This is a fun policy

Labour has indicated it could ban the use of private jets within five years if it wins power, amid claims that billionaires should not be able to “trash the climate”.

Andy McDonald, the shadow transport secretary, has endorsed a report calling for a ban on private flights by 2025.

The report, compiled by the left-wing Common Wealth think tank, claims that private flights from UK airports contribute as much to climate change annually as 450,000 cars.

So, if one flies in can it fly out again?

Further, what’s the definition of a private jet? The Emir of Qatar has a private 747. Ownership? But near all are owned by companies. It’s more difficult than it seems….

41 thoughts on “This is a fun policy”

  1. ZaNu are the shite scum of the Earth.

    So lets split the vote–put them in power and lose all chance of Brexit forever because we can’t have everything we want .

    Yes Blojo is BlueLabour shite but ob we don’t want to get 75% of what we want and the chance to expand that FAR further when we can lose everything for good under a storm of rigged votes and outright ZanU dictatorship.

    In order to make gestures showing how outraged we are that we haven’t got everything we wanted.

    Yes we are all sick of our votes not being respected. But handing power over to an alliance of Marxists and cunts who openly are telling you that they don’t give a fuck for democracy is not how we change that.

    Nor is big talk about sweeping constitutional chances that aren’t going to happen if remain win. There WILL be lots of sweeping changes–for the worse as Labour is showing us here.

    But I will be civil for a change–except to Longmuir who can fuck off as he is a gobby septic who will be doing nothing one way or the other.

    So please Pcar and Mr Lud and the rest who say I am a sell-out. The hour is growing late so lets have your plans as to how No Deal is to be attained from where we are.

    Without TBP outright victory of course. I am the one who believes polls are fixed. But there are limits as to how fixed they can be. Killery’s 93 % was about past that limit. So if TBP are being marked down 50% it means that they still are not going to get more than a handful of seats.

    So as I say please save the insults and let me in on the plan for No Deal victory. I really do want to help.

    Rather than make empty destructive gestures that cost us everything instead of than getting out and then sitting Johnson’s arse on the fire. Whereas if remain –and most esp Jizz win OUR arses will be on the fire. No nonsense please about how 5 years of Marxist evil will do us all good. Once Marxism, is in–it will take a real war to get them out.

    So please all the opponents of “sell-outs” like me–please let me know the Plan.

  2. Except it’s not a ban on private jets at all. It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jets to be replaced by electric and owners will be offered incentives to do so. Seems reasonable enough to me or probably anyone who isn’t a climate-change denying fruitcake.

  3. Ecks

    Events. What Farage is doing at the moment is negotiating. And keeping the pressure on Boris. Boris needs that to steer him. Without Farage, he’ll see the pressure coming more from the wets and Remainers, which may risk seeing him drift off towards some May type capitulation when push comes to shove Unlike Farage, Boris isn’t truly driven by Brexit, he simply wants to be World King…

    Let’s see how it pans from here. Noises yesterday that No 10 may be looking at various options, perhaps committing (as part of the manifesto) to not extending the transition beyond 2020, Deal or No Deal (though yes, we’ve heard that before)? I suspect there may be more going on behind the scenes that we aren’t aware of. Farage made the mistake of trusting MPs before, in 2016, hence, he’s in no hurry to repeat that exercise.

    And many of us (for example on here) can happily say we might well vote TBP without hurting Boris one bit in reality – if we are in safe seats and our votes are completely inconsequential in terms of MP numbers.

  4. @ KJ – “It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jets to be replaced by electric”

    Care to name any such “Electric” alternatives, either in current (sic) production, or with the remotest likelihood of going into production in the next 5 years?

  5. PF–Hope you are right PF. Again I don’t trust polls but Survation has Southampton South (sic) taken by Limp Dicks with 31% I think while combined TBP/Tory vote would have been 47%.

    Not good.

  6. Lets make sure this KJ dick does not get any more flying holidays then since he is so cut up about lying bullshit from lying Marxist ecofreaks.

  7. @ Dave Ward

    I’m obviously not an aeronautical expert, I was simply pointing out the inaccuracy of the content in the OP. However, I believe there is a Bristol-based company called Vertical Aerospace who reckon they’re only a couple of years away. Incidentally though, I’m not personally convinced by the policy and like our host I’d be more in favour of a carbon tax.

  8. @ Mr Ecks,

    No need to worry, I haven’t been on holiday abroad for many years and have no intention of doing so in the future. Hope that eases both your mind and blood pressure.

  9. @KJ, that Vertical Aerospace product is impressive but is in no way a private jet replacement. It is a short range airborne taxi. If you’re going to point something out, it ought to be relevant.

    @Dave Ward, you could equally ask about a 20 year timescale I reckon. And even that is optimistic for the ranges and endurance we are talking about.

  10. Short of some unforeseeable breakthrough in electrical storage technology, there’s zero chance of an electric-powered aircraft – even a two-seater with a 100 mile range – ever. We’re more likely to develop Star Trek transporter beams. Anything with enough energy storage would be far too heavy to leave the ground.

    There are companies working on jet-electric hybrids, but even that looks more like virtue-signalling than a real-world development project. We know of nothing that can get (even theoretically) to within an order of magnitude of the energy density of hydrocarbons – so if we’re still flying in 100 years, the planes will still be using that for fuel (it doesn’t have to be fossil fuel, of course).

  11. Perhaps in a couple of hundreds of year’s time people will carry their personal mini-nuclear “USB-stick” as energy source. Have a few around the house, carry a couple of them with you. Need to drive to the shops? Insert the stick near the radio on the dashboard. Mow the lawn? Jump on the drone and quick dash to the pub?

  12. “Except it’s not a ban on private jets at all. It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jet”

    Well, you see, jets are jets. Fossil-fuel powered. Any alternative suggestion is pretty much magic. Can’t be done. So he does propose to ban private jets, as there is no substitute. How he plans to deal with perfectly kosher jets from foreign registries which have rights to land here I don’t know. There are various international aviation treaties we are signed up to. And jets are mobile. What’s to stop them registering elsewhere? Or in the EU, which we might still be a part of if Jezza were to be in a position to impose this idea. How many more bloody stupid plans are we to see this season as sops to the loonies to get their votes even though that plans are ill thought-out and impossible?

  13. @ Chris Miller

    Sir George Cayley discussed ” Prime Movers” 200 years ago and came to much the same conclusion.

  14. @ Chris Miller – “There’s zero chance of an electric-powered aircraft – even a two-seater with a 100 mile range – ever”

    The Slovenian Pipistrelle is flying, but when an example owned by Norway’s airport operator Avinor, was being used to “showcase the opportunities of electric power in aviation”, things didn’t work out as intended:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2019/08/15/all-electric-plane-crash-lands-in-lake-in-blow-to-norways-aviation-strategy/

    As for something with a 7,000mile range capable of cruising at Mach 0.9 & 51,000ft* on battery power – dream on…

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulfstream_G650

  15. anyone who isn’t a climate-change denying fruitcake.

    KJ: With that simple phrase you show me that nothing you say on the subject of climate change should be taken seriously. (And very likely, anything you say on any other subject should be taken with a pinch of salt.)

    Ad Hominem is really not a good debating technique and it’s not even a very good sales technique either.

    If you take the trouble to examine the whole range of views on the subject you will find very few people who deny that climate changes, but you will find a great many who do not think that we can affect the way the climate changes to any great degree and a lot more who think that the kind of things that we are doing will not affect the climate but will adversely affect our ability to adapt to climate change. (Particularly if it starts to get colder as some scientists think will happen – or is happening.)

    As for electric aircraft, when they build one that can compete with the current aircraft, (without some artificial subsidy based on carbon footprints), then fine. Go for it. But for God’s sake keep the government out of it.

  16. I’m sure the proposal is to try to outdo the Greens and LibDems but it seems counter-productive even as a not-going-to-happen manifesto pledge. (We know from recent experience how much they are worth).
    The “problem” of executive jets is tiny to the point of virtual invisibility and so is unlikely to alone tip the balance for many of even the loonier greenies, while it’s an extreme red flag (to add to all the others) for any of the relatively saner potential Labour voters that they really need.
    Are any in the deprived formerly Labour heartlands thinking “what would really improve my life is a ban on Markle’s shuttle buses”?

  17. Bloke in North Dorset

    Except it’s not a ban on private jets at all. It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jets to be replaced by electric and owners will be offered incentives to do so. Seems reasonable enough to me or probably anyone who isn’t a climate-change denying fruitcake.

    Nice try but your argument falls apart as soon as any thought is given to it:

    1. This is Labour and they don’t believe in things like market incentives, to the extent that any of them have even heard of the term.

    2. Labour just hate rich people. The left don’t even dress it up as concern for those at lower end of the socio-economic pile anymore.

  18. It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jets to be replaced by electric

    Son, if you want to keep working here, stay off the drugs.

    I believe there is a Bristol-based company called Vertical Aerospace who reckon they’re only a couple of years away.

