Re: SFGate: L.A. Settles Suit, Scraps Airport Plans

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Precisely.  I saw that the original article said, right at the end,  
the equivalent of "pending FAA approval". And the FAA is likely to  
just smack down anything that caps or reduces capacity at LAX. They  
would be nuts not to.

-- 
Michael C. Berch
mcb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Dec 2, 2005, at 6:45 PM, Alireza Alivandivafa wrote:
> Actually, the agreement the city made is null anyway.  It is  
> illegal to place
> an artificial cap on capacity at LAX

> In a message dated 12/2/2005 4:45:20 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
> damiross3@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>> "The city also agreed to an annual passenger limit of 75 million,  
>> up froma
>> cap of 62 million this year. If it hits the new cap by 2010, the  
>> airport
>> would begin to reduce its number of gates."
>>
>> Typical liberal politician bullcrap.  If something is uccessful,  
>> punish it.
>>
>> Hey, politicos: The purpose of an airport is to attract  
>> airplanes.  Don't
>> worry about the idiots who live near the airport and complain  
>> about the noise
>> because they had to know the airport was there when they bought  
>> their house.  The
>> people who do this are too stupid to be allowed outside without an  
>> escort.

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]