back to article Scariest climate change prediction yet: More time to eat plane food

Increasingly powerful transatlantic jet streams thanks could by 2050 add a global 2000 hours of extra flight time, says a University of Reading study. Jet streams are fast winds that can reach 300km/h and which flow from west to east. The winds are at their strongest during winter when the boundaries between hot and cold air …

Page:

      1. Steve Todd

        Re: Surely it wil average out

        Actually what happens is that routes eastbound deliberately alter to pick up the jetstream. Westbound they avoid it as much as possible. The result is that the average time is less than the aircraft speed +/- the jetstream speed.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Surely it wil average out

        Google suggests it's only a few hundred miles wide - I wonder why they don't fly around it.

        1. AndrewDu

          Re: Surely it wil average out

          "I wonder why they don't fly around it."

          They do. They always have.

          This is another desperate bollocks-claim by the warmists.

          And the figures are cooked too - tiny differences added up over huge numbers to make a headline.

          Not worth dignifying it by taking it seriously, in fact.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Surely it wil average out

        "significantly lengthen"

        It requires a very special definition of "significantly" to be able to make this statement based on the numbers they model their way to in this paper.

        1. Chris Miller

          Re: Surely it wil average out

          It's just the way 'averages' (arithmetic means) work. Consider a 60 mph journey by bike. If you can pedal at 30 mph in a flat calm, you can get there and back (120/30) in 4 hours. Now suppose there's a 10 mph head wind (to be exact, a head wind that slows you down by 10 mph) in one direction (tail wind in the other, of course). So getting there now takes 3 hours (60/20) and getting back takes 1.5 hours (60/40), and your whole journey takes 30 minutes longer.

          However, in the real aviation world, as an earlier post suggested, airlines reroute westbound to avoid the jet stream so this simplistic approach is wrong - faster jet streams further reduce travel times eastbound and don't have much effect westbound.

          Anecdotal illustration - a flight from Heathrow to New York will usually route out over Liverpool, Ireland and then you won't see any land until Long Island. But I've done the route on a very windy day and ended up going over Greenland (normally only seen on flights to the US west coast) and coming in over the St Lawrence (I could see Quebec City off the starboard side). The flight took an hour or so longer than normal.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Surely it wil average out

      No, because drag costs more energy than pushing gives.

      However, advances in aviation are likely to make more of an impact, especially if something like SABRE really can be shown to work.

      1. inmypjs Silver badge

        Re: Surely it wil average out

        "No, because drag costs more energy than pushing gives."

        If wind ever pushed a plane it would fall out of the sky. There is only drag and at the same air speed the drag is unchanged.

        It is true that it doesn't average out if you have to fly through the same wind in both directions. If for example your plane can fly at 300mph air speed in a 300mph head wind it would never arrive.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Surely it wil average out

          Clearly no one here is a pilot. If there is a wind at dead right angles to your path, your trip takes longer, and a larger wind has a larger cost. The reason is that you have to point the airplane somewhat into the side-wind, in order to not be blown off course. This is called "crabbing". Your speed along the course is now smaller: this follows from vector arithmetic.

          Are winds getting stronger? Well, yes, it's been measured, and they are. A study of albatrosses found that their average weight has been decreasing in recent years, and it is assumed that this is because the higher winds are making them work harder per calorie of food gained. And no, there are no known "natural causes" for albatrosses being on a diet.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            FAIL

            Re: Surely it wil average out

            Clearly no one here is a pilot...

            Are winds getting stronger? Well, yes, it's been measured, and they are. A study of albatrosses found that their average weight has been decreasing in recent years, and it is assumed that this is because the higher winds are making them work harder per calorie of food gained. And no, there are no known "natural causes" for albatrosses being on a diet

            Thank you oh great wise expert for enlightening us all with that glorious non sequitur which so effortlessly and beautifully encapsulates your entire zombie religion.

            ASSUMED by whom and by what authority?

            "Albatrosses are getting thinner therefore AGW! DEATH!!! DEATH!!! WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE"

            Nothing, OF COURSE, to do with industrial fishing forcing them "on a diet"

            Nothing, OF COURSE, to do with that EQUALLY WELL KNOWN krill collapse forcing them "on a diet"

            ...etc... etc...

            Do you know what "ecosystem" means? "Complex"?

            Christ alive

            Thinner THEREFORE AGW! DEATH!!! DEATH!!! WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Between 33 seconds & 93 seconds!

    And UK taxpayers funded research too stupid even for an IgNobel Award contender.

    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/024008

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hummm...

    So this work is the output of a computer model that uses the the output of unvallidated computer models of a very chaotic system that can't predict what is going to happen next year let alone 10, 20 or more years in the future.

    It would appear that this paper does not even consider any possible improvements in aircraft design or advances in engine design and fuel efficiency. It therefore appears to be nothing more than something to prop up the CAGW religious scam that is being used to milk money from the population using higher taxes..

