Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Aviation news and discussion for anything aviation related.
Post Reply
User avatar
Turbofan
Senior Veteran
Senior Veteran
Posts: 1736
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:22 pm
Favorite Aircraft: Boeing 747, all variants
Location: Central OK
Has thanked: 861 times
Been thanked: 588 times
Contact:

Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by Turbofan » Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:03 am

Here's a perfect example of when wanting to make money interferes with the ability to think like a normal human.

Source: BBC
Check out my YSFS videos on my Youtube channel!
-----------------------
ATRP: When used in my posts refers to "Air Traffic Replay Project"
-----------------------
Avatar: Pratt and Whitney JT8D-219
-----------------------
My general rant: I will call them blended winglets, not Sharklets; There is no CEO, it's just simply put, an Airbus 319/320/321, or the 320NEO, 321NEO etc. I didn't land IN DAL, I landed AT DAL. On the other hand, I did land in Dallas.
-----------------------
New website update as of July 3, 2018: New map modification policy under "Map Information" and updates to the GRID and WIP!
Turbofan's Terminal

User avatar
Neocon
First Class Membership
First Class Membership
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:01 am
Favorite Aircraft: Baron 58
Location: Tennessee
OS: Win Vista
Has thanked: 1513 times
Been thanked: 1632 times
Contact:

Re: Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by Neocon » Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:51 am

I can see the next step now. The plane is crashing and the passengers are seeing a recording of a smooth flight because that's cheaper than providing a live image.

User avatar
Turbofan
Senior Veteran
Senior Veteran
Posts: 1736
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:22 pm
Favorite Aircraft: Boeing 747, all variants
Location: Central OK
Has thanked: 861 times
Been thanked: 588 times
Contact:

Re: Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by Turbofan » Thu Jun 07, 2018 4:24 am

Neocon wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:51 am
I can see the next step now. The plane is crashing and the passengers are seeing a recording of a smooth flight because that's cheaper than providing a live image.
That or the whole projection system gets knocked out of service at the same time the plane has an accident/incident, causing chaos and confusion in the cabin.
Check out my YSFS videos on my Youtube channel!
-----------------------
ATRP: When used in my posts refers to "Air Traffic Replay Project"
-----------------------
Avatar: Pratt and Whitney JT8D-219
-----------------------
My general rant: I will call them blended winglets, not Sharklets; There is no CEO, it's just simply put, an Airbus 319/320/321, or the 320NEO, 321NEO etc. I didn't land IN DAL, I landed AT DAL. On the other hand, I did land in Dallas.
-----------------------
New website update as of July 3, 2018: New map modification policy under "Map Information" and updates to the GRID and WIP!
Turbofan's Terminal

User avatar
Bombcat
CVW-171
CVW-171
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:08 am
Favorite Aircraft: F-14D Tomcat
Location: Virginia
OS: Windows 7
Has thanked: 138 times
Been thanked: 138 times
Contact:

Re: Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by Bombcat » Sat Jun 09, 2018 7:09 pm

While passenger comfort issues are significant, I could certainly see the point of removing structural weaknesses from the fuselage. As for the ability to see outside in an emergency, I see no reason why traditional windows couldn't remain in the doors, which are already necessary cuts in the fuselage anyway.

I would be strongly against removing windows for the flight crew, of course.
[CAG171]Bombcat, Commander, Air Wing 171
Team Awesome # 23
Former YSFHQ administrator.

User avatar
Turbofan
Senior Veteran
Senior Veteran
Posts: 1736
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:22 pm
Favorite Aircraft: Boeing 747, all variants
Location: Central OK
Has thanked: 861 times
Been thanked: 588 times
Contact:

Re: Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by Turbofan » Sun Jun 10, 2018 1:03 am

I understand where this structural weakness argument is coming from but don't agree with just eliminating them altogether. Planes have been flying for decades now with windows, and it's exceedingly rare for an airplane to crash because a window was the weak link. Then again, that's just my 2 cents' worth.

However, it would be a very sad day if planes do start flying without windows and introduce this "projected image" crap. The entire reason I love flying, what got me hooked on aviation, is the ability to see not just other aircraft, the delights at various airports, but also the natural wonders of the planet in the form of geographical features, storms lighting up as you pass by them, other aircraft with their contrails whizzing by... there are many things that I see with my own eyes, that I can see at will as I please with a viewport that's as big as the window I am looking out of. There is no way a projected image from a camera will replace that for me. It will simply kill the joy of flying.
Check out my YSFS videos on my Youtube channel!
-----------------------
ATRP: When used in my posts refers to "Air Traffic Replay Project"
-----------------------
Avatar: Pratt and Whitney JT8D-219
-----------------------
My general rant: I will call them blended winglets, not Sharklets; There is no CEO, it's just simply put, an Airbus 319/320/321, or the 320NEO, 321NEO etc. I didn't land IN DAL, I landed AT DAL. On the other hand, I did land in Dallas.
-----------------------
New website update as of July 3, 2018: New map modification policy under "Map Information" and updates to the GRID and WIP!
Turbofan's Terminal

User avatar
waspe414
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:35 pm
Favorite Aircraft: CH-136 Kiowa
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 157 times

Re: Tim Clark wants windowless planes

Post by waspe414 » Sun Jun 10, 2018 1:12 am

I imagine it would be a cost-saving measure, if anything, depending on what their projection system would be. Fewer parts, less construction cost, less maintenance. If the system has a failure, it doesn't ground the aircraft. But yeah, like TFan said, it would totally kill my love of flying. Could be in a tunnel the whole way for all it's worth.

I would be more concerned about the ability to see into the aircraft in emergencies. And the structural argument isn't really there for me unless the fuselage has substantially more pressure differential to deal with. Windows have been getting bigger in modern jumbos, so it's clearly a priority for airlines.
Actual UltraViolet
Image Image
Image
I stole your turnip. Now you must come and defend your honour. ~ Hank Green

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest