|
I enjoy work travel. My company puts me up in a nice hotel near the office, which is either in downtown Philly or midtown Manhattan. I work pretty reasonable days, expense drinks with coworkers, and generally enjoy not making my bed for a week. When I'm going to a conference, it's about the same answer for a different city. If I want, I can usually make a business case for flying in on Sunday or leaving on Saturday, then pick the earliest/latest possible flight that day, which gives me a day to myself to enjoy the city.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:54 |
|
|
Murgos posted:Where the heck do you work? Where I work I don't even get lounge access or air miles! Maybe your problem is being in engineering, instead of sales or marketing or related fields, or maybe you're just selling it wrong instead of posting look how happy and successful I am and how great my life is Facebook updates. I get that a lot of times it isn't glamorous, but it's exactly like Ola described it. It's an excuse to break out of a routine and daily work grind, maybe escape family obligations, and be unsupervised for a little while, only having to answer to the accounts department when you submit your receipts. To a lot of people, that is like a vacation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Mr. Ola, I think you mean: fuel cell powered airship airliners  3 Days to London! 5 Days to Beijing, sooty coal brick of the Orient!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
simplefish posted:No, BA made money off Concorde because of how they operated it in their fleet. Didn't they also get the planes way below cost?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Yeah, seriously, where do you work that people enjoy work travel? It depends a lot on how your management treats it. My job is 75% travel but my Mondays and Fridays are basically just travel days. That's all I need to do those days. So depending on where I am going, I have a few hours of dealing with the airport. Then I teach a class a few days during the week. If I'm in a city that's interesting, It's not an every week thing though. Last week I was in Omaha and my desire to play tourist was nil. But I have a trip to DC coming up in a few weeks that goes into some of my PTO. So I'll go see Udvar-Hazy and take two days for that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Didn't they also get the planes way below cost?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
Until someone can figure out the gap between "poo poo happens at (rate) when I show up in person" and "poo poo happens at (0.25)*(rate) when I don't show up in person" there is going to be a permanent durable future for business air travel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Most people I know who have to travel for work consider it a benefit, and treat the trips themselves as a vacation outside of the actual work stuff. And that doesn't even touch the leisure market, and the basic human desire to explore other places. Ive found this to be true of people who have less than 3-4 years of work travel, under thirty and or travel 25% or less. I'm at the point this year where I've traveled more privately than commercially for work and can largely choose my countries of travel. If you told me that at 24 I would have been in heaven. Now I just want to get off the plane not have to face a client while facing backwards with nothing interesting to look at.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Lol just heard on the news that YYC received over 1700 noise complaints from 1 person last year. Need to find a way to monetize that salt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Lol just heard on the news that YYC received over 1700 noise complaints from 1 person last year. That's got to be like more than one complaint per aircraft "Yes? I'd like to complain! That jet that I called about earlier is still very loud!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Lol just heard on the news that YYC received over 1700 noise complaints from 1 person last year. Well, you could become a psychiatrist who takes medicare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Well, you could become a psychiatrist who takes medicare. It's a good notion, but sadly YYC is in Canada.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Proof of concept testing on boundary layer engines has just wrapped up and the results seem promising. UTRC (United Technologies Research Center) and NASA are showing the engines use less fuel compared to their pylon counterparts. Blended engine/body designs here we come. http://www.utrc.utc.com/20170316_nasa.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Lol just heard on the news that YYC received over 1700 noise complaints from 1 person last year.  can it? There must be some sort of mental illness there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Proof of concept testing on boundary layer engines has just wrapped up and the results seem promising. UTRC (United Technologies Research Center) and NASA are showing the engines use less fuel compared to their pylon counterparts. Blended engine/body designs here we come. I mean, this seems like a no-brainer, but isn't the issue that maintaining these things is a huge pain in the butt compared to pylon-mounted engines? Also, the whole issue with compressor disks deciding to go on an adventure becomes even more problematic when it happens. Did the Comet teach us nothing? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Fredrick posted:I mean, this seems like a no-brainer, but isn't the issue that maintaining these things is a huge pain in the butt compared to pylon-mounted engines? Plus the modern designs look to be a lot more modular than the older blended concepts - they're moving towards engine pods attached to the airframe, essentially.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
From 2015 https://www.yyc.com/Portals/0/Environment/YYC%20Noise%20Report%202015.pdf?ver=2016-07-07-122606-393 quote:YYC continues to follow the international trend of small groups of individuals submitting 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Just goes to show the superior mental health system north of the border, it only took one person to file that many against Reagan National last year. 18 every day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
slidebite posted:From 2015 The right answer is "if you don't like it, loving move, you whiny rear end in a top hat!" I also find it funny that they're building a brand new "lake community" right out by Springbank, so of course you're going to have these same loving retards buy an expensive new McMansion and then bitch about the airport that's been there for nearly five loving decades. Of course, being the sixth busiest airport in Canada by aircraft movements, I suspect they will get told to pound sand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Fredrick posted:I mean, this seems like a no-brainer, but isn't the issue that maintaining these things is a huge pain in the butt compared to pylon-mounted engines? I don't think it makes an issue with compressor disks any worse. How would that work? Uncontained failure is uncontained failure. Maintenance, sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Fredrick posted:I mean, this seems like a no-brainer, but isn't the issue that maintaining these things is a huge pain in the butt compared to pylon-mounted engines? It looks like you could service most of that engine by