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Hummm...

      Ivan, you beat me to it!

    2. NomNomNom

      Re: Hummm...

      how do you think climate scientists have known since the 70s that the earth would warm and continue warming? Climate models. They remain our best predictors of future climate and impacts. Btw studies like this are based on premises such as the impact being on current aircraft design. That is an entirely reasonable case to test.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Hummm...

        Probably the same models that told us the earth was going to freeze over.

        James Hansen was one of the scientists who made this claim IIRC.

        1. NomNomNom

          Re: Hummm...

          You don't recall correctly and it wasn't the same models

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Hummm...

            Do I really need to cite a Nature article with JH's name on it predicting Gobal cooling? Go look it up!

            1. NomNomNom

              Re: Hummm...

              You recall incorrectly

            2. scarper

              Re: Hummm...

              "... Do I really need to cite a Nature article with JH's name on it predicting Gobal cooling? Go look it up!"

              Your claim, your cite.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh dear ...

    I just read this paper. I think it qualifies for an IgNobel, it is utter pointless bollocks.

  4. Mikel

    A pinch in your sock

    Research has proven that the climate change affects humidity and so, the flexibility and friction of the common foot sock. Extensive modelling demonstrates that further CO2 emissions will lead to an increase in the incidence of "toe fold", where a small flap or seam of the sock will fold under the toe. This causes an odd feeling in the foot, a strange gait, and in extreme cases might start a blister.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Childcatcher

      Re: A pinch in your sock

      That's exactly what I was going to say! ;)

      ..and that's not to mention that the proven change in humidity has been proven to cause an increase in cloud cover and density resulting in a 7.01375620009465936472305632% fall in mean global solar radiation reaching the ground by 2019. Extensive modelling has proven this will comprehensively snuff out any warming effects result in a 1.300476% increase in cases of childhood rickets and is the duly proven cause of CCD which by 2019 will account for a massive 62.5860938% collapse in global bee activity causing a 97.00000% fall in global fruit production and thereby a 84799.9600835% increase in scurvy deaths *and* a global mass starvation event.

      ...and then there's the 22.485% increase in point freezing incidents. 97% of scientist agree what that'll cause. DEATH!! Haven't you read the papers you ignorant denialist twat?

      ..and a 3.200058967357% increase in the rate of corrosion of critical electronic components in critical communication apparatus within life saving emergency ambulances. DEATH

      ...and... oh, the humanity! How many people must die?????

      We're doomed! DOOMED I SAY

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE

      DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE

      THIS IS IMPORTANT

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE

  5. mememine69

    Climate Change

    CO2=Y2K²x1000

    *Occupy no longer mentions CO2 in it's list of demands so move on.

    35 more years of global debate is certain and unstoppable no matter how much you eager "believers" exaggerate science's; "99% real" for a CO2 Armageddon.

    Smoking causing cancer is "real", not 99% real.

    Were your climate gods also only 99% sure the planet wasn't flat?

    Is this how you climate drama queens want your kids and all of history remembering you?

  6. Mikel

    Climate change increases homelessness

    In our area at least, a warming climate is impacting the homeless population. Ever more people on the dole and in retirement are finding themselves accepting the decrepitude of lying on warm grass soothed by a gentle breeze sipping wine instead of basking in the glorious sweat of honest toil or giving their mite to a slumlord. The warmer the coldest winter nights get, the more of them there are. Should freezing nights end entirely, such folk might become a sizeable share of the population.

    And then there is the incidence of Lycra outerwear - and now evening attire. It is shameful how many young people are wandering about with clothing that looks like body paint. Warming can only accelerate this trend as well until folk are walking the streets entirely naked. The horror!

    Clearly industrialization must be reversed and we must return to an agrarian society before we are all doomed to this unspeakable fate.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Climate change increases homelessness

      "And then there is the incidence of Lycra outerwear"

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYRENWT8lz8

    2. TheVogon

      Re: Climate change increases homelessness

      "In our area at least, a warming climate is impacting the homeless population"

      It's the same in London. The Scots that visit find it so hot that they have to consume vast quantities of drink and sleep out on the streets...

  7. The Islander
    Boffin

    Curious ...

    I felt compelled to look at the handle associated with comments on this article. My little thought experiment was driven by my perception that a lot of comments considered* "anti-AGW" are apparently posted anonymously. Here's my view at time of writing ...

    Pro AGW - Handle: 28 Anonymous: 0

    Anti AGW - Handle: 26 Anonymous: 24

    Non AGW - Handle: 21 Anonymous: 10

    Deleted - 3

    I'm curious why so many anti-AGW posts are submitted under Anonymous Coward?

    (* Yes, yes it's subjective, I probably am pro-AGW, YMMV, etc ...)

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Curious ...

      Even more strange is that nearly none of the commentards actually commented on the actual subject of the original article ...

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like