Rocket Racing League

In article . 90,
Jim Davis wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:

But what is jet-lag?

As far as I can see -- and I've flown trans-Pacific between
Auckland and LA quite a few times, often with a transcontinental
US flight on the end (not to mention Auckland -- Wellington)
-- it all comes down to just two things: dehydration due to ~10%
humidity in the aircraft, and enforced lack of sleep for 24 - 30
hours. Just drink plenty of weater/juice and don't touch booze.
I don't find timezone synchronization to be a problem -- stay
awake at all costs until normal bedtime in the destination
timezone and all is well the next morning.

You've described the situation precisely.

The time from departure to "all is well" at the the destination is
the sum of travel time and recovery time. Suborbital flight decreases
one and increases the other so there is no net gain.

I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until you've got
to the point where you would normally have gotten to your sleep period
in your originating timezone. If you can leave Auckland at 8am, get to
New York an hour later at 3pm, do a couple of hours of business, head
home at 6 pm, arrive an hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and
then head home to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Bruce Hoult wrote:
In article . 90,
Jim Davis wrote:

Richard D. Latham wrote:

I've long asserted that a useful intermediate market is a 6000
nm sub-orbital craft.

I suspect that there are quite a few executives that wouldn't
mind commuting to their Hawaii houses on the weekends , or
even daily.

This doesn't work. Any travel time saved by using a suborbital
rocket instead of a subsonic jet will be more than eaten up in
longer recovery times from jet lag. We're pretty near the point of
diminishing returns for increases in routine travel speeds.

But what is jet-lag?

As far as I can see -- and I've flown trans-Pacific between Auckland and
LA quite a few times, often with a transcontinental US flight on the end
(not to mention Auckland -- Wellington) -- it all comes down to just
two things: dehydration due to ~10% humidity in the aircraft, and
enforced lack of sleep for 24 - 30 hours. Just drink plenty of
weater/juice and don't touch booze. I don't find timezone
synchronization to be a problem -- stay awake at all costs until normal
bedtime in the destination timezone and all is well the next morning.

Not necessarily.

Flying West (I go London-Seattle pretty much every month) staying up is
essential, but it doesn't solve the problem of being wide awake around
the time you normally get out of bed. In the case of an 8hour shift, I
start waking up about 1(ish) and then get bored of lying there between
4 and 5am.

Flying the other way, especially if I've been in the US for enough time
to really adjust, I have the opposite problem of waking to stay asleep,
even if I've had more than enough.

What surprises me is I've been doing regular long haul travel with 8+
hour time zone shifts for 3 years and I still can't predict what the
jet lag will be like.

The one thing that really helps is Business Class seats.

Dave

Bruce Hoult wrote:

I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until
you've got to the point where you would normally have gotten
to your sleep period in your originating timezone. If you can
leave Auckland at 8am, get to New York an hour later at 3pm,
do a couple of hours of business, head home at 6 pm, arrive an
hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and then head home
to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?

That might work...*if* someone were willing to foot the bill for an
antipodal round trip for the sake of "a couple of hours of
business." Do you think this situation will arise often enough to
justify the development of ballistic flight? I have my doubts.

Jim Davis

Jim Davis wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:



I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until
you've got to the point where you would normally have gotten
to your sleep period in your originating timezone. If you can
leave Auckland at 8am, get to New York an hour later at 3pm,
do a couple of hours of business, head home at 6 pm, arrive an
hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and then head home
to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?



That might work...*if* someone were willing to foot the bill for an
antipodal round trip for the sake of "a couple of hours of
business." Do you think this situation will arise often enough to
justify the development of ballistic flight? I have my doubts.


This also doesn't take into account the time spent going to the
ballistic vehicle, boarding it, disembarking from it, and going to your
destination. That's about three hours, easy.
It also shows why SSTs aren't of very much use on short trips- as even
if you save a hour or so, it's not much of a real reduction in overall
trip time.
As an alternative to flying someone from LA to Hong Kong via suborbital
vehicle to do business, your competitor might use holographic
teleconferencing and get there at the speed of light with far lower cost.