    In 20 years time it’ll still be just a couple of years away. That cold fusion heating company has a better chance of turning a profit.

    It’s the laws of physics, mate. They hate bullshit.

    The energy density of aviation fuel is about 12000 Watt-hours per Kg

    Energy density of the most advanced batteries is about 500 Watt-hours per kilo

    I can’t be arsed doing the sums for solar panels, it should be needless to say they offer only a marginal amount of additional power per extra kilo of weight and don’t work very well at night or when those nebulous, cloudy things are in the sky.

    So, no, electric flight will only ever be good for toys and technology demonstrators. It’s not a viable means of getting a large (or anything bigger than a Smart car) aircraft off the ground and keeping it off the ground for hundreds of miles, ever, and even the best prototypes are objectively worse than the performance specs achieved by the Hindenburg in 1936 – which could carry up to 100 people at 80mph.

    Gravity is a bitch.

    As for your retarded climate change religion, aviation only accounts for 2% of global man-made C02 and serves about 4 billion people a year, adding trillions of pounds of value to the world’s economy.

    What “incentives” do you have in mind to offset returning to 19th century living standards in return for almost zero measurable impact on Gaia?

  19. What in God’s name are Eviation thinking of by developing a TAILDRAGGER? – particularly one with wingtip mounted fans! Much as I love old tech, and have a soft spot for the legendary DC3, this is a massive step backwards, unless they envisage “ReWilding” existing airports by grassing over the tarmac.

    Anyone who has aviation experience (Not KJ, obviously) knows that tailwheel aircraft have a tendency to “Ground Loop” (swap ends) during taxying, takeoff & landing, particularly so on hard runways. No doubt they will claim sophisticated software will overcome this by varying the thrust of the outboard propellors during this critical phase, but if that goes tits up at the wrong moment there won’t be any modern pilots capable of taking over. This isn’t going to have the low approach speed and large balloon tyres of the DC3 to help cushion an “interesting” arrival, and the usual “Into Wind ~ Wing Down” technique in a crosswind isn’t an option either. Compared to all other commercial aircraft (of whatever design), the adverse yaw of a wingtip mounted engine (electric propfan or whatever) failing at low speed is just asking for a stall/spin accident. …

    I’m really looking forward to watching YouTube videos, filmed at large airports, in strong crosswind conditions, if this contraption ever gets approval!

  20. Dennis, Climate-Change Denying Fruitcake

    Except it’s not a ban on private jets at all. It is a phase-out of fossil-fuel powered private jets to be replaced by electric and owners will be offered incentives to do so. Seems reasonable enough to me or probably anyone who isn’t a climate-change denying fruitcake.

    KJ –

    At this time there are no designs that are even in the development stage, and there will be none anytime in the near future. Multiple constraints centering around battery technology… weight, capacity, temperature resistance (batteries hate the cold, and at 20,000 feet you could be looking at -40F), etc. So in practical terms, a ban of fossil fuel aircraft is a complete ban of aircraft.

    Part of being a climate-change denying fruitcake has to do with not having your head up your ass about the practical effects of policy. It would have taken you a quick google of “electric jets” and less than five minutes to find out electric jets will probably never be a practical alternative. Besides, according to cunts like you, we only have 12 years to completely redo human civilization or we’re going to die from the heat. So if the technology isn’t in production and available today, it’s worthless, right?

    Question for KJ: Can you give us an estimate of the carbon dioxide reduction such a ban of private jets based in Britain would provide? Parts per million or millions of metric tons, either will do. And then, would you demonstrate how that reduction will actually impact present carbon dioxide levels? I’d prefer you present as a percentage, and again, either parts per million or millions of metric tons would be fine.

    Feel free to use either CO2e or CO2eq if you’re more comfortable with those measures.

  21. What in God’s name are Eviation thinking of by developing a TAILDRAGGER?

    I’m guessing the exact same thing that guy who founded WeWork and Lyle Lanley from The Simpsons were thinking.

  22. Re: Eviation, according to Wikipedo:

    An investment of $500 million is needed to begin serial production, maybe reached through an IPO.

    Genuine lol at the “maybe” bit. The whole thing looks like IPO bait. They still haven’t actually gotten a plane in the air, but that might not matter to a Softbank type investor.

    Also reminds me of that company that has been promising flying cars – any day now! – for the last 30 years.

