What is Digg?113 Comments
- Harbinger67, on 05/02/2008, -2/+33Haha, thinking that the airlines care about consumers.
Aren't you adorable. - inactive, on 05/02/2008, -4/+35Maybe they could try turning the engines off for minute or two, coasting, then turning them back on. Rinse, repeat. Drafting other planes might help too.
hypermiling in the air FTW.
/sarcasm - robbh66, on 05/02/2008, -3/+30They should keep it under 30 if they really want to save on gas.
- NeilVickers, on 05/02/2008, -1/+25Giant trebuchets at the source airport and huge piles of fluffy pillows at the destination?
- sladehawke, on 05/02/2008, -0/+16your sarcasm is noted, but a lot of us do 4 degree descent paths now, instead of 3 degrees, to save gas. We stay high longer (faster true air speed and lower fuel burn) and then chop the throttles to idle and come down at 3000 feet per minute (or better). It's not a good analogy to hypermiling though, since cars don't see much of a change in air density...
- LordZeal, on 05/02/2008, -0/+149 times out of 10 on my plane trips they fly faster to make up time lost because of delays.
- NeilVickers, on 05/02/2008, -1/+12Yeah, but Silicon based solar panels are REALLY heavy. Bit of a problem for a plane.
- CedEx, on 05/02/2008, -1/+12Airports should have catapults!
- thedinomeister, on 05/02/2008, -27/+38wtf is up with these stupid news stories today? digg me down.
- plhofmei, on 05/02/2008, -3/+12In the case of jets, I think a more accurate phrase would be "fewer gallons per mile"...
- Zandarrr, on 05/02/2008, -2/+10Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks.
- JorgeGT, on 05/02/2008, -0/+8I wonder why all comments in this story by sladehawke were at 0 diggs beign him the only one that obviously knows the topic as he appears to be a pilot / engineer that is willing to share his knowledge with us. I mean, the comments about true science and knowledge are at 0 and the jokes about catapults and trebuchets at 10? What the ***** happens with Digg?
- inactive, on 05/02/2008, -1/+9The you're not looking hard enough. It's sort of tough to miss it.
- superkendall, on 05/02/2008, -1/+8Or a blimp.
- sphigel, on 05/02/2008, -1/+8Who gives a flying ***** why they're doing it. If it benefits the environment then it benefits the environment. The strive for profit will create efficiency. I am so sick and tired of people that only care about good intentions. Good intentions doesn't get you *****. Grow up and learn a thing or two.
- ausfahrt, on 05/02/2008, -3/+9Not true at all. Going west to east in canada is way slower than east to west. Jet stream partner.
- Mist0r_Wiggles, on 05/02/2008, -1/+7did you go to MIT?
- veriix, on 05/02/2008, -2/+8Get out of the way! The roads were made for driving, grandma!
- inactive, on 05/02/2008, -0/+5If "that's awesome" is seriously all you have to say to a story, why even comment?
- inactive, on 05/02/2008, -0/+5I have seen 10 duplicates on digg so far. They are getting buried because each gets about 80 diggs and not all of them will reach the front.
- demodawid, on 05/02/2008, -0/+5I was promised teleportation by the year 2000 and I'm still waiting... :-(
- asskicker32, on 05/02/2008, -4/+9Im thinking we need a whole new way of travelling.
- oderdigg, on 05/02/2008, -1/+5Read the article you douche.
FTA: "That meant flying at an average speed of 532 mph, down from the usual 542 mph". & "It added eight minutes to the flight, extending it to eight hours, 58 minutes."
Soo... 8 mins on a 8 hour and 50 minute flight. - emomakesmecry, on 05/02/2008, -3/+7As a pilot I have no qualms whatsoever with the airlines adding a couple minutes to flight times. You people who are complaining about a few minutes of your time make me sick. The airlines are having to do everything they can in order to stay in business. By staying in business, they allow you people to fly from location to location as opposed to driving or taking a train (which are both VERY time consuming) and all you can do is complain about a few lousy minutes?
