Talk:Airfield rubber removal

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Science

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Yeah- I wanted to explain a little known service that airfield/runway maintenance personnel have to provide in order to keep the runways safe. I will try my best to make it as informative and least like a commercial. Any suggestions are welcome. Kinetiscope (talk) 19:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are the facts really the facts with UHP Blasting?

I find humor in the fact that someone destroys airfield runways and taxiways with Ultra High Pressure water blasting and then markets it as texturing. I guess that is pretty brilliant. When all of the fines are removed from the surface do you really have better friction numbers. I believe that friction comes from good micro and macro texture.

On a different note why use 40k for rubber removal when there are companies out there that achieve this service with under 20k. The water blasting industry is being ruined by people using 40K or higher pressures on surfaces and and damaging asphalt and concrete. 40k equipment, if used properly, can be utilized for rubber removal. I would rather see 20k and 30 gallons of water per minute then 40k and 7 gallons of water per minute. The 20k and 30 gpm is more of a hydro-hydraulic way of removal where the 40k is hydro-demolition. I posted an article on here by a gentlemen that works for Jetstream and I notice that it has been removed. That is sad because the article was the best bit of content on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.97.182.5 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at above. You say that:

40k equipment, if used properly, can be used for rubber removal.

What is your beef with UHP? Is it that you don't know how to handle the equipment correctly and therefore want everybody to use 20k? Both can cause damage in the hands of unskilled operators. A wide range of water pressures can be used for hydro-demolition, hydrocleaning, and airfield rubber removal including 20k. So what you really want to be aware of, as an specifier of airfield maintenance procedure, is each individual company's skills and reputation in the industry.

Oh and by the way... this is not really the place for this type of discussion. If you wanted your Jetstream article on the page then all you have to do is send a message to the person who removed it and ask them why. Or just put the content back on. Sign up for an account and join the community instead of just being an anonymous IP address. Thanks.

Kinetiscope (talk) 13:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Airfield rubber removal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:24, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]