User talk:Neo16287

JBLU flight times

Thanks for your comment on the JetBlue talk page about bad flight times -- Now that we have a cite one way hope that person will stop. BTW: how is it working at JetBlue? —Cliffb 03:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Compliment regarding User:Golich17

I would like to express my thanks for your kind compliment. I definately enjoy aviation and I believe taking useful information from "Today in the Sky" and integrating it into the article makes great pages on Wikipedia as all information is reliable and relevant.--Golich17 00:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accpeted

thanks for making a apology.User talk:Yousaf465

ATC Remarks on Today in the Sky

Neo, I'm not honestly sure what the runway incursion rate/ATC error rate per flight (or other valid comparison measure) is for Canada vs the US. What I do know is right now the FAA isn't oriented to serve their airline and private aircraft operator customers well since they're not really set up to think of them as customers.

It makes a whole lot of sense from my perspective that a non-profit corporation that collects user fees and is regulated by the FAA is a balance of being customer focused, while still being regulated on a safety front. Additionally, by not having the FAA regulate itself there is the addition of positive pressure to ensure that safety is followed. What would've happened if over the last ten years the FAA audited the private ATC operator's controller duty logs and noticed that in Lexington there was only one controller on when two were called for. The FAA would have brought this up so it could be corrected, but if it continued for any length of time there would have been a public fine, and pressure from customers (airlines) to fix it. Would this have averted the Comair flight 5191 disaster? I'm tangentially connected to that disaster, as a fellow alumni from my small high school was aboard that flight.

I'm not sure how to effect this change, but honestly I think the pilots union, airlines trade group, perhaps the controllers union, and other safety advocates need to push the case for change and an increase in safety and operational efficiency. (e.g. What if as people asked a flight could keep its takeoff slot after returning to the gate in bad weather, the airlines have asked for that, but the FAA hasn't delivered. I can't really see a safety impact so the FAA as regulator shouldn't really balk that much.)

I know I've dropped a pretty big analysis on your talk page, but I hope you're interested in it. Drop me a message, or I'll also be watching this page. Thanks... —Cliffb 05:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I like chatting about this subject.. But what really amazes me is that there seems to be a significant deficit when it comes to electronic data interchange. Why aren't airplanes and ATC communicating with data messages for the routine transmissions? I kinda remember that during some parts of the ATC process the planes ordering are being handled with cardboard slats. Also thinking about the runway incursion problems, I'm kinda surprised that there isn't more data interchanging in this area. It seems to me that we're using ATC controllers as computers, when really we should be using computers monitored by ATC controllers. A computer could fairly easily see that "there is already a plane that has a 'slot' on this runway for the next minute, no more clearances allowed, instead of placing this on people. Technologically a whole lot of things could be safely done to improve safety while reducing stress. But I don't think the FAA really has the ability to implement these. —Cliffb 05:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protecting a page

Hi Neo16287- I was wondering how we go about getting a page semi-protected (or even permanently protected) like the JetBlue page once was. The Carl Sandburg High School page keeps getting vandalized and I want it to stop. Any help would be great! Sox23 02:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help! Sox23 03:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cayman Air Question

Hey Neo16287- the only facts I know about Cayman's pullout of BOS is from this airliners.net forum. I also looked on Cayman Air's website and noticed they did not have BOS or FLL as part of their schedule: Cayman Air schedule. In fact, their only US destinations are: New York, Chicago, Tampa, Orlando, Houston, and Miami. The airliners.net forum I told you about says that possibly the introduction of New York (JFK) service is replacing the BOS service. That would be my guess (and the MIA service is replacing FLL service). Other than that, I know nothing else as there hasn't been a press release (as far as I know). Hope this helps...Sox23 17:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. Sox23 20:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New England

In response to your comments about New England: Thank you Neo. You are very wise! Indeed if New York was part and parcel of New England I would have had to adjust the population and area as well. That would involve too much calculation. So lets leave it out then. I would urge you though to consider the historical context and think if there are any good reasons why New York should be left out of this exclusive club. The line seems rather arbitrary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtkrug (talk • contribs)

Hello Neo. I am still unclear about your comments: You wrote: "New England was colonized by the Dutch, and was referred to as New Amsterdam. Not the Brits, and thus not New England. Now that I have set that straight for you..." If New England was colonized by the Dutch, why is it called England at all? It is not straight to me at all. And regarding Wiki's no personal attacks policy, "do us all a favor and sign your posts" may not be too far off the mark either. Regards, Mtkrug 20:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)mtkrug[reply]

Images

Hey, no worries! You might like to look at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria - I haven't investigated, but you might have an argument under a "fair-use" claim. REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ 21:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Air Lines

Yes, I am an employee of Delta. I am also a graduate of Embry-Riddle University. Aviation is my interest so I often edit related articles. Maranomerau 20:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Report of vandalism

Thanks for reporting the vandalism to the Jet Blue page. To be sure that a vandal is called to the immediate attention to administrators who are online, consider making your report to the administrator's notice board for vandalism. The page has instructions on how and when to report, as well as guidance for non-admins on warning vandals. Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you're what's wrong with wikipedia!

STOP REPORTING "VANDALISM" WHEN THERE ISN'T ANY.

Specifically referring to your false accusation of vandalism on the Logan Int'l Airport page when the edit you undid was quite accurate.

Stop ruining wikipedia! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.33.49.251 (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Look closer to see that the edit you undid was accurate... and thus that you were WRONG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.49.251 (talk • contribs)

Once again, look closer to see that the edit you did was not "a space" but rather the addition of a missing closed braket. I cannot refix the edit because a lurker like yourself will simply undo it again. And as for your threats to report me, I'd be more than happy to report you for false claims of vandalism, which is far worse than your broad, immature definition of harassment in terms of its impact on the Wikipedia project.

Our friend anon 71.235.81.32

Give up hope.--Loodog 13:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is and isn't vandalism

The consensus on WP:AIV so far is that the recent edits by 67.183.153.10 aren't vandalism (though there may be other issues, like a conflict of interest, that need to be addressed). Please read WP:VAND to see what we do consider vandalism. Accusing someone of vandalising when they're not can often by counter-productive.--Chaser - T 05:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]