- bincoder, on 05/02/2008, -1/+5They are smarter than the drivers. Around here they still race to the light, slam on the brakes, then burn rubber to go again. One would think gas was 10 cents a gallon by the way people Still drive.
- masterm1nd, on 05/02/2008, -1/+5First of all, around 50 mph is typically the most fuel efficient. So speeding up could also use less gas. Second of all, it's not so much the speed as it is unnecessary acceleration and unnecessary braking that wastes gas. Using the brakes and gas as little as possible is the way to go if you want to save a tiny amount of gas in your vehicle.
- masterm1nd, on 05/02/2008, -2/+6Did they account for the people who are going to fly with a company who doesn't purposely go slow?
- dustysquareback, on 05/02/2008, -2/+6God, you guys ARE retarded, aren't you?
- superkendall, on 05/02/2008, -0/+4The "savings" is that the flight you paid for is actually there because the company has not gone bankrupt.
- drifter, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3might aswell use it up in style.
- sladehawke, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3Induced drag decreases as you fly faster and increases as you slow down.
It's parasite drag (and thus total drag) that increases with the square of velocity. Slowing down .02 mach can makes a difference in parasitic drag, and wave drag to a lesser degree (with today's supercritical airfoils).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Drag.jpg - iFrikkenR, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3they don't pay road taxes on their gas. they also buy in extreme bulk
- masterm1nd, on 05/02/2008, -0/+3Use your feet. See you in 10 years!
- inactive, on 05/02/2008, -2/+5Higher ticket prices + unnecessary security hassles + fatties that should buy two seats but spill over into mine = I'm driving.
- inactive, on 05/02/2008, -1/+4JasonsLan also spotted in front yard, ordering youths to stay off his finely manicured lawn.
- CedEx, on 05/02/2008, -2/+5You got that reversed. It's faster flying eastward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream - davidlow, on 05/03/2008, -0/+3Propellor planes save even more money:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24390211/ - thentro, on 05/02/2008, -1/+41) not closer to the sun, just less atmosphere in between
2) planes use a fantastic amount of fuel. Solar panels would not make a dent. - inactive, on 05/02/2008, -1/+4If it meant spending an extra two hours in the air heading to Japan or Australia, I certainly would.
- Virgule, on 05/03/2008, -0/+3All in one page (nevermind the print prompt)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24410809/print/1/displ ... - petard, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3That is pretty fast! Imagine if you had to take a car!
- sphigel, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3I really doubt any significant number of people think about that when booking a flight.
- fxu1989, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2I've seen one on the front page... and that is more than enough.
- Princeamor, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2maybe they were late for work? did you ever consider that?
- plundstedt, on 05/02/2008, -1/+3Airlines these days have such a small profit margin, they're going to use every bit of extra to increase that. Ticket prices are just going to go higher.
- zakatov, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2brilliant!!
- emomakesmecry, on 05/03/2008, -1/+3Might want to research before you start on an uneducated rant. The airlines have nothing to do with the security checkpoints. That's the TSA's responsibility which is now a part of Homeland INsecurity. Airlines know full well that people absolutely loathe security checkpoints but there's nothing they can do about it. As far as delayed flights go, weather has a major factor on it and always has. Airlines need to be careful to protect not only the passengers, but their pilots. Also, the demand for flights is on the rise and airlines are using smaller aircraft in order to save money on fuel and because it's easier to fill up all the seats. This makes for congested air traffic (due to the vast increase in aircraft in the skies), which in turn, causes delays due to crowded traffic patterns over runways. Our existing Air Traffic Control system is having a hard time keeping up with as much air traffic as there currently is in the skies.
Stop complaining and realize that there is much more to this industry than just going from point A to point B. - Dustmuffins, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2They are closer to the sun...
about .0000769% closer - shodanx, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2oohh oohh let's put a wind turbine on the tail and use that to power an electric motor with a prop instead of a gas engine !!!
- robbh66, on 05/02/2008, -0/+2Or the fact that it's not a single seat jet, but a something 50 times bigger that's not designed for it?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 111 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 