Airlines need to qualify aircraft for passenger-carrying transoceanic operations.
Northwest Airlines would often use their new wide body aircraft for domestic operations to meet the qualification requirements to operate long distances.
Maybe a stupid question, but why fly them across the Atlantic? Can't they fly over continental US, or along the coast? It feels like it's the same, except any emergency is a lot less bad.
There are quite a few specific procedures unique to crossing the North Atlantic. Part of it has to do with the absence of radar and VHF comms requiring HF or satellite communications which pilots will otherwise never use. I'm sure Pacific crossings have their own peculiarities but I'm less familiar.
I'm sure some of it has to do with operating within the North Atlantic Tracks. Essentially when you lose radio connection you are placed in a slot with a specific speed, bearing, and altitude without the ability to be in constant contact with FAA radio guidance. - the airspace is more congested than you might imagine.
My best guess is that it's simpler for the pilots to focus on the plane because of less interactions with other planes and crowded airspace. The routes are probably simpler compared to domestic fights.
Not a stupid question, the article is asking essentially the same question
> That brings me to another question… I understand the need for specialized training, but does anyone know what actually happens on these transatlantic flights that couldn’t be done in a simulator or classroom? Obviously these are all pilots who already know how to fly the plane, so it’s just transatlantic operations that they’re being certified on. So is it about interacting with air traffic control, understanding the North Atlantic Tracks, etc.?
I was a participant in a trial of the TIL therapy at NIH in 2012 for stage 4 melanoma. I chose to participate in this trial because it was retraining my own immune system to fight my cancer.
Within three months of treatment, 99% of my tumor load was gone (with the remaining was unknown if it was active malignant cells or scar tissue). By 15 months, there was no evidence left.
In the last 11+ years, I've had no further treatment and the melanoma has not returned. I'm very lucky to be a complete responder and have a long-term remission.
When TIL adoptive cell therapy works, it works well. It's amazing, and I'm thankful for Dr. Steven Rosenberg's life work in developing this.
Now that it's FDA approved, many other melanoma patients will have a shot to try a therapy that, for all practical purposes, can be a cure for a disease that not too long ago was a terminal death sentence.
Interesting. I had zero issues using my Amex in France and Switzerland this past summer. In fact, there was only one restaurant that I visited that wouldn't take it. I must have been lucky.
Yes, such treatments have been in trial for a couple decades at NIH, showing complete response in a segment of the patients for certain cancers. The therapies harness each individual's immune system to direct it's attack to the mutations specific to their tumors.
Iovance is on the brink (should have been approved in the next month or two, but has been delayed because of "staffing shortages" at the FDA) of getting FDA approval for Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes adoptive cell therapy.
Besides the special labs used for the cell processing (managed by Iovance), the therapy is not a whole lot different from stem cell transplants, so any hospital that helps patients with blood-bourn cancers can provide this new therapy to melanoma (and soon, other cancer) patients.
P.S. I'm an 11-year survivor post-TIL therapy for Stage 4 melanoma at NIH.
In elementary school in Wisconsin in the 70s, we lost our milk cartons in favor of the bagged milk.
Although it may have been sold as eco-friendly, the real driving reason was cost reduction: it was less expensive to package and transport milk in plastic bags than in small waxed cardboard cartons.
That is why CAR-T and personalized medicine are some hot topics right now. Essentially, the best medicine and treatment we have often just expand or aid our own body capacity to fight back. Cancer is especially problematic because our body often refuses to fight it.
Training an elite team of cellular terminators is the next step when the local forces are just not adequate anymore. But it is still so expensive.
I'm not sure how someone could get through with the incorrect identity unless their eye scan results in the record of someone with the same name.
The process for CLEAR is:
1. Stand next to the kiosk for recognition. For whatever reasons, the machines always seem to have problems with me, but eventually get a good scan and bring up the correct record.
2. Scan your boarding pass at the kiosk, which (supposedly) validates that you're on a flight at this airport and that your name matches what's on the boarding pass.
3. You're escorted to the TSA agent, the CLEAR agent vouches for you, and you just wave your boarding pass in the air to the TSA agent (no scanning).
Often (including this week), I get flagged to show my identification to the CLEAR agent and to the TSA agent. Ultimately, I could have gone through less hassle with simply the TSA Precheck line.
Many times the TSA Precheck line is actually faster. However, when that line is backed up (usually at certain airports like DCA), having CLEAR is a winner. YMMV
https://opennext.js.org/cloudflare