  23. You mentioned the Hindenburg, maybe it is the time for the return of airships and slower travel?
    As the manufacture and disposal of the battery and the source of electricity to power it for an electric car don’t seem to matter to the ecofreaks then I’m sure they can be sold on low carbon electric airships

  24. Hmm. So this piece in Wired says that batteries are 7% as good as fuel.

    https://www.wired.com/2017/05/electric-airplanes-2/

    The Eviation Alice is claiming to go 650 nmi or around 1,000km. According to Wiki’s fuel economy page, the Pilatus PC-12 with 9 seats manages 0.4kg/km

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft#Commuter_flights

    So call it 400kg of fuel to fly 1,000km. At the Wired estimate of 7%, that means that the batteries will be 5.6 tonnes. The Eviation Alice has a maximum weight of 6.4 tonnes, Given the engines and everything else, not really seeing this. Maybe battery tech has improved…

  25. I am reminded of when in the early ’90s in the States they imposed a luxury tax on boats, which hammered the boat building industry (particularly in Maine) and threw a lot of skilled craftsmen out of work. Climate change is often used as an argument that someone rich should have something taken away from them, or made to suffer a bit, but it’s hard to do that without also hurting some ordinary folks.

  26. We have an electric (batteries +solar) aircraft that can fly round the world. But it’s a toy (an impressively high-tech toy, but still a toy) that can’t conceivably be scaled up to a commercial airliner. Similarly, we have a man-powered aircraft that can cross the Channel, but nobody is proposing a version of the A320 with pedals at every seat (though I admit I haven’t asked Extinction Rebellion).

  27. Once you can scale up an “electric” jet to go M.70 (I’ll take a performance reduction from M.80-.85), with at least 8 hours of endurance, and ETOPS level reliability call me, until then, they are just expensive toys.

    There is a company here in Canada touting their plans to add electric aircraft to their fleet. Trouble is, there market is less than 10 passenger “Air Taxi” between Vancouver and Vancouver Island, which is a 20 minute flight. An Electric DH Beaver float plane is possibly practical for such a route, especially if the govt. subsidizes the electricity for same. Also savvy marketing on their part, since Vancouver is on the “left coast” and there are enough greenies to market to. Not sure how much is marketing/vapourware, or if they are serious….

  28. Rather than mess about developing a battery powered aircraft, we simply need to make jet fuel using electricity, then continue with our existing infrastructure, job done.

  29. Maybe the ban is so POTUS can’t visit.

    .
    @Dave Ward November 5, 2019 at 10:41 am

    We could start building The English Electric Lightning again – it self-declares as Electric, job jobbed

    .
    @Kevin B November 5, 2019 at 12:43 pm

    If you take the trouble to examine the whole range of views on the subject you will find very few people who deny that climate changes, but you will find a great many who do not think that we can affect the way the climate changes to any great degree

    Spot on. Plus best to adapt as we and every living thing always has rather than attempt to stop it at enormous cost and deprivation

    ** But for God’s sake keep the government out of it **

  30. Tiananmen Ecks — who used to call for tanks in the streets and blood in the gutters to get Hard Brexit, and now is a Tory shill pushing BRINO: “But I will be civil for a change–except to Longmuir who can fuck off as he is a gobby septic who will be doing nothing one way or the other.”

    Fair enough, Mr. T. But what does any of that have to do with an electric private plane? Has Boris promised to give all his loyal supporters one of those? So they can all have fun flying their electric planes under Boris’s Bridge to Ireland? 🙂

  31. @ Pcar – I have distant (50+ years) memories of EE Lightnings displaying at an RAF base airshow. The earth shattering roar as they hurtled down the runway, followed by the legendary near vertical climb. No fancy computers or worries about “Carbon Footprints” back then, just sheer brute power. What a machine!

  32. Most of the Vancouver seaplane flights seem to be tourists, government employees or people’s whose company’s expense accounts are generous.
    The downtown to downtown ferry from Victoria to Vancouver is marketed as a luxury trip and priced accordingly.

  33. Noel C: Replace all the UK’s power sources with PRISM reactors to use its huge stock of spent fuel and depleted uranium. Extract H2 and CO2 from the surface of the ocean (this is in equilibrium with the atmospheric CO2 concentration), turn it into CO and H2 with a reverse water gas reaction and run the CO and H2 through a Fischer-Tropsch reactor. The only tech that’s relatively new is the CO2 extraction.

  34. @Dave Ward

    Sadly I never saw or heard an EE Lightning flying. However, I console myself with memories of sight and sound of Concorde and Vulcan flying.

    Concorde boom-boom made me fall of a ladder in 70s!

    EE Lightning – only aircraft that intercepted an SR-71 (although BA Concorde did ask one to get out of their way)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *