Planestupid

Now im all for getting your voice out but these people just get on my nerves!!

How stupid can you be to go sit on a busy runway?? I suppose none of these spotty teenagers have worked out that a plane cant just put the brakes on and stop on the spot!!! im sure they will be feeling very sorry for themselves if they cause a major accedent.

And you would think they do there research before protesting outside a small office in london that has little to do with the airline aspect of the easy group!!

I have been doing a bit of digging around, and followed a link from the main PlaneStupid website onto another website (http://www.airportpledge.org.uk/index.php), that appeals to people to make a pledge against airport expansion, and the one interesting thing that I found out…since this pledge was started on 8th October 2004, only 4,108 people have signed up to it…

Ok, so I cannot tell how this number is spread out geographically, but this figure clearly demonstrates that people are not queing up to sign this pledge because they know that air travel is important to them and that in order to have the services that we do have now and that we will have in the future more space and capacity at airports is needed. However, I do strongly believe that the government and airport operators do need to analyse every possible detail before announcing plans to expand airports, and they should at least make an effort to listen to and understand the concerns of the people that will be directly effected, i.e the residents that live under the flight-paths.

I must admit though, (and I suppose this is because I am a Londoner and therefore have better access to it), if I had to travel to Paris or Brussels for example, I would look to use alternative modes of transport than flying because although it would take me longer by Eurostar, the prices are just as acceptable to pay, and also to see the nice countryside passing you at 150mph is quite a thrill…

The group performed again today! 😮

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6120210.stm

They said on the radio this morning, that their ‘protest’ was actually plain stupid…..as they went to the building where the other easyGroup company headquarters were e.g. easyCruise, easyInternet – where infact, easyJet did not have any offices there!

Keep an eye out for them at the AVP!. The airport is looking for a reason to build on that!

Rgds Cking

The group performed again today! 😮

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6120210.stm

I find myself agreeing with Damien on this one. 🙂

No, the government usually causes a lot more chaos than that.

Heathrow, Stansted, Gatwick, on the mythical ‘liquid bomber’ day and every day since…?

Hmm… Not quite the same topic of conversation but I certainly can’t disagree!

Paul

I have to laugh at all the indignation and vitriol spewed against this group when the government themselves actually agree and are planning to put further tax on air travel… why not save all your righteous rage for the tossers in government – a minority that rules over the majority all the time!

I’ve never heard of members of the government breaking into airports and sitting on taxiways for four hours.

You appear to have spectacularly missed the point, Sir!

Paul

I bet these folks aren’t as militant when they jet off on their holidays.

Environmental damage and global warming are things we cannot ignore, so it’s right that protest and action groups raise their concerns in whatever way they see as appropriate.

I alarms me though, how on earth anyone manages to occupy an airport runway for so long. Don’t they have security and police at the airport ?

They are just a bunch off murpets who just wanna cause delays , trouble and blame Aircraft for Environmental damage and global warming.If I had a plane and they where on the runway I would ********** run them over :diablo:

James

The plural for Aircraft is Aircraft.
No S!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Aircraft
:p

The bottom line is that the aircrafts are far far more effecient and many of the LCC are on the way of aquiring new jets which allow them to save money . If all the airlines of the world switched to LCC approach ( wanting more eff. which lowers cost) the per capita emmision ( per capita PAX and plane) would fall by nearly 20-30% over the entire spectrum ( emmissions , noise etc etc) . The population of the earth is growing and there are always going to be more and more people wanting to TRAVEL which just goes to show that there is prosperity . Now would the Anti-aircraft people want those people on buisness trips , leisure get aways to choose anything other then the most effeceint way to travel ( emmissions per PAX per mile) ? Aircrafts dont pollute as much as automobiles and these retards need to realize that the ELECTRIC TRAINS that they talk of also require elctricity which for the vast majority of the world is generated from *BELLS* FOSSIL FUEL *BELLS* .

:diablo: Anyone up for some cheap flights 😀

But look at the other side, thank god, we do live in a Democratic state, where this is possible. Yes they should be locked up, as they are trying to get rid of the things we love, but they have a right to raise their voice, in where a number of people around the world do not 🙂

In a democratic society, the minority have to accept the position of the majority. Of course it means that we can all voice opinions, but it also means that the minority cannot (or should not be able to) force their opinions on the majority – in the case at EMA a few weeks ago, a few mindless souls should not be allowed to disrupt the travel of thousands. And if the majority want more and more flights, then the minority are obligated to accept that whilst they campaign for their view and seek to try to influence more people to join their cause.

Their concepts are fundamentally flawed anyway – the only things that is “plane stupid” are the people involved in the campaign. Cheap flights have not come about deliberately to damage the environment – even the low fare carriers make money, and that’s known as capitalism (something else the democratic UK has decided it is in favour of). Cheap fares have come about because the airline industry has driven down costs and continuously increased its efficiciency (including engine efficiency) – just think of how much more environmentally damaging flying would be if we still all flew around in first generation jets like 707s and DC-8s.

Taxing aviation probably isn’t the answer either (as tax usually just goes into government coffers and serves no purpose related to the source from which it is collected), unless the tax is ring-fenced and used to develop even more efficient and cleaner technology for airlines to use – if that condition is met, then I think taxation would be useful. BUT, if you reduce the amount of flying being done, then less money is generated, and less money is available to invest in new cleaner technology. And aviation fuel taxation in the UK, for example, would do more harm as airlines would tanker more fuel which would actually increase emissions as a result of aeroplanes carting un-needed fuel around. This is not a UK solution either – it is a global solution that requires consistant application across the globe. Aviation isn’t a UK thing, its a global thing, and polution and global warming won’t hold short of the UK just because the UK is doing things that are better for the environment than anyone else.

In any case, aviation is only a minor contributor to global polution. The biggest poluter in western europe is the power generation industry, as it is primarily driven by fosil fuels. The same mindless people who want flights to be cut back also do not want nuclear power stations (which would have a significant impact on reducing emissions), nor do they want wind farms because they’d spoil the view and/or a few birds might fly into the windmills and die as a result. Ahh, how sad – I guess a few birds crashing into windmills is more important then? Or I guess we all go back to caves.

Global warming needs a coordinated effort that INVESTS in new technology to reduce aviation, other transportation AND power generation emissions (amongst others). Until this happens, the environmentalists might as well just stand there picking their noses for what good they’re going to do.

Andy

Just get the aircraft to carry on with their approach and landing as normal, I’m sure when they see an aircraft coming right from them they will **** their breeks and run off to mummy.

Anybody know where I can get a cheap flight so I can join in…. :diablo: .

Solution is simple 😉 Construct jet engines with ramjets under the fuselage (already exists in some military projects i think?). As soon as you get to cruise, turn off the engines and let the ramjet do the rest until you reach your destination and require the engines again. Sure you’ll add some weight and as a result a bigger price tag, but if it helps save the environment then there should be no problem 😀

Ofcourse its not quite that simple…

Gaz

Did anybody see the debate on Newsnight featuring one of their spokes”men”. I’ve never seen anything so funny, it has been ages since I’ve seen anyone so incapable of a coherent and well thought through argument. He was just like a 12 years old! Pathetic actually, not a good image for them if they actually want to make a serious point. The truth is that we do ahve to take environmental issues seriously in the industry, but as aviation represents 3% of the carbom emissions in Europe then there are other issues to be considered aswell. Next he’ll be chasing me down the motorway in my Land Rover shouting abuse!

I’d like to see how long members have to plan in advance to get to the AGM if they can’t fly 😀

What a shame… I’m away on one of those cheapo, shorthaul flights at the time! :diablo: :dev2: