An "airport neighbourhood" where people can store their planes in their yard and taxi directly to the runway

https://lemmy.ml/post/4761282

An "airport neighbourhood" where people can store their planes in their yard and taxi directly to the runway - Lemmy

Location on a map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=42.1486108&mlon=-88.5628734&zoom=17#map=17/42.14861/-88.56287 [https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=42.1486108&mlon=-88.5628734&zoom=17#map=17/42.14861/-88.56287]

Must be lovely to hear your neighbor fire up their Cessna at 7 in the morning for their morning commute.
Enjoy being stuck behind the asshole in a C130 with trucknutz.
Would be super impressed if a C130 didn’t end up in the cornfield on t/o
Muddin' on the weekends!
God Bless America.
American problems (too short of a runway for your jumbo jet) require American solutions (rocket boosted Yeehaw 🤠)
God that is so fucking glorious
Those are booster jet engines?
Solid rocket boosters, but they’re called “jet assisted take-off” for some reason.
Yep, "Fat Albert" JATO (Jet Assisted Take-Off) C130.
Jet Assisted Takeoff - The gif is Fat Albert which is part of the Blue Angels. There was a plan to use jet-assisted landing and takeoff to rescue hostages in Iran but it wasn’t used after a failed test of the landing jets.
JATO - Wikipedia

C130s were designed to operate from relatively short unimproved runways. If the place has enough runway to operate corporate jets, it should have enough for a C130.
I reckon a C130 could use it actually. The US Navy landed one on a carrier, which is probably shorter then this runway.
Thank you, this gave me a good chuckle.
I’ve lived under a flight path, ~9km/6miles from the airport - while I understand the difference between a 787 and a Cessna 172, I’ve got no earthly idea why anyone would choose to have a runway in their front yard.
Because us plane people have a crippling addiction…
Haha - like most addictions, this feels a lot like self-harm.
For the people living there I am sure that’s a feature, not a bug.
I lived adjacent to a neighborhood like this. It was much quieter than middle aged neighbors with Harley’s. Little Cessnas and Pipers are not that loud.
I imagine the people living there probably don’t need to commute at all anymore, or if they do, it’s definitely not at 7 in the morning.
You won’t commute like this lol
I live basically across the street from an Air Force base so I get turboprops over the house at 1,000 feet starting at about 7:00 5-6 days a week. Doesn’t bother me or my wife, we just like planes.
I love planes, but I wouldn’t want to live next to a fighter base. USAF cargo planes are super cool though
It’s a training base so we’ve got both here. I’m just on the prop side. Cargo planes are super fun too, used to fly C-17s over my old house all the time before we moved here.
I want to see a train-based one of these
Everyone parks their personal train in their yard?
Yeah, or at least train cars, with a way to get it onto the network for vacations and such. (Vacationing in a personal train car sounds fun)
This is the future I didn't know I wanted. But it seems like a good way to make Snowpiercer reality in record time.

It's the present in the US. Many people own personal train cars, and you just contract with Amtrak to hook you up and you're off on vacation. You can even bring Babu. You can rent personal cars as well, though you probably should make sure yuor ocelot is housebroken if you're taking a rental.

Now, I say "many" but what I means is that's more than a few. Many is still probably in the 3-4 digit number (I'm guessing). And you'd be correct in assuming that it's not a luxury most people can afford. But it does exist.

Who is Babu?

An ocelot from the cartoon Archer

Another character in the show, Carol/Sheryl, comes from a wealthy family and owns a private rail car

And, there’s an ocelot named Babu

DO they still? Last I heard Amtrak was no longer taking private train cars as too many were not in good mechanical shape and thus a large cause of their delayed trains.

I was just googling around, and it looks to me like a private rail car costs something like a 2nd home, storage fees similar to property tax, $4/mile to have Amtrak haul you around. Basically a vacation home, but mobile. Definitely a 1% thing, but not billionaires-only. Probably way more prestige in saying you’ve got a private rail car than a beach house. At least among a certain segment.

Most interesting thing I’ve learned all week.

I’d love parking for these cars at various places I want to visit though, think railway parking timeshare.
The logistics and cost of that does NOT sound fun. I’m pretty sure it would make the airport neighborhood look like a slum, based on the money needed.
Basically like an older industrial district with rail links to every building, but with houses instead.

Vacationing in a personal train car sounds fun

My parents almost did this in India a few years back. They have travel agencies that plop you in a couple of nicely-appointed rail cars that you stay in for a month while they’re attached to different trains every night. You wake up each morning in a new city - basically a land cruise.

/c/fuckcars : “use some other form of transportation!”

Also /c/fuckcars: “No! Not like that!”

Why not? Less risk of being hit by a plane if they’re in the sky and requirements for a pilot license are much stricter. In a plane crash occupants are more likely to die than innocent bystanders l, compared to cars that are designed for safety only for those on the inside.

Why not? Probably because:

Bike pollution: .

Car pollution: oooooooooo

Plane pollution: OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO

(bike pollution is slightly more than nil just because of the CO2 we breathe out while riding)

Speak for yourself, I bike with a bag on my head to capture my emissions.
Don’t worry, your body will release all that carbon when you die.
What about the emissions from the other end?
That changes it from a bike to a gas powered engine
Planes are better than driving cross-country. Just from a safety standpoint. It's also considered mass transit. If we had high-speed cross-country rail, then maybe it'd be better but still takes several times longer.
Plane pollution is not that much worse than a car. Depending on what metric you measure it can be better (planes are more fuel efficient and thus less CO2. Small planes like the picture generally use lead fuel and old engine designs that pollute more) on long trips.
I do love having heavy metals rain down on me from the sky so rich cunts can entertain themselves.

Nearly all land near small runways and airports that fly planes using AvGas will have lead contamination. That’s because lead is still used in most aviation fuels a consumer plane would use. Runways are also required to have and use PFAS in firefighting foam for emergencies. Training and system tests will dump that stuff in the surrounding area.

Unless these fine folks have A380s they’re paying a hefty premium for lead exposure and PFAS in their water and soil.

Lead is only one factor of pollution though. You will note that i acknowledged it exists. There is no objective way to say what is the most important factor or how you compare them.
No, planes are not more fuel efficient, even driving alone a car. The reason why it costs more to go by car is due to many reasons, especially the higher cost of fuel at petrol stations.

Yes, some light planes have fuel economy similar to efficient cars (which is very impressive considering how fast they are relative to cars). If you consider the advantages of direct, straight line routing, it’s not hard for planes to do better on fuel economy.

We’re not talking about jets here, though some of those do very well in mpg on a per passenger basis.

bike pollution is slightly more than nil just because of the CO2 we breathe out while riding

Technically, the CO2 animals exhale is carbon neutral because it’s from plants you eat (or your food eats). Unless you’re eating petroleum derived products of course.

I say technically because while the plants themselves are carbon neutral, modern food production and distribution, especially meat production, still has a large carbon footprint. So your breath is only truly carbon neutral if you foraged for food in the forest on foot.

So your breath is only truly carbon neutral if you foraged for food in the forest on foot.

So once again: return to monkee

Unless you’re eating petroleum derived products of course.

I didn’t come here to be judged

Don’t forget that many small propeller driven aircraft run on leaded gas, and it’s a formulation of leaded gas that has 10x the lead that motor fuel used to.
But, didn’t you hear the Midgey guy who invented TEL like 100 years ago? You can safely breathe it and even wash your hands with it! (said right after he got lead poisoning)
Then he went on to make Freon.
“Most dangerous man in history”… and knowing humanity’s track record, that’s something.