Jump to content

Ghost of LL

Full Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

1,623 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It doesn't exactly block the approach. But both runways at DAL point directly at downtown. In contrast, whether taking off to the north or to the south, downtown Austin is at a 90* angle to the approach on short final. Yeah, planes departing to the west take a right turn when taking off to the south to go out over downtown. But they're at higher altitude when they go over downtown Austin than what every single departure on 31R is at when going over downtown Dallas. So I really don't understand the FAA restriction (insofar as its rumored existence is even real). It must be the result of some recent regulatory changes.
  2. If he told Pompeo to "take her out," he'd probably be demanding that she be fired. But how are Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman going to carry out firing the American ambassador? And if "take her out" doesn't mean firing her, then whatever could it mean?
  3. I've been really unclear on what the story is with that. Downtown Dallas has a building that is 900' and that is (1) directly in the approach pattern for DAL and (2) closer to DAL than downtown Austin is to AUS. I don't know if the FAA revised its requirements recently or what.
  4. Reminds me of the bit from the latest biography I read on Winston Churchill. When he was First Lord of the Admiralty, the Navy built four new Dreadnoughts. Churchill proposed naming one the "Oliver Cromwell." One of the few prerogatives the monarch still has in the UK is the right to name His/Her Majesty's Ships. And George didn't cotton to the idea of naming one of his ships after a regicide. The ship was instead named the Iron Duke. And so the following year, when the Navy proposed building four new Superdreadnoughts, Churchill again proposed naming one the Oliver Cromwell. The King again refused. Some things aren't going to get any less controversial with time.
  5. I can't help but notice the biggest outliers on that map--Nevada and South Carolina.
  6. Actually, probably quite a lot of benefit.
  7. That's not "downtown;" that's the Capitol area.
  8. Yeah, but if it's three blocks further north, then it's at least 15 feet uphill, which should offset any difference in perspective.
  9. So two questions: (1) what prompted you to think that was a good idea, and (2) when did you get out of federal prison?
  10. Maine and North Carolina area step below Arizona and Colorado for me. Arizona and Colorado are on a "that would really surprise me if the Democrats lost" level for me. Maine and North Carolina are on a "I think it's somewhat more-likely-than-not that the Democrats win" level. Within that level, Maine has a higher likelihood of flipping than North Carolina. And then there the Iowa and Kansas-with-Korbach level, which is a "it's probably less-likely-than-not that the Democrats win, but it definitely wouldn't surprise me if it were to happen."
  11. On the contrary, I know that plenty of people use it. I also know that plenty more people have need of it, but it doesn't serve them well. I don't want to get rid of CapMetro--I want it to work. There are a lot of people in this area for whom that is their only transit option. And it does a poor job of serving those people. The subway is a case in point. A subway was a great idea in Victorian London or Tammany New York. Those places were already densely populated. And when the subway went in, that became a primary mode of transit around which development grew. Austin is different. It is a city that has grown around surface automotive transport. So it makes no sense to graft an ancient mode of transit onto a city that has grown based on an entirely different transportation paradigm. That's why something that incorporates and utilizes the way people currently experience transportation makes sense. It's not just that BRT is more economical. It's that it more effectively provides service to an automotive-developed city. What we're looking at is a DART starter kit. DART sucks. Don't reinvent that stupid wheel.
  12. So a less than 5% increase YoY? That doesn't strike me as very impressive for an area growing as fast as Austin. Specifically, what improvements has CapMetro brought about to encourage new ridership? And no--I'm not a transit user. Because guess what--CapMetro's shitty system doesn't run buses anywhere close to my house.
  13. That may be true. I'm not even complaining about the corruption, if the process (corruption included) ends up with a quality product. But what in CapMetro's history would given anyone any basis to believe that, after spending $10B, we would end up with anything that accomplishes the goal of providing usable mass transit?
  14. Is he? Because I've seen no evidence of any changes. It's the simple blocking-and-tackling of running a mass transit system that CapMetro falls down on. Look at 8th Street between Brazos and Congress. It's down to one lane. It has been for months (and will be for quite a long time) while the City does utility work. A competent agency would reroute buses up to 10th. Or at least eliminate the stop at 8th and Congress. But not CapMetro--they keep the bus stop there, which makes that one-lane street completely impassable (even to their own buses that get caught in the backlog behind the stopped bus). CapMetro could rationalize its bus routes tomorrow. That's what Houston has done, and Houston has seen a huge increase in ridership. But CapMetro wants shiny trains that cost billions, rather than thinking about effective solutions utilizing the resources it has in hand. One wonders why that might be.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
  • Create New...