News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by hannasanarion on Monday April 01, 2019 @08:01PM (#19549657)
Planes operate at the whim of the weather. High winds are way more common than train derailments, and they take out a hub, not a line.
Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by bdamm on Monday April 01, 2019 @08:18PM (#19549769)
Trains aren't hurricane proof either so we can take those right off the table. Of the rest, it takes very exceptional storms to blockade an airport for more than a few minutes. Delays that occur because of snow and fog are not because the commercial airliners can't fly in those conditions, but because the ground infrastructure can't clear the snow quickly enough, or because the reduction in visibility means increasing separation requirements on approach to landing and therefore reduces overall throughput. In places where it snows a lot there exists sufficient infrastructure to handle it (Chicago, Denver, Moscow). Even thunderstorms are not typically a big problem for commercial airliners and their airports; the controllers declare holds while the storm passes directly overhead and they're back in business in under an hour. And hubs that systematically are hammered by storms aren't hubs for much longer, a luxury that any railroad executive would kill for.

This is particularly impressive if you compare average airliner delays to average Amtrak delays.

Modern airliners are remarkably good at handling typical bad weather.

Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by ocdtrekkie on Monday April 01, 2019 @08:23PM (#19549795)
> This is particularly impressive if you compare average airliner delays to average Amtrak delays.

> Modern airliners are remarkably good at handling typical bad weather.

Why are you comparing modern airliners to archaic rail systems? Amtrak is far from the shining example of modern rail.

Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by hannasanarion on Monday April 01, 2019 @09:18PM (#19550179)
Exceptional storms still happen a lot more often than train derailments. It doesn't take a hurricane.

I was in one of the last flights to land at EWR on February 25 before all the area airports were closed for 12 hours. From the ground it was a moderately windy day. In the air, it was scary as hell, and the first time I vomited on a plane, with about a quarter of the other passengers.

There were no derailments or train delays that day.

Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by Const-me on Monday April 01, 2019 @09:49PM (#19550326)
> because the ground infrastructure can't clear the snow quickly enough, or because the reduction in visibility means increasing separation requirements

Only true for airports in the middle of big flat nothing. If there're mountains around, bad weather or visibility makes landing too unsafe, unacceptably so for commercial airlines.

I live near this international airport: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxzQIvVu7mg Closes in bad weather regularly. Doesn't work at all after sunset.

Re:Trains are more efficient and less polluting than other t... by pandapower2 on Monday April 01, 2019 @08:26PM (#19549822)
Even volcanic eruptions crop up with surprising frequency and result in vast disruptions to air traffic. Those disruptions can last for weeks and can shut down a single hub or potentially multiple hubs across a region depending on which way the ash cloud blows.

As an example, every few years the volcano on Bali comes to life and hundreds, if not thousands, of flights get delayed or canceled.