In the long run, would it be cheaper to build cargo planes that can refuel in midair?
That way you don’t overburdened the ground airport system. And eventually, the refueling airplane can become robotic, and fly fully automated also.
That way you don’t overburdened the ground airport system. And eventually, the refueling airplane can become robotic, and fly fully automated also.
Also, if you can make the tanker bird a UAV, you can do the exact same with the original cargo plane anyway.
The risk to humans in automated flight is mainly in takeoff and landing. I can readily imagine making safe UAV tanker drones which take off and land on airstrips far from human habitation, such that the occasional mistake, while expensive, costs no human life.
What I can't imagine is the economics of this ever working out.
The A-350ULR has a range of a bit more than 11,000 miles [1].
Basically, probably some time in the next decade or so we will break through that barrier and be able to connect any two airports on Earth nonstop if we wanted to. Whether it is economical to do so is another question.
[0] http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?DU=mi&P=AGP-AKL
[1] https://www.flightglobal.com/a350-900ulr-range-figure-not-a-...
And cargo planes fly far fewer hours each day than passenger planes, leading to fewer movements per plane. OTOH the fact that the MD-10/MD-11 has a second life in cargo also is evidence that fuel burn isn’t the primary concern. And that’s cheaper than ever now, while being the primary operational cost.
And weight (and thus fuel burn) is only one constraint, the other is volume.
Anyway, this whole thing goes away by just adding a runway in Anchorage at most assuming anything like current demand.
And especially after the still unresolved 737MAX saga there is very little appetite in commercial aviation towards increased aviation. We’re down to two people, that’s enough.