There are three categories of runway incursion types: operator/ATC error, pilot error, pedestrian/vehicle. Even if someone 'knows' that they need to "hold short runway 12", they can still have a brain fart and go through the hold short line.
Unless you want to argue that all vehicles taxiing have to operate (SAE Level 4) autonomously?
The issue is that the final approach and landing (and taxiing?) environments are probably too dynamic for that: in this particular situation one of the vehicles was responding to an emergency (fire).
In addition to huge planes, there is baggage transportation, passenger buses (to mid-field terminals), fuel pumpers, emergency vehicles, snow plows, deicers, and general maintenance vehicles (clear debris off runways).
Given there are ~45,000 flights per days in the US (and so aircraft and vehicles would move hither and fro around an airport for each flight), 1700 feels like a small number.
Exactly - it's a small number and should be investigated, because if we reduce the number of all incursions, we reduce the number of collisions (and fatalities).
They are classified as operation/ATC error, pilot error, and vehicle/pedestrian error.
Human can misspeak or mishear instructions, but if they were communicated and understood correctly (a read back was correct), but the pilot had a 'brain fart' and went forward instead of stopping, how do we eliminate brain farts?
NOTE-
Previous reviews of air traffic events, involving LUAW instructions, revealed that a significant number of pilots read back LUAW instructions correctly and departed without a takeoff clearance. LUAW instructions are not to be confused with a departure clearance; the outcome could be catastrophic, especially during intersecting runway operations.
The older term was "hold short runway X" and that was too close to "hold runway X" - the first meant do NOT enter the runway, the second meant enter and line up but do NOT takeoff.
But in the highly dynamic environment of final approach, landing, and taxiing, I doubt it would be practical. Unless we want to try autonomous 'driving' on taxiways and runways?
Young people with difficult housing affordability and general high cost of living is dragging down the score. Boomers that own their homes are more satisfied:
Except the biggest drop was among teenage girls. Housing affordability and cost of living isn't usually yet a concern to most teenagers, and to the extent that it is a concern, it is equally a concern to teenage boys who haven't felt the same decline in happiness.
I suspect you're right, in general, but teenage girls may also be more susceptible to "future worry" than the boys are.
Tell the girls that housing will be unobtainable and they start worrying; tell the boys and they laugh. Not saying it's the case (and it's likely that the cause is more social than financial) but it could be.
Right — teenage girls have long been considered to be leading indicator in cultural shifts. So it isn't unexpected that when teenage girls become unhappy that everyone else will slowly start to follow them. It is quite likely that it is going to look a lot worse the next time this evaluation takes place.
But the question is what is it that the teenage girls are seeing that the rest of us are slowly catching up in realizing? The most popular answer is the current social media landscape is creating unhappiness in them (and ultimately the rest of us), but that's the answer given for all woes these days...
Again, it's probably not housing or cost of living. While it is fair to say that teenage girls are not completely removed for that, they're generally not the ones who have to actually face it head on, and these have been considered pressing issues in Canada since before those teenage girls were born! If that made people unhappy, they'd have been unhappy for a long time already.
> Canada here. Feels like we're barely hanging on to rung 5 or 6 and about to fall to the bottom.
The Missing Middle podcast went into this in a recent episode, and it's age-dependent: older folks are happier (i.e., they have purchased homes), while younger folks are less happy (cost of living). We Canadians basically have age-dependent wealth-class nowadays.
The fact boomers have it so good yet our ranking is dropping like a rock tells you just how bad it is for the working class, especially those who don't have government jobs...
This is one of those things that just is not true, no matter what sort of evidence is presented, because actual humans can go walk outside their door and see it isn't.
Denmark has ranked as one of the happiest countries for years running, but, Dane here, we hoover up antidepressants like it was our breakfast. There are also deep cultural factors at play that make Danes more likely to mask that everything is fine when it isn't. We have an extremely high incidence of cheating on our partners, which, surprise, comes from a talent for deception, both toward self and others, and we are extremely emotionally avoidant, which results in our nationally very high rate of alcohol consumption and alcoholism.
These happiness indexes are a complete sham and don't observe the full spectrum that goes into how cultures present themselves versus lived reality.
Currently these interfaces are only on switches, but there are already NICs at 800G (P1800GO, Thor Ultra, ConnectX-8/9), so if you LACP/LAGG two together your bond is at 1600G.
TCAS on planes is disabled below 1000±100' (~300m) AGL (above ground level).
ADS-B on vehicles is already a thing (and FAA certified):
* https://uavionix.com/airports-and-atm/vtu-20/
There are three categories of runway incursion types: operator/ATC error, pilot error, pedestrian/vehicle. Even if someone 'knows' that they need to "hold short runway 12", they can still have a brain fart and go through the hold short line.
Unless you want to argue that all vehicles taxiing have to operate (SAE Level 4) autonomously?
reply