Pat

In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote:

Jim Davis wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:



I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until
you've got to the point where you would normally have gotten
to your sleep period in your originating timezone. If you can
leave Auckland at 8am, get to New York an hour later at 3pm,
do a couple of hours of business, head home at 6 pm, arrive an
hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and then head home
to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?



That might work...*if* someone were willing to foot the bill for an
antipodal round trip for the sake of "a couple of hours of
business." Do you think this situation will arise often enough to
justify the development of ballistic flight? I have my doubts.


This also doesn't take into account the time spent going to the
ballistic vehicle, boarding it, disembarking from it, and going to your
destination. That's about three hours, easy.
It also shows why SSTs aren't of very much use on short trips- as even
if you save a hour or so, it's not much of a real reduction in overall
trip time.
As an alternative to flying someone from LA to Hong Kong via suborbital
vehicle to do business, your competitor might use holographic
teleconferencing and get there at the speed of light with far lower cost.

Yes, those are all reasons that ballistic transport might not be worth
developing. I think we've now showsn that jetlag isn't necessarily one
of them.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Bruce Hoult wrote:
In article . 90,
Jim Davis wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:

But what is jet-lag?

As far as I can see -- and I've flown trans-Pacific between
Auckland and LA quite a few times, often with a transcontinental
US flight on the end (not to mention Auckland -- Wellington)
-- it all comes down to just two things: dehydration due to ~10%
humidity in the aircraft, and enforced lack of sleep for 24 - 30
hours. Just drink plenty of weater/juice and don't touch booze.
I don't find timezone synchronization to be a problem -- stay
awake at all costs until normal bedtime in the destination
timezone and all is well the next morning.

You've described the situation precisely.

The time from departure to "all is well" at the the destination is
the sum of travel time and recovery time. Suborbital flight decreases
one and increases the other so there is no net gain.

I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until you've got
to the point where you would normally have gotten to your sleep period
in your originating timezone. If you can leave Auckland at 8am, get to
New York an hour later at 3pm, do a couple of hours of business, head
home at 6 pm, arrive an hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and
then head home to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?

So, the person has been up since 6am(ish - probably earlier) Auckland
time? You have them arriving back at the office after being awake 12
hours (although they'd not be back in the office for another couple of
hours probably, you then have them doing another 4+ hours work, then
home and family, maybe an early night at 10pm? So that's a 21+ hour
day?

Regardless of what the clock says at that point, you've a person with a
pretty screwed up body clock which will be screaming foul.

Dave

Henry Spencer wrote:
In article ,
Bruce Hoult wrote:
...I don't find timezone
synchronization to be a problem -- stay awake at all costs until normal
bedtime in the destination timezone and all is well the next morning.

Some people can get away with that, but many need at least a day or two of
adaptation before they are really functioning well. Jet lag *is* timezone
synchronization, by definition; the added problems associated with poor
traveling conditions are secondary.

This a rule of thumb suggesting an hour per timezone to completely
adjust.

It's not entirely accurate but it's not far out, especially if you've
had to fly Economy.

Dave

In article .com,
"Dave O'Neill" wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:
In article . 90,
Jim Davis wrote:

Bruce Hoult wrote:

But what is jet-lag?

As far as I can see -- and I've flown trans-Pacific between
Auckland and LA quite a few times, often with a transcontinental
US flight on the end (not to mention Auckland -- Wellington)
-- it all comes down to just two things: dehydration due to ~10%
humidity in the aircraft, and enforced lack of sleep for 24 - 30
hours. Just drink plenty of weater/juice and don't touch booze.
I don't find timezone synchronization to be a problem -- stay
awake at all costs until normal bedtime in the destination
timezone and all is well the next morning.

You've described the situation precisely.

The time from departure to "all is well" at the the destination is
the sum of travel time and recovery time. Suborbital flight decreases
one and increases the other so there is no net gain.

I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until you've got
to the point where you would normally have gotten to your sleep period
in your originating timezone. If you can leave Auckland at 8am, get to
New York an hour later at 3pm, do a couple of hours of business, head
home at 6 pm, arrive an hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and
then head home to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?

So, the person has been up since 6am(ish - probably earlier) Auckland
time?

