this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
645 points (98.8% liked)

pics

19745 readers
673 users here now

Rules:

1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer

2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.

3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.

4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.

5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.

Photo of the Week Rule(s):

1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.

2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.

Weeks 2023

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Enlighten me as to why this airport is equited as opposed to using aircraft that can land on water

[–] gazter@aussie.zone 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Likely for the same reasons that any airport near a body of water is built. Layman's guesses would be ease of embarking/disembarking, less likely to be affected by weather, standard airplanes are more common...

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't know that I've ever seen a modern plane that can land on water that carried more than a handful of passengers.

[–] AnAustralianPhotographer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Largest I know of are some Twin Otters in Canada have floats. 16-20 people, but I'd call them exceptional and a Cessna caravan type is a typical large float plane. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Canada_DHC-6_Twin_Otter

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

There you go. We're just not flying the Spruce Goose and I'm guessing for cargo reasons if for no other, you want to be able to land large planes.