View Full Version : What if we could never fly again?
We are in an open ended no fly period.
I don't need to fly, ever. But my wife flys all the time for her job.
What if it became indefinate?
How would it effect you?
How would it effect the economy?
riggerboy
16-Apr-10, 08:02
We are in an open ended no fly period.
I don't need to fly, ever. But my wife flys all the time for her job.
What if it became indefinate?
How would it effect you?
How would it effect the economy?
would be an awfy long trip offshre but my economy would deffinately improve
would be an awfy long trip offshre but my economy would deffinately improve
Yes, would defo effect the shifts. How long by boat to your platform?
it'd be nae skin aff ma nose
David Banks
16-Apr-10, 08:58
We are in an open ended no fly period.
I don't need to fly, ever. But my wife flys all the time for her job.
What if it became indefinate?
How would it effect you?
How would it effect the economy?
If it became indefinite, I could see three quick changes:
- many of the recently built vacation cruise liners would be put into trans-ocean passenger service
- an increase in rail transport - Europe would be in better shape than North America
- a great increase in electronic meetings via e.g.: skype
It would not effect me.
I couldn't predict the ecomonic effects, except for an increase in vacationing nearer 'home.'
The Drunken Duck
16-Apr-10, 09:00
As a Radio Op having to go offshore by boat would make my life MUCH easier, I wouldnt have an endless line of people asking me 345 times if they are booked on the flight after being told yes, I wouldnt have to run round the rig finding guys seemingly unable to check in for their flight home, I wouldn't be expected to be able to predict the weather for a week next Thursday and I wouldnt get the blame every time its foggy and the flights are delayed.
riggerboy
16-Apr-10, 09:03
As a Radio Op having to go offshore by boat would make my life MUCH easier, I wouldnt have an endless line of people asking me 345 times if they are booked on the flight after being told yes, I wouldnt have to run round the rig finding guys seemingly unable to check in for their flight home, I wouldn't be expected to be able to predict the weather for a week next Thursday and I wouldnt get the blame every time its foggy and the flights are delayed.
here whens ma flight comin, or do i take the boat ???? help i`m not staying for more than 4 weeks
just been informed all flights to the rig today are cancelled
Well, we ain't flyin' 'till Saturday now at least. Lots of unhappy campers everywhere.
I'd be out of a job if they did stop the airyplanes.
We are in an open ended no fly period.
I don't need to fly, ever. But my wife flys all the time for her job.
What if it became indefinate?
How would it effect you?
How would it effect the economy?
Up until less than 100 years ago we all went by boat anyway so why worry? Might even slow the pace of life which would not be a bad thing.
Well, as someone who is greatly looking forward to being in Caithness a month from today (from the US) it would certainly cut all of that out. I fly over 100,000 miles a year on average, so it would impact me a great deal.
That being said, I would happily take a "no aircraft" break.
Bruce
Cape Crusader
16-Apr-10, 14:55
If God had meant us to fly He would not have given us the railways.:lol:
***********************
Just because I am paranoid it does not mean that they are not out to get me!!!.
If God had meant us to fly He would not have given us the railways.:lol:
***********************
Just because I am paranoid it does not mean that they are not out to get me!!!.
I think with our railways, god meant us to walk :lol:
Wouldnt bother me at all. Only flown three times, Barrow to Wick and got a lift back, Barrow to Wick and got the train back and Manchester to Amsterdam and got the ferry back.
Wouldn't bother me, I can get the boat to Iceland. :)
if i was to fly i would have been born with wings
I'll just stick to my turbo charged broomstick.
mums angels
16-Apr-10, 19:28
It would effect us in a huge way , My hubby flies from wick -Aberdeen - London- Johanasburg- Luanda- Angola and back every 4 weeks . He went out on Wednesday but all the back to backs are currently stuck in Johanasburg waiting to get back to the UK , must be horrible for all those stuck trying to get home to their families ( not so bad for those stuck at home getting paid to wait for flights back to work though , a day later and my hubby would have been one of those ) LOL
I'll just stick to my turbo charged broomstick.
Just do not get stuck in the Jet Stream Lizz
I'll just stick to my turbo charged broomstick.
is that no just a hoover? :Razz
I'll just stick to my turbo charged broomstick.
And sweep the ash away at the same time?
On a positive note, we would never see another 911 or Lockerbie or similar atrocities.
Sara Jevo
18-Apr-10, 13:13
No air ambulances would be bad news.
Travelling by ships might be good news.
And the improvements that would happen to the railways would be very good.
There's a lot of chatter on the internet about the much bigger volcano next to this one, called Katla, and whether it's rumbling, too.
Apparently, when it last erupted in the 18th century, the climate change across northern europe lasted for several years, triggering famine that was blamed for the French Revolution etc.
The epic eruption that changed Iceland forever (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8624791.stm) - BBC
it would effect us just in visiting family. but other than that not so much. could still take a boat i suppose but again, would take most of holiday time getting there and back ... thats the only drawbacks i could see.. hmm how would it affect our carbon footprint with no planes in the air?