Two hours before the flight? Why? Even in these times off paranoid
security I wouldn't get up more than an hour before a flight here in
Wellington. That's 20 minutes to get ready, 20 minutes to drive across
town to the airport, check in 20 minutes before departure. All very
standard.


You have them arriving back at the office after being awake 12
hours

By my reckoning, 1 pm is 6 hours after 7 am. Even if I allow your 6 am
start it's still only 7 hours after waking up, not 12.


(although they'd not be back in the office for another couple of
hours probably

Why?


, you then have them doing another 4+ hours work, then home and
family, maybe an early night at 10pm? So that's a 21+ hour day?

Assuming an early night at 10 pm, I get 15 hours. Even counting from
your 6 am to 10 pm is still only 16 hours, allowing 8 hours sleep even
if you have to do it all over again.


Regardless of what the clock says at that point, you've a person with a
pretty screwed up body clock which will be screaming foul.

Looks like a pretty standard business day to me. I've certainly done
exactly the same sort of thing on business many times, simply taking a 1
hour flight from Wellington to Auckland or Christchurch on a 737 instead
of a 1 hour flight to New York on a ballistic rocket. And, yes, I've
gotten up at 7 am, been on a plane at 8, in Auckland at 9, in someone's
office by 9:30, back in Wellington at 1 pm after spending several hours
in meeetings/installing a program I'd just written/solving a technical
problem.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

In article ,
Bruce Hoult wrote:
I don't see how you can possibly have a jetlag problem until you've got
to the point where you would normally have gotten to your sleep period
in your originating timezone. If you can leave Auckland at 8am, get to
New York an hour later at 3pm, do a couple of hours of business, head
home at 6 pm, arrive an hour later at 1 pm, do an afternoon's work, and
then head home to wife and kids ... where is the possibility for jetlag?
So, the person has been up since 6am(ish - probably earlier) Auckland
time?

Two hours before the flight? Why?

In North America, for an international flight you're typically supposed to
be *at the airport* two hours ahead. ("Supposed to" means "you probably
won't need that long, but if you cut it closer and something goes wrong,
it's your fault, not ours".)

Even in these times off paranoid
security I wouldn't get up more than an hour before a flight here in
Wellington. That's 20 minutes to get ready, 20 minutes to drive across
town to the airport, check in 20 minutes before departure. All very
standard.

Maybe standard there, but not at a major North American airport. At
T-20min, they've started boarding and any still-unclaimed seats are being
assigned to standby passengers. Even assuming no major snags, arriving at
the airport later than maybe T-60min is risky, because 10-15min waits can
occur at several points even when all is basically well.

Remember also that on arrival in New York, you can easily need 30-60min to
clear Customs & Immigration -- long waits in line are common -- and
probably another 30-60min to get to where your business is waiting for
you, unless it's at an airport hotel.

The theory is good, but it would take considerable streamlining of the
airport bureaucracy and ground transportation to make it work reliably.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bruce Hoult wrote:

Even in these times off paranoid security I wouldn't
get up more than an hour before a flight here in
Wellington. That's 20 minutes to get ready, 20
minutes to drive across town to the airport, check
in 20 minutes before departure. All very standard.

Maybe standard there, but not at a major North
American airport. At T-20min, they've started
boarding and any still-unclaimed seats are being
assigned to standby passengers. Even assuming no
major snags, arriving at the airport later than maybe
T-60min is risky, because 10-15min waits can
occur at several points even when all is basically well.

Wellington is not a large airport, domestic check in time is typically
twenty minutes, international two hours, as per most of rest of the
world.

I suspect that a VTOL aircar type vehicle that was capable of relatively
high speed and long range between fuel stops would do unto border
controls what the internet did unto the dissemination of information. It
would perhaps force a breakdown of international borders such that
ballistic transport would then become more viable.

At the end of the day jet lag is a luxury, this is not a reasonable
objection. Many people can and do adapt to sporadic sleeping patterns,
so long as they still get sufficient sleep on the average. A period of
hard living is every bit as disruptive to normal sleeping patterns, and
many do this by choice. The more people depart from the standard 8 hour
working day, the less of a problem jet lag becomes. People do adapt to
it, it is largely just about practice.

Pete.