It was flying on visual landmarks, from the reports I've seen. Private planes aren't required to be visible on radar, are they?
Ah, yes, of course. The gypsies, they gave you your soul. The gypsies are filthy people. Ptui! We shall speak of them no more.
Ilona Costa Bianchi ,'The Girl in Question'
Natter 47: My Brilliance Is Wasted On You People
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Connie Neil - Oct 11, 2006 1:59:41 pm PDT #3176 of 10001
brillig
Jesse - Oct 11, 2006 2:06:22 pm PDT #3177 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I write it to [my address] Associates, LLP. I think even when Related was my landlord the checks went to [my address] Associates, LLP.
Oh yeah. We just switched from writing the rent to the management company (so I knew their name) to [my address] Associates. But I now know the landlord is actually Ravi.
CNN has a breaking news banner: "New York Yankees manager Joe Torre says the plane that crashed into a building in Manhattan is registered to team pitcher Cory Lidle."
Oh, man. I was wondering, as I was just fast forwarding through the breaking news coverage they had on instead of Ellen Degeneres, why suddenly they were having sports on.
juliana - Oct 11, 2006 2:15:26 pm PDT #3178 of 10001
I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I miss them all tonight…
It was flying on visual landmarks, from the reports I've seen. Private planes aren't required to be visible on radar, are they?
Not if they're on VFR [link] (visual flight rules), which he was, but I'll admit to surprise that Manhattan isn't under air traffic control at all times (which disallows VFR flights).
Tom Scola - Oct 11, 2006 2:20:46 pm PDT #3179 of 10001
Remember that the frontier of the Rebellion is everywhere. And even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward.
Not if they're on VFR [link] (visual flight rules), which he was, but I'll admit to surprise that Manhattan isn't under air traffic control at all times (which disallows VFR flights).
Since the 1980’s, planes and helicopters have been allowed to fly over the East River, as well as the Hudson River, below 1,100 feet, without special permission. They fly under “visual flight rules,” meaning they avoid collisions by visually keeping track of other aircraft, and maneuvering to avoid conflicts.
DXMachina - Oct 11, 2006 2:22:16 pm PDT #3180 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
It was flying on visual landmarks, from the reports I've seen. Private planes aren't required to be visible on radar, are they?
They'd still show up. Aircraft flying by visual flight rules (VFR) have a choice. They can request that air traffic control keep track of them, in which case ATC would assign a unique transponder frequency to them for the duration of the plane's time in the controlled area, or else the pilot would set the transponder to a standard transponder frequency. Either way the plane would show up on ATC radar.
juliana - Oct 11, 2006 2:23:23 pm PDT #3181 of 10001
I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I miss them all tonight…
Since the 1980’s, planes and helicopters have been allowed to fly over the East River, as well as the Hudson River, below 1,100 feet, without special permission. They fly under “visual flight rules,” meaning they avoid collisions by visually keeping track of other aircraft, and maneuvering to avoid conflicts.
Yeah, I saw that - I just thought the rules would have tightened after 9/11.
DXMachina - Oct 11, 2006 2:29:56 pm PDT #3182 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I just thought the rules would have tightened after 9/11.
If for nothing else, they'd probably need the VFR corridors for helicopters.
§ ita § - Oct 11, 2006 2:40:25 pm PDT #3183 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
billytea - Oct 11, 2006 2:41:19 pm PDT #3184 of 10001
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.
Wikipedia is bananas.
Can't be. I can still get Wikipedia in Melbourne.
tommyrot - Oct 11, 2006 2:51:44 pm PDT #3185 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
No beaming from Teotihuacan.
That sucks. But on the bright side, the Swiss want to send a tiny house to the moon.
Not content with having them dotted all over the countryside, Sweden is now considering putting a little red cottage on the moon. The idea, first conjured up by the artist Mikael Genberg seven years ago, may become reality with the help of the Swedish Space Corporation (SSC), according to N24.
The state agency SSC has carried out a technical study showing that it is indeed possible to put a little red cottage on the moon.
"If we manage to do this Sweden will be the third country to occupy the moon", said SSC's Fredrik von Schéele.
A competition has been arranged for students to construct a little red house that is suitably sized for placement by a moon landing device. The construction may not exceed eight square metres and can weigh a maximum of four kilos.