removing the cowling, and time on wing is exceeding 40,000 hours now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't think it makes an issue with compressor disks any worse. How would that work? Uncontained failure is uncontained failure. Maintenance, sure. Maybe not compressor disks, but the main fan is in front of the wing's plane, so it most definitely helps reduce critical wing damage. Given current wing and engine dimensions, there's also the matter of "where else do you put it?". Ola fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Lol just heard on the news that YYC received over 1700 noise complaints from 1 person last year. I know the US does but does CA provide government subsidies to provide soundproofing for places in high exposure zones that qualify? Also, I loved the An-124/Russian flight crew stories + the recommendations - good stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't think it makes an issue with compressor disks any worse. How would that work? Uncontained failure is uncontained failure. Maintenance, sure. I feel like having the engine that much closer to important spars or longerons increases the risk that an airframe might be written off by debris that might've otherwise gone to some part of the sky that isn't occupied by plane, but I admit it's not enough of a gripe to rule out using these, especially with the information you guys presented after my first post. I hope it's worth it, for reals! It looks super cool, and I'm completely onboard aesthetically, I just worried that this was more of a reinventing the wheel situation when I saw it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
As a data point in the speed vs. comfort discussion, I just chose to wait an extra 4 hours, and skip 2 flights, to get on a transcontinental flight with a virtually guaranteed first class. e: they're not lie flats 
vessbot fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Ola posted:Maybe not compressor disks, but the main fan is in front of the wing's plane, so it most definitely helps reduce critical wing damage. Given current wing and engine dimensions, there's also the matter of "where else do you put it?". Oops, linked to the wrong img url. The "where do you put it?" argument has a bit more impact with a pic that loads. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
All I see
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
No, that's the future, when the only person sitting there will be the guy in charge of making sure the robot autopilot doesn't go "HAL" so he doesn't go schizo himself for not having a window. Or the aperture where the Laser ILS shines to guide the plane in.
BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Or the aperture where the Laser ILS shines to guide the plane in. Lol, the future is WAAS enabled GPS approaches. Ground based navigational aids will be deprecated in twenty years, and probably gone altogether in fifty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Lol, the future is WAAS enabled GPS approaches. Ground based navigational aids will be deprecated in twenty years, and probably gone altogether in fifty. Hopefully nobody figures out how to jam GPS between now and then!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
well yeah maybe VORs and NDBs will be deprecated, but I feel like visual landmarks and runway lighting are probably gonna stick around for a while "Mwahaahahaaha! In order to deny the Air Force access to my secret lair in the Sierra Nevada, I have jammed all GPS receivers, cut the power to every navigational beacon, and dynamited the tops of every mountain!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:No, that's the future, when the only person sitting there will be the guy in charge of making sure the robot autopilot doesn't go "HAL" so he doesn't go schizo himself for not having a window. Or the aperture where the Laser ILS shines to guide the plane in. If we have computers flying the plane can't we move the pilot out the back and have some kickass 180 degree window seats at the front?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:well yeah maybe VORs and NDBs will be deprecated, but I feel like visual landmarks and runway lighting are probably gonna stick around for a while Right because people don't do poo poo just for kicks. See: Lasers pointing at aircraft all over the goddamn place, and drones getting in the way. All it takes is for one aircraft's system to flip out and try to correct an "error" and fly into a building because it thought it was 1/4 mile away and 100 feet higher. Edit: Last year a Navy exercise employing GPS jamming forced a bizjet to declare an emergency after it hosed with his autopilot, which started making unexpected control inputs. Read your NOTAMS, people. Godholio fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
Has anyone been working on making an autopilot based on computer vision instead of external navaids? If so, how successful has it been?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Has anyone been working on making an autopilot based on computer vision instead of external navaids? If so, how successful has it been? My friend did it as his PhD (well, positioning by identifying the horizon and mapping the features to a map - but the autopilot is pretty easy once you know where you are). He also briefly did auto-land using computer vision only, but that's not terribly hard He got sub meter precision. Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
Generally speaking the problem with computer vision systems is that unusual or marginal light conditions can cause the to misinterpret their surroundings. Deep shadows and dazzling reflections are the most common mishandled conditions. That happens to humans too, of course, but computer vision systems to go even further off the rails when they fail. It's the classic problem with programmed systems - the majority of the time the results are amazing and far better than human control. But when they go wrong, they tend to go wrong catastrophically. What makes it a really intractable problem is that humans have an annoying tendency to override automated systems when they shouldn't. And a tendency to trust them when they shouldn't too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
Why would you want a an autopilot, which is so important at night or in IMC, to be based on vision? How does it navigate over the sea? And navigating by land features alone is so hard the mail planes of the 20s needed city names and huge arrows painted on roofs. A set of gyros keeps you oriented, an INS can tell where you are. Don't know if the best ones are accurate enough to autoland after an intercontinental trip.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Cruise missiles have navigated by landmarks for decades—using terrain, not visual, granted.
Platystemon fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Ola posted:Why would you want a an autopilot, which is so important at night or in IMC, to be based on vision? How does it navigate over the sea? And navigating by land features alone is so hard the mail planes of the 20s needed city names and huge arrows painted on roofs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:54 |
|
|
Platystemon posted:Cruise missiles have navigatd by landmarks for decades—using terrain, not visual, granted. um, excuse me, but cruise missiles know where they are at all times because they know where they aren't. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 08:07
|
|