News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Concorde ‘B’. Parent comment

Re:Concorde ‘B’ by baxtr on Monday May 07, 2018 @12:10PM (#17013873)
Do I understand you correctly that if we would stop flying right now, we could reverse some effects of global warming (the water vapor part of it would be gone instantly)?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Concorde ‘B’ by hammock on Monday May 07, 2018 @12:14PM (#17013919)
>the water vapor part of it would be gone instantly

Not to mention the parts of the economy that rely on air travel ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Concorde ‘B’ by airstrike on Monday May 07, 2018 @12:40PM (#17014157)
Not to mention the remaining parts of the economy which would grind to a halt even if not directly related to air travel
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Concorde ‘B’ by merpnderp on Monday May 07, 2018 @12:33PM (#17014097)
You don't have to to stop flying, only stop flying so high. Low level cloud cover has a massive net cooling effect.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Concorde ‘B’ by scrumper on Monday May 07, 2018 @01:56PM (#17014844)
Jet engines are massively more efficient at high altitude. Turbulence is much worse at lower altitude. Safety margins are reduced at lower altitude. Winds are far less predictable at lower altitude.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Concorde ‘B’ by Tloewald on Monday May 07, 2018 @01:02PM (#17014333)
Problem is planes don't fly high for fun, they fly high because the air is thinner up high which improves fuel economy.
[ Parent | on HN ]