The Drunken Duck
18-Apr-10, 14:12
The worlds shipping produces TWICE the amount of emissions that the worlds aircraft do, so more ship travel would no doubt drive the Enviromental lobby into a frenzy .. http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/30046240/Ships-emit-more-COsub2sub-than-aircraft
Banning aircraft and replacing them with ships would be worse for the atmosphere, not better. This has been conviently ignored by the scabby protesters that run onto aircraft runways claiming all planes are bad for some reason.
The worlds shipping produces TWICE the amount of emissions that the worlds aircraft do, so more ship travel would no doubt drive the Enviromental lobby into a frenzy .. http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/30046240/Ships-emit-more-COsub2sub-than-aircraft
Banning aircraft and replacing them with ships would be worse for the atmosphere, not better. This has been conviently ignored by the scabby protesters that run onto aircraft runways claiming all planes are bad for some reason.
Just for the sake of it, and I never said aircraft were bad in any way.
Are the shipping immisions twice as much as aircraft in total, or per person/unit of freight carried (I didn't get that from the article).
The Drunken Duck
18-Apr-10, 15:04
Looks to me like the figures are based on the actual number of ships and aircraft. Its a report on commerical shipping so I would guess the figure for the aircraft would be for commercial passenger carrying ones too.
The figures given in the report are 1.2 billion tonnes of carbon produced for ships and 600 million tonnes for aircraft so, based solely on the number of ships and aircraft, shipping is worse than air travel in total. But with a lot less aircraft than ships that would mean that individually aircraft are worse than ships.
and what is the passenger limit on ships ect.. and how many would be used for comercial use.. lots of questions for that one!
Looks to me like the figures are based on the actual number of ships and aircraft. Its a report on commerical shipping so I would guess the figure for the aircraft would be for commercial passenger carrying ones too.
The figures given in the report are 1.2 billion tonnes of carbon produced for ships and 600 million tonnes for aircraft so, based solely on the number of ships and aircraft, shipping is worse than air travel in total. But with a lot less aircraft than ships that would mean that individually aircraft are worse than ships.
So I think it is safe to say that travelling by boat would be a lot "greener" It would also be a lot slower. I think a return to horses and carts would be too but what is the point of progress if you don't use it. I was very sad about Concord ending it's career (although it was getting very old technologically). Shame we are not looking for a replacement.
I guess cheap flying is what people want.
Just think, if we had continued developing scram jets and balistic passenger flights we wouldn't have the problem we do now. :(
I was very sad about Concord ending it's career (although it was getting very old technologically). Shame we are not looking for a replacement.
It was a sad day indeed, but although an oldish aircraft and maybe wartime technology but nothing flying today (well, flying until thursday) in the commercial sector comes close.
northener
19-Apr-10, 11:01
Gliders.
("Message is too short")
OK:roll:
Honking great huge large gliders...massive ones.
And sailing ships.
i heard that planes are bad for the ozone layer because they release there exhaust so close to it? Anyone else heard that?
Gliders.
Honking great huge large gliders...massive ones.
We're halfway there!
This is the bit I don't understand, fly the planes and if they work great, If the engines stop due to ash ingestion you just glide for a wee whiley, OK you may not get to where yer goin' but it'll be closer than sitting at the airport waitin for the ash to go away.
Amy-Winehouse
19-Apr-10, 11:30
It would be like old times, taking a boat to work .
Im supposed to go off on weds but all flights are cancelled from Aberdeen again today so now theres a 5 day backlog , shame for the guys like Riggerboy who are already there but another day at home for the good guys :D Take the rough with the smooth they say
We're halfway there!
This is the bit I don't understand, fly the planes and if they work great, If the engines stop due to ash ingestion you just glide for a wee whiley, OK you may not get to where yer goin' but it'll be closer than sitting at the airport waitin for the ash to go away.
Now Phill, you of all people should know: getting halfway there on an airyplane is rarely a good idea :roll:
BTW…….you may know this already, but the reason it is always just called “the Icelandic volcano” is because its name is……
….Eyjafjallajoekull :eek:
My biggest fear about the cessation of flying would be, what would happen to European football matches involving EPL teams?
As SPL teams are always knocked out in the first round anyway it would not any effects on them, and as Scotland never qualify for competitions the same would apply
My biggest fear about the cessation of flying would be, what would happen to European football matches involving EPL teams?
As SPL teams are always knocked out in the first round anyway it would not any effects on them, and as Scotland never qualify for competitions the same would apply
[lol][lol][lol]
Also all the Air Mail would have do be done by Pidgeon Post.
You never know the Mail might arrive quicker as well. :D
Sod all that carry on-son has just moved to Florida----an you are telling me I will have to flog over the pond to join them--- NO WAY HOSIE,hairy planes all the way!:)
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.