http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8464274.stm

It seems to me that if the news organisations are able to drop corespondents, camera/sound crews and the like on Ground Zero before the aid efforts arrive, that there is something very wrong with the world.

How long does it take to bung a correspondent on a plane compared to loading a cargo plane with aid?

no surprise there as USA government dont want to help, coincidental that it took ages to help katrina victims too? coincidental that because the Iraq enquiry is coming out their government needed something to distract them from it? I wonder if that earthquake weather changing machine H.A.A.R.P really is to blame or its a load or rubbish makes you think though

Quicker if the corespondent and his/her entourage helped with the loading

The BBC has their news anchorman on the ground.

As far as I was aware, the problem is largely one of airport capacity. To put it simply, there is only one runway that safe to use and it takes each plane a certain amount of time to either land and taxi off or taxi and take off on the runway and you have to leave a 'safe space' period between them. Plus you need somewhere for the planes to sit when they are on the ground that aren't too close to each other either.

Combine that with the maximum size of plane that can land on the runway and you end up with a maximum amount of cargo can be brought in per day. If you include the fact a fair chunk of that is heavy construction gear to get the infrastructure back up and running, you've only got so much food and medical supplies you can get in by plane.

Jon