RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, RR: 52 Posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2225 times:
A move by Congress to extend daylight-saving time for four weeks to save energy has prompted an outcry from parent groups and the nation's airline industry, which warn it could be dangerous and costly.
...The change would become permanent in spring 2007 if Congress passes the overall energy bill, which is far from certain. President Bush says he wants an energy bill, but his administration opposes an extension of daylight-saving time.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman has warned it would "raise serious international harmonization problems for the transportation industry."
The Air Transport Association, which represents major U.S. airlines, argues that it would throw U.S. international schedules further out of sync with Europe. It says a two-month extension, the initial proposal, would cost the U.S. airline industry $147 million and disrupt overseas travel.
"This is an ultimate disaster for airlines and all of our customers, who will be horribly inconvenienced," says James May, the group's president and CEO.
Neilalp From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1034 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2196 times:
My only thought would be a flight like NW#40 that leaves DTW at 4pm and arrives AMS at 5:55am, but tends to arrive even earlier around 5:15am some days. Now if the U.S. stays on Daylight savings...the flight leaves at 4pm still and it now would arrive at AMS at 4:55am or earlier. Now this would mean bringing airport crews in earlier, but they'd be done sooner 1 hour earlier after the last international flight leaves. So a solution would mean moving all international flights forward 1 hour in the U.S. Now that would cause problems in the U.S. But they would arrive at the usual time overseas.
I can see where this is confusing, but $147 million I'm not figuring that out.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2180 times:
Well, it doesn't shorten the day to 23 hours.
You might also see some countries follow suit, if it is better for them. As for the switch, it is currently lopsided, taking place 5 weeks after the fall equinox, but 2 weeks after the spring equinox. It could take place 1 month earlier in spring. Second Saturday in March would be ideal. Leave the fall alone, unless you want to move it a week earlier.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Contrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1818 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
I too am puzzled by the objections made recently against this proposal. I can't really understand how this would hurt the airlines, they have to change time twice a year anyway. Another group said it would impact livestock. I have seen a lot of this world, but I have never seen a cow, horse, or pig that could tell time. And now the parents? What is their objection? Of course, people who oppose something can always come up with something.
I have a better idea. Make it year-round effective now and nobody will have to change anything.
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2077 times:
Now at least the daylight saving time matches the one in Europe, time in NYC is always 6 hours behind Amsterdam and time in LA always 8 hours behind London no matter if it is summer or winter. Imagine if these times don't overlap it will give headaches to the planners. There are night curfews in many european airports, which means the early morning arrivals to Europe have to depart an hour later in the USA as they are not welcome yet in like Amsterdam or LHR before 5 or 6 AM. That means if their turn around time stays the same, come back in the USA an hour later, maybe too late for the aircraft to do the next scheduled flight, for instance to Asia or transcontinental and for the pax to get a connecting flight. In theory a day remains 24 hrs but this probably end up in worse utilisation of aircraft and more expenses to accomodate passengers missing their connections.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
TAN FLYR From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1847 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2045 times:
contrail..it means that it would be darker longer in the morning, with already shorter days. Thus school kids would be walking/ waiting for the bus potentially for more days in the dark or limited AM light. Parents don't like for our children out in the dark making their way to school.
As for it, no change is needed unless you take the idea of making it Early March to add a bit more there. But not in the fall.
FlyinTLow From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 501 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2023 times:
I guess it would make sense to just standardize this as well. Make all airlines change to daylight saving time and back on the same day. Of course then the debate would start as to which country or continent to follow here...
Quoting Neilalp (Reply 1): My only thought would be a flight like NW#40 that leaves DTW at 4pm and arrives AMS at 5:55am, but tends to arrive even earlier around 5:15am some days. Now if the U.S. stays on Daylight savings...the flight leaves at 4pm still and it now would arrive at AMS at 4:55am or earlier. Now this would mean bringing airport crews in earlier, but they'd be done sooner 1 hour earlier after the last international flight leaves. So a solution would mean moving all international flights forward 1 hour in the U.S. Now that would cause problems in the U.S. But they would arrive at the usual time overseas.
I can see where you are coming from, but every bigger international airport in Europe at least, has staff available 24/7/365 a year. And as everything in aviation, airport staff has to be flexible in every way, without getting better pay if they have to come in an hour early. So, just from this, you will not get 147 Mio.
StarCruiser From United States of America, joined May 2004, 301 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1889 times:
Quoting Contrails (Reply 3): Another group said it would impact livestock. I have seen a lot of this world, but I have never seen a cow, horse, or pig that could tell time. And now the parents? What is their objection?
Every time I hear people who complain about daylight time I am reminded of the silly arguments against it. Good grief it's the twenty-first century. Don't you think we can handle a simple change like an hour one way or the other? It's not going to cause the earth to change its axis or orbit, so short of that I think we'll manage.
