-22 or a variant?) and better fuel capability.

(Written on 07/16/2016)(Permalink)

The problem, fundamentally, is that there are certainly regions where wind is in abundance (plains states, mountainous areas, etc. - see the following link to the Energy Information Administration website https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=4630). The fundamental problem isn't so much the existence of renewables subsidies, but rather their poor targeting and design, which promotes gimmicky projects that don't generate as much energy as better designed projects. As far as the government subsidies are concerned, a wind turbine built in super calm central New Jersey will earn as much in incentives as an equally large project in eastern North Dakota, even though the latter is, in real terms, a significantly better investment. The problem is that since both receive the same federal support, it dampens the market incentive to target the best locations and project designs. The easy solution here is to tie the tax credits to productivity - higher yield/$ spent means better

(Written on 01/21/2016)(Permalink)

There are regulations on new structures - the building would need to be built to code regardless of height. Fault zones don't preclude tall buildings, just poorly built buildings.

(Written on 01/07/2016)(Permalink)

The FAA butting into urban planning like this is yet another case of the tail wagging the dog. The airports essentially are there to serve the needs of the Seattle region, not the other way around. If Seattle, as a city, favors a particular development plan, then it absolutely should be within their rights to do that. Too often we're seeing the FAA dominate urban planning by essentially having this "safety veto" where they can shove their wish list down cities' throats by simply saying that a plan they don't like would negatively impact "safety." I hope Seattle has the courage as a city to move forward with their urban development plans.

(Written on 01/07/2016)(Permalink)

Doubtful; at those speeds, heating is extremely rapid; the X-15 had to use special materials primarily for its high-speed flights (although the X-15 did reach space, re-entry heating is only a factor if you're starting from orbital or close-to-orbital speeds, which the X-15 was not), and those flights only spent a couple minutes at hypersonic speeds, and even then only at Mach 5 to Mach 7, not Mach 10. Active cooling would be an option possibly for lower Mach numbers (maybe up to Mach 3?), but it's overwhelmed by the amount of heat generated above that.

(Written on 11/03/2015)(Permalink)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY278K4ljWs I know it's a bit young for many of the people here, but still...

(Written on 10/19/2015)(Permalink)

So apparently it has to do with the investigation into Bridgegate. Why is it that everyone who had anything even remotely to do with it is suffering real, actual, material consequences except for the one guy in the center of all of it? As someone who will be living in New Jersey for the foreseeable future, I sincerely hope that Chris Christie's political career ends already.

(Written on 09/08/2015)(Permalink)