The end of budget flights?

VEGAS · Post by **VEGAS** » 07 Aug 2006, 17:50

Just think chaps, the school runs will never be the same again.

Thats a relief as I'm sick of steering around bloody Jeep's & 4x4's wrecklessly parked on the pavement outside a school near where we live with only one kid per Jeep getting aboard and a female dwarf driver inside who can hardly see over the dashboard.

A real pain for the locals and the planet. :roll: :tuttut:

TobyV · Post by **TobyV** » 07 Aug 2006, 18:25

Garry, if you're brother is filling up his MPV with people, which was the original intention then thats great. Next door (to me) also have an MPV and it often goes out with one or maybe two of them in it.

Eddie, spot on, and its the same all over the UK.

What would be useful would be a clearly presented and publicly available study of what modes of transport and frequently used pieces of equipment are contributing annually to the environment.

Garry, sorry I still have to disagree over the bizjets. They are already very expensive to run which in turn keeps their numbers down (although forthcoming VLJs might end up being a nuisance unless they replace slower GA a/c already in existance rather than just add to existing numbers). If we are going to say lets ban aircraft that use a lot of fuel per person carried, regarless of how often they are used or how many there are, then how could we continue to justify flying historic aircraft like Hawker Hunters etc?

For me, its only the total figures that matter, total fuel consumption and total emmissions output.

ianhind · Post by **ianhind** » 07 Aug 2006, 21:12

I totally agree with Garry.

It doesn't matter how much a bizjet costs to run - it is the inefficiency that is the point. How much CO2 does a GV produce flying half a dozen people to the US? If they caught the 777 instead, that would be a reduction.

But instead, let's stop the 777 and just have 6 people in the GV.

And why does His Tonyship have to fly to the USA to see his master for 30 minutes of poodle petting? What's wrong with the phone?

Only when the "Environmental Audit Committee" show the way will any of us consider following.

So Tim Yeo, where are you going on holiday this year?

andy · Post by **andy** » 07 Aug 2006, 21:22

ianhind wrote:And why does His Tonyship have to fly to the USA to see his master for 30 minutes of poodle petting? What's wrong with the phone?

Or indeed a webcam.............then everyone on the internet can laugh at them..... :dance:

fournier · Post by **fournier** » 09 Aug 2006, 16:35

TobyV wrote:Same goes for MPVs, rarely when you see them are they ever full

That is a problem and as a result it's going to punish those of us with large families (4+ kids) who have no choice but to drive a larger car. Maybe we could produce our child benefit books and get special dispensation. As if!

AndyG · Post by **AndyG** » 09 Aug 2006, 16:41

Picking up on Toby's comments, it all depends what you class as a bizjet as well. Airbus are selling a fair few A319CJs, Boeing are shifting the odd BBJ and Roman Abramovich has a 757 for .... goodness sakes! And frankly there can't be a whole world of difference, emissions wise, between an ERJ-135 and an EMB-170, can there?

AndyG

blanston12 · Post by **blanston12** » 09 Aug 2006, 16:43

It seams kind of silly to me. If I want to buy a vehicle that burns twice as much gas, then I pay twice as much in tax. That seams simple and the most fair way to do it. As far as emissions are concerned, you can put smog controls on a vehicle and control everything except CO2 which is directly related to the amount of gas burned, until we get hydrogen cars.

TobyV · Post by **TobyV** » 09 Aug 2006, 16:45

How big is the engine in a typical MPV? I was under the impression that many were rather wheezy with smaller engines than one would epxect for a vehicle of that size (e.g. as small as 1.5/1.6l and at most 2-2.5l?). Most 4X4s have silly great engines of 3-6 litres. Of course in the same vein, farmers could end up worse off out of that and I think they should (and so perhaps people who genuinely do fill up MPVs) have a dispensation.

blanston12 · Post by **blanston12** » 09 Aug 2006, 17:01

It really should not matter how big the engine is, there are efficient engines that are big and inefficient engines that are small. The only thing that should matter is how much fuel does it burn.

TobyV · Post by **TobyV** » 09 Aug 2006, 17:25

Well in general, larger engines are going to burn more. Obviously issues such as weight of the vehicle, aerodynamics of the vehicle and specific characteristics of the engines design will affect things, but you have to use something as an arbiter. Engine size is an easy and non-disputable value to choose. If it were based on the quoted MPG on the vehicle there would be no end of debate on how the average fuel consumption was calculated and people would be arguing this or that for years about their car and we'd forget why we were even doing it in the first place.