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1660 times:
Quoting FlyinTLow (Reply 6): Make all airlines change to daylight saving time and back on the same day. Of course then the debate would start as to which country or continent to follow here...
Not even every state in the United States agrees on observing Daylight Savings Time. Indiana is finally switching after having some of the state on central time, some of the state on eastern time, and most, but not all of the state ignoring daylight savings time. If it took this long to standardize it within the United States, I don't think you are going to get any world wide airline cooperation at all.
Quoting Contrails (Reply 3): I have a better idea. Make it year-round effective now and nobody will have to change anything
What would be the point of that? You would just shift the clock back an hour and readjust your schedule by waking up an hour later. Work would start at 9 instead of 8 and lunch would be at 1 instead of noon.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1950 posts, RR: 26 Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1648 times:
Quoting Contrails (Reply 3): they have to change time twice a year anyway.
Actually, they have to change schedules 4 times a year, twice in the spring and twice in the fall. Why? Because the U.S. and the rest of the world don't switch to/from DST on the same day. Airlines serving the Southern Hemisphere also have to contend with an even greater time switch. The Southern Hemisphere is just going on to DST as the Northern Hemisphere is coming off. But again, not on the same day, hence there is a 2-3 week period of interim scheduling between the dates the two regions change their clocks. A true pain in the a$$ for scheduling, but that's the way its been done for years. I don't see how extending DST will create any more work than what already exists.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1587 times:
Quoting FlyinTLow (Reply 6): I can see where you are coming from, but every bigger international airport in Europe at least, has staff available 24/7/365 a year. And as everything in aviation, airport staff has to be flexible in every way, without getting better pay if they have to come in an hour early.
As MEA707 already mentioned, most European airports have curfews thus a plane can't simply land an hour earlier. For example, if you want to land before 6AM at AMS you need special slots which are not available (and also cost more).
Another reason is that US airlines will loose pax as they may not be able to offer connections from their hub in Europe to a destination outside their hub in the US. The reason for this is that they have to leave from Europe in order to provide connections at their US hub while they have to wait for pax arriving at their European hub for the flight to the US.
Rafabozzolla From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1508 times:
Quoting PA110 (Reply 9): The Southern Hemisphere is just going on to DST as the Northern Hemisphere is coming off.
Here in Brazil, for example, time difference between eastern timezone and Europe mainland ranges from 3 two 5 hours. So when the Northern Hemisphere is on DST (5 hours diff) is acutally easy to have westbound daylight flights but night flights from Europe arrive at around 4 to 5 AM (way too early). When we are on DST (November through March) daylight flights from Europe feel quite long, and with few connection opportunities at both ends (apart from Portugal to NE Brazil), whereas night flights tend to arrive at less awkard times.
To and from the US is not so much of a problem since time difference to the eastern states ranges from 1 to 3 hours and the only daylight flight is from GRU to MIA with both TAM and AA.
Dolphinflyer From Canada, joined May 2005, 188 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1472 times:
It's a shame that rather than Congress fixing a problem (i.e. moving up DST by one week in the spring to align with Europe), they instead create a whole new set of problems for both the fall and the spring. Once again, the arrogant US boldly pushes ahead without thoughtfully thinking about the implications for ALL industries, domestically and internationally. The airport slot situation would be a mess - especially for US carriers operating to Europe - if this measure passes.
Midway2AirTran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1427 times:
Quoting Dolphinflyer (Reply 12): Once again, the arrogant US boldly pushes ahead without thoughtfully thinking about the implications for ALL industries
You can't satisfy everyone single one, the airlines may be getting the butt-end of this one up-front, but it may help to reduce energy demand overall. Its a small part of this Energy bill pie, but maybe we'll see some fuel pricing heading south; especially with the speculative nature of oil prices.
The ATA may be a bit over-reactive too(they're supposed to be) as it almost sounds like the aircraft will turn to pumpkins or something. Maybe they think it is dangerous for passengers to be waiting for rides after early morning flights at airport curbs while it is dark..hehe
It will be a pain, but there is technology out there to assist and make the transistion a bit better, there may even be benefits afterward.
Transat1011 From Canada, joined Nov 1999, 113 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
An amendment was proposed to that provision last week. The Department of Energy will complete a study after the first year to assess if any savings were observed. If not, the Congress may cancel the DST rule.
Furthermore, the overall Energy bill may still not pass. It's been years they are waiting for this. Sometimes no conference report, somestimes a filibuster...
So depending on MTBE and other issues, the Daylight Savings Time may have to wait.
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1436 posts, RR: 50 Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 1233 times:
Quoting Dolphinflyer (Reply 12): Once again, the arrogant US boldly pushes ahead without thoughtfully thinking about the implications for ALL industries, domestically and internationally. The airport slot situation would be a mess - especially for US carriers operating to Europe - if this measure passes.
Riiiiight.... DST: A Global Problem!
Feeling a bit touchy, are we?
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 501 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1165 posts, 
From Canada, joined May 2005, 188 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
