If the plane is controlled completely by autopilot and/or remotely, it's basically on tracks, so I can't see any logical argument why we couldn't then take the same approach to domestic flights as to domestic trains. Perhaps there's only so much that can be done about #1, but regarding #2, I wonder if we could rethink airport security once we have completely autonomous planes. why don't we have those things on trains? I can think of a couple reasons: 1) trains tend to be mostly used for domestic travel (in North America), so you don't have border checks slowing things down, and 2) trains can only go where the tracks go, so although you could certainly carry out an attack on a train, it would be much more difficult to use a train as a weapon against something else, or to try to stage a getaway of some kind by taking a train off course. Some thoughts I just had reading these comments: We all accept that boarding a train is a much more pleasant experience than boarding a plane, largely because you don't have this need for massive security waits, arriving three hours early, etc. when all most people care about is spending as little time there as possible. All the proposals to replace KC Airport brag about all the shopping and restaurants. Personally I would love to see airport design focus on passengers and less on retail space. And the waiting spaces are cramped and unfriendly.Īfter 9/11 it's still extremely fast to get in and out of, but the long waiting before flights is unpleasant. It is awful to have layovers in or have to change terminals in for a flight: you have to leave security for everything for one. It feel optimized for people to get on and off planes quickly, and get out of the airport fast. The layour is 3 separate terminals which are each a semicircle ring. Very minimal space is given to restaurants, shops, or even bathrooms inside gates. Before 9/11, you could park, go through security, and walk onto a plane in 15 minutes. That's how the Kansas City Airport (MCI) was designed. But I'd love to know if that's really the case. There's nothing that appears in the very brief trailer that suggests that it isn't highly constrained in the same way SimCity is.
Similarly in this game, can you really design your own airport that works anyway you want from scratch? Or are you just placing all the pieces in your typical international airport in different places on the board, while the NPCs walk in some pre-determined route from parking, to checkin, to security etc. There's no way to construct something that looks & functions remotely like the city of Venice in SimCity. in in SimCity 2000 it initially looks like you can do anything, but really you can't design something that doesn't look & function either like an American suburb or car-centric Los Angeles. I'm asking as a simulation game, how customizable is this? E.g. That misses the point of what I'm asking, which I'll rephrase. It would be very interesting to experiment with changes like that and see how it would look.Įdit: There's now an entire discussion downthread about how airports did and didn't look like before 9/11. That would mean you don't need space for restaurants, or lots of space for people to pool as they're waiting past security. no security screenings so people can pretty much just walk on the plane like it's a train station? Is it possible to go outside the bounds of what a typical international airport looks like today? E.g.
0 kommentar(er)
