"It has been reported that JetBlue has said ORH needs improved navigational aides.
- Is this true?
- What are they referring to?
- How much will this cost?
- Are there any plans to have this done?"
Same Time Next Year
-
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the problems that come from
having 11 bosses who are not on the same page about anything, as well as
suggestion...
5 months ago
4 comments:
I located a copy of the IMG report. It states that the current instrument landing system (CAT I) presents no material obstacle to attracting commercial service. It further states that a technical assessment of the various ILS options (CAT II CAT III) are discussed in the Master Plan.
I have been unable to locate a copy of said Master Plan.
Interesting language...maybe even typical of consultants.
" no material obstacle to attracting commercial service"
Key words being "material obstacle" and "attracting"
I can attract Harry T. to St Spirydons Annual Greek Festival for a one day outing, but I cant make him eat or stick around.
Bll: if you get the run around, I think you need to contact the telegram gazette and have them drop by the massport office for an answer. The boston heral too. They pretty much mocked the fact that the airport is still open, maybe they should drop in at the massport office for answers too. These people are getting paid with tax payer money so we need to put their feet to the fire for answers and action.
I believe a CAT II would be satisfactory, I'm sure airlines can deal with a decision altitude of 100 ft. I still believe Worcester is to have service to hubs rather than non-stop (Which may come after hub service is established). United and American would be ideal to start off, airlines like JetBlue and Southwest would follow.
Post a Comment