Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site ssc-bee.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ssc-bee!maa
From: maa@ssc-bee.UUCP (Mark A Allyn)
Newsgroups: net.travel,net.aviation,net.sci
Subject: Re: Airport Fog - Thanks for replies
Message-ID: <530@ssc-bee.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 11-Apr-86 10:13:31 EST
Article-I.D.: ssc-bee.530
Posted: Fri Apr 11 10:13:31 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 14-Apr-86 01:14:32 EST
References: <520@ssc-bee.UUCP> <1501@lanl.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Boeing Aerospace Co., Seattle, WA
Lines: 10
Xref: linus net.travel:2163 net.aviation:2657 net.sci:423

>   And you have to look at the other side of the coin - what are the take-
>   off minimums for Part 121 and 135 operatioons. "Two engines or more"
>   still would require 1/2 mile visability to depart, so even if you could
>   "get em down" you would end up with a bunch of heavy iron sitting on the
>   ground waiting.
> 

Perhaps, in light of the available technology, maybee these parts
(121 and 135) should be changed to reduce or eliminate the minimums
any comments ??