3 ms·

Why not? Maybe not in an airplane and not at an airport, but the same general idea.

by jpmoral 7y ago

_bxg1 7y ago
We've got all those 737s...
- totalZero 7y ago
  Almost 800 of the 737 Max are just sitting around collecting dust. Not to mention all the grounded wide-body aircraft. Take out the seats, equip the cabin with ventilators, and when one outbreak gets under control, send the aircraft to the next outbreak zone. They even have their own generators lol.
  - james_s_tayler 7y ago
    Would give all those pilots something to do and I'm sure it couldn't hurt fuel prices.
- bobthepanda 7y ago
  The ones that have already crashed, and are totally grounded because they propose a risk to the public? Not sure if this is supposed to be better. And who would fly all these people? Access to the cockpit is through the rest of the plane.
  - mdturnerphys 7y ago
    No flying needed--just need to pressurize the aircraft while on the ground.
  - totalZero 7y ago
    The aircraft could fly empty to arrive at airports near outbreak areas, then be used as a hospital after it arrives and the pilot disembarks. Once the hospitals in the area gain some ability to control the outbreak, remaining patients can be sent to local hospitals, the aircraft can be decontaminated and left to sit for some period of time, and the aircraft can move to the next region. Also, considering Boeing was anticipating FAA approval within weeks, it's fair to assume that the MCAS problem has been resolved. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-737-max-certification-flight-could-come-within-a-few-weeks-faa-administrator-idUSKBN20S2SS https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-737-...) If it were truly necessary, you could also set up an airtight septum to separate the contaminated part of the aircraft from the front part that includes the cockpit. There is an aft door (as well as emergency exits) that can be used to access the rear of the aircraft.
  - numpad0 7y ago
    We public know what the issues was. Apart from MCAS risk, I think the planes would be mostly safe for these one-off missions. It just has to fly handful times, from Boeing park lots to a depot in a desert and back from frontline after months/years. They are supposed to be clean before deployment, and can be cleaned by medical professionals before reflying. Or maybe cracks would develop and can't be manned after anyway, either way not much there is in terms of infection risks.

Why not? Maybe not in an airplane and not at an airport, but the same general idea.

_bxg1 7y ago

We've got all those 737s...

totalZero 7y ago
Almost 800 of the 737 Max are just sitting around collecting dust. Not to mention all the grounded wide-body aircraft. Take out the seats, equip the cabin with ventilators, and when one outbreak gets under control, send the aircraft to the next outbreak zone. They even have their own generators lol.
- james_s_tayler 7y ago
  Would give all those pilots something to do and I'm sure it couldn't hurt fuel prices.
bobthepanda 7y ago
The ones that have already crashed, and are totally grounded because they propose a risk to the public? Not sure if this is supposed to be better. And who would fly all these people? Access to the cockpit is through the rest of the plane.
- mdturnerphys 7y ago
  No flying needed--just need to pressurize the aircraft while on the ground.
- totalZero 7y ago
  The aircraft could fly empty to arrive at airports near outbreak areas, then be used as a hospital after it arrives and the pilot disembarks. Once the hospitals in the area gain some ability to control the outbreak, remaining patients can be sent to local hospitals, the aircraft can be decontaminated and left to sit for some period of time, and the aircraft can move to the next region. Also, considering Boeing was anticipating FAA approval within weeks, it's fair to assume that the MCAS problem has been resolved. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-737-max-certification-flight-could-come-within-a-few-weeks-faa-administrator-idUSKBN20S2SS https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-737-...) If it were truly necessary, you could also set up an airtight septum to separate the contaminated part of the aircraft from the front part that includes the cockpit. There is an aft door (as well as emergency exits) that can be used to access the rear of the aircraft.
- numpad0 7y ago
  We public know what the issues was. Apart from MCAS risk, I think the planes would be mostly safe for these one-off missions. It just has to fly handful times, from Boeing park lots to a depot in a desert and back from frontline after months/years. They are supposed to be clean before deployment, and can be cleaned by medical professionals before reflying. Or maybe cracks would develop and can't be manned after anyway, either way not much there is in terms of infection risks.