12 comments

[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 46.5 ms ] thread
Presumably airports would prioritize whatever flights pay the highest fees. Not that I’m an expert or anything, but I’d assume that small regional flights are going to be the first to get cut.
Ironically this might be one of the most green actions the US has ever made
In 2001, they grounded almost all air traffic for about three days. It would take take a while for this move to catch up to that.
I wonder if foreign airlines are going to demand compensation, like US airlines have done in the past when a country made one sided changes.
Not likely since international flights are exempt?
Is there any historical basis for how the traffic to cut is selected? Future flights? Existing flights? Short domestic flights vs international flights?

It’s also unclear what the actual definition of ‘cut’ is

They could just...pay the air traffic controllers.
This is very French!
It was air traffic issues that ended the [now] 2nd longest shutdown during Trump's first term, right?
I'm in favor of cutting air traffic at night.
I suppose some people must enjoy being woken up by an explosion of jet engines in the middle of the night. Victims are blamed for having ears and living within 50 miles of an airfield. Some airports do seem have "curfews", say from 1 to 5 a.m., so you can get 4 hours of sleep. How generous.

While we're cutting budgets, I'd like to cut the budget for constant and unnecessarily loud sirens for emergency vehicles as well. "Oh great, there's another emergency.... somewhere..."

It is a shame that the EPA doesn't actually enforce any noise pollution regulations.

(comment deleted)