A Canadian-made plane caused all those hot-weather flight delays in Phoenix: airline

I'm sure another billion dollar taxpayer bailout and 7,000 more employee layoffs would fix this problem.

Sad but probably true.

How would government subsidies change the laws of physics?

Here's a thought, do what Middel Eastern countries do, and schedule flights for regional fuel efficient aircraft at night, when it's cooler.

test

Sorry, I just assumed that the (sarcasm off) tag on my post would be implied.


But here's a thought. Of course subsidies can't change the laws of physics but, they can change the ability and desire to actually create a product capable of operating in extreme weather. Unless of course, those subsidies are handed out to the members of the Board rather than the engineers, designers and workers.

So, rather than having regional fuel efficient planes fly at night inconveniencing thousands, maybe the planes purchasers should buy a plane capable of flying in the Desert rather than one that craps out at 118 degrees farenheit because that temperature while not the norm isn't unheard of.

You getting that SQL error to?

You getting that SQL error to?

Yah. "Invalid form, try submitting again" message over and over again. Trev said that it was something to do with downtime at a data center corrupting something.

Sorry, I just assumed that the (sarcasm off) tag on my post would be implied.


But here's a thought. Of course subsidies can't change the laws of physics but, they can change the ability and desire to actually create a product capable of operating in extreme weather. Unless of course, those subsidies are handed out to the members of the Board rather than the engineers, designers and workers.

So, rather than having regional fuel efficient planes fly at night inconveniencing thousands, maybe the planes purchasers should buy a plane capable of flying in the Desert rather than one that craps out at 118 degrees farenheit because that temperature while not the norm isn't unheard of.

I got your sarcasm, but what you describe as an adverse operational characteristic is actually the aircraft's operational parameters. It's designed to be a fuel efficient regional carrier, not a high flying intercontinental jet. Putting bigger engines on it will let it take off in hotter weather, but defeats the fuel efficient intent of the design.

If the airlines that bought it for it's fuel efficiency wanted a plane that would fly in hotter weather, they would have bought something else.

Sorry, I just assumed that the (sarcasm off) tag on my post would be implied.


But here's a thought. Of course subsidies can't change the laws of physics but, they can change the ability and desire to actually create a product capable of operating in extreme weather. Unless of course, those subsidies are handed out to the members of the Board rather than the engineers, designers and workers.

So, rather than having regional fuel efficient planes fly at night inconveniencing thousands, maybe the planes purchasers should buy a plane capable of flying in the Desert rather than one that craps out at 118 degrees farenheit because that temperature while not the norm isn't unheard of.

I got your sarcasm, but what you describe as an adverse operational characteristic is actually the aircraft's operational parameters. It's designed to be a fuel efficient regional carrier, not a high flying intercontinental jet. Putting bigger engines on it will let it take off in hotter weather, but defeats the fuel efficient intent of the design.

If the airlines that bought it for it's fuel efficiency wanted a plane that would fly in hotter weather, they would have bought something else.
Using your logic than one can't blame the Liberals.

Yea, I'm a party pooper because I prefer reality to partisanship.

Around here, yeah you are.