Could you imagine the (rather justified?) NIMBYism for all the airports required for commuter flight? If rail can’t be done, flight definitely won’t fly.

▲

_carbyau_ an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Curious, would electric flight be significantly quieter such that airport noise is significantly less of an issue?

Or is the noise from turbulence through the air or something? I honestly would think they'd be minimising turbulence anyway for energy efficiency.

	▲	marcosdumay 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Most of it is due to turbulence. But that doesn't mean that a different engine can't make the plane have a completely different noise profile.

▲

LastTrain 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Rejecting stupid ideas that are a net bad for the community isn’t NIMBYism

	▲	Waterluvian 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yeah… Fair point! I’ve always perceived NIMBY as “we want the benefits but we want someone else to deal with the geographic price.” I bet we could find people who legitimately want commuter airports but just not near their house… wait… how would that even work?!
	▲	Spooky23 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Stupid in those that lack imagination. I happened to be in Plattsburgh the day of this flight, on my way to a fishing trip on the lake. They used that facility for the long former SAC base runway, but I think it’s also appropriate given the nature of the NY North country that an ultra low operating cost aircraft would see flight there. The death of most industry really hurt these regions, which are largely cut off from the prosperity of the normal economy. The ability to affordably link places like Plattsburgh or Watertown NY to the broader world. That region in particular prospered with rail links driven by iron and timber. 90 minute flights to places like NYC metro or Boston Metro would be transformative, and may even create new airline operating models.