Another airline scare
 

Beware!


IMPORTANT FRONTIER AIRLINES UPDATE


Frontier Airlines files Chapter 11
Frontier Airlines continuing normal operations following chapter 11 filing.

Click here for details

Re: Another airline scare
 

And some people wonder why I don't fly...
Good thing Champs wasn't this week! With American & Southwest grounding their MD-80's I be willing to bet some wouldn't make it.
I'm still wondering if anything will be flying go get folks down to Atlanta.
Maybe Amtrash umm Amtrak not such a bad idea after all. :rolleyes:

Are any team planning on going by bus or rail just because the airlines are having so many problems?

-p

Re: Another airline scare
 

Southwest doesn't have MD-80's :p

Re: Another airline scare
 

Okay... what ever they do have... they did have to ground them to inspect them didn"t they? Or was the FAA just pulling a April fools joke?

Re: Another airline scare
 

They did have to ground 38 Boeing 737 planes for inspection. As of Wednesday 28 of the 38 had been inspected and were reentering service.

Re: Another airline scare
 

Yeah, we were going to fly but were A. worried about the flight costs and B. Flight being cancelled. So we decided to caravan our ways down. 13 straight hours from Flint MI wed night to make it there just before pits open the next day :eek:

Re: Another airline scare
 

It's nice if you can actually drive there yourself. I mean 13 hours is still a lot and the gas prices make it not better at all.
For other teams from the Westcoast, etc. there is not possibility like that, well unless you start like 3 days early. I think we're flying on Delta, not sure though, should be a problem though.
It's funny though how much is canceled and grounded around now. I think SAS or Alaska grounded several Q400 not too long ago...well better grounded than crashed!

Re: Another airline scare
 

While reading Google News a few days ago, I saw an incredibly funny contrast of news articles. The first one was about the failings and vankruptcies of the air travel industry, and here was the second article.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...in-807789.html

Sure, it's British Rail, but I don't think it would be impossible to replicate their success over here. It'll just take some commitment to passenger rail, as opposed to the "Oh, Amtrak..." mentality.

Re: Another airline scare
 

Hey,
as a European (German), I think I know the value of trains. The trains are usually faster/cheaper than the most other alternatives. Especially the high speed trains are very good for Europe since flights are not necessary to cover most distances. Unfortunately, the trains lost a lot of their networks and its popularity since WW II. My town doesn't have any train access since the 1960's. Surprisingly though, trains are very cheap in Europe. I would pay for a bus to our neighbor community more than for a train to Hanover (about an hour away).
I had to make the experience though that the Northwest here is not able to do provide anything similar at all. Seattle has buses and (pretty soon) a light rail but cargo has the attention on the tracks. Passenger trains are seldom and to funny times. I know back East its different. But in order to achieve a switch from flights to trains, America would have to spend billions and billions of dollars! I don't know how one would finance such a massive project!

Re: Another airline scare
 

So the elaborate on the trains idea. Right now, there is a LightRail that passes by the Reliant Park (where Nats were a few years back and LSR the past few years minus 2008) and METRO is planning on doing something of the sort around the whole area. I am already aware that Dallas has one but it would be even neater if we (Americans) could standardize a lightrail track (if we haven't) and begin to start joining several major cities that are close like Dallas and Houston which are only about ~250 miles apart.


Pavan

.

Re: Another airline scare
 

For us Hawaii teams,
if we didnt already start swimming or paddling our canoes already, we would miss the event.

Well, that's why we have no choice, BUT to fly.;)

Re: Another airline scare
 

We have 28 tickets booked on Frontier :(

Hope for the best that our flight won't be cancelled or that we don't get stuck in Atlanta. If we get stuck there, don't be surprised to see our team taking collections to get home or we'll be renting cars and taking that long awaited trip cross country.

Re: Another airline scare
 

Another airline I've never heard of that's in trouble... Big surprise. :rolleyes:

Re: Another airline scare
 

You'll be alright, they just filed to protect their fees from a credit card service company. I would be more worried if I were flying on any of the MD80-90 series on any airline.

Re: Another airline scare
 

Currently, the Northeast Corridor is the only part of Amtrak's operations that is profitable. Especially on the four-track stretch between New Haven, CT and New York City, you'll see various trains every fifteen minutes, whether they are Amtrak Regional service, Amtrak Acela, or Metro North Commuter Rail. As it stands, this stretch of track carries nearly as many people every day as I-95, which parallels the route.

The reason why the Northeast Corridor is profitable is because we have a lot of people using the service, and since these [electrified] tracks are mostly for passenger only, they are in really good shape. This is in complete contrast to almost everything else that Amtrak operates.

Almost everywhere else, Amtrak was given horribly-maintained freight railroad tracks in the 1970s, and an annual budget that can barely cover operating costs. Without any additional funds, they can never hope to repair the 100+ year old infrastructure that sometimes it seems is held together with duct tape and prayers.

The only way out of this is to start investigating the best possibilities for profitable service (basically any trips between 50 and 500 miles), and then proactively start upgrading those routes, including track, signals, bridges, stations, etc., as well as concentrating on maximizing transfer hubs between existing modes of transit (airports, ferries, light rail, subway, etc).

Increasing grade separation is also a must; with a drastically reduced number of level crossings, higher speed can be attained, thus making it a more attractive choice.

As of right now, most of the states are all working on their own plans to bring new light rail and commuter rail service into their metropolis' areas, and this is a very good start. However, very little attention is being spent towards creating a national vision or goal. We need another Eisenhowen-type plan, with the focus on rebuilding America's once great passenger rail network as opposed to more highways.

And before someone starts complaining that this sounds like big government socialism, it kind of is. But the intent of government should never be to compete with business; as such any improvements should be made with the hope that one day the system would be profitable enough to denationalize/deregulate and let industry take over operations. It worked with ConRail for freight rail, and it worked with British Rail in Britain, there's no reason if done right it won't work here, either.


(That is actually how I would propose a funding source for the projects; direct some ($3-5b) of the $33b spent annually on the Interstate Highway system into rail travel. The Interstate Highway System, as envisioned by Eisenhower as a dual purpose military/public transportation network is now done.

We should only be spending money on maintaining the system, as every highway widening project I've seen has only cost the taxpayers much over original estimates, snarled traffic for years during construction, and yet we still end up with traffic jams as bad as before. How many years are we going to continue this inane cycle before we realize that we aren't ever getting the results we want?

That, and I'm pretty sure that most cities now regret building Interstate Highways right through the downtown areas. They lost a lot of taxable (and very expensive) real estate in the process. Roads, highways, and parking lots now often account for 40% of urban areas. I'm sure city planners, as well as the local economy would prefer to see some of that land returned as more residential/commercial real estate.)