Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

wrote in message
...

Lots of airports have perfectly reasonable noise abatement procedures that
don't appear in the A/FD. KCCB specifically is a case in point.

It appears the system is broken.


What "system" would that be?

Locally created noise abatement procedures are fine when they simply
identify noise sensitive areas and ask pilots to avoid them. They can be
dangerous when they tell pilots where to fly in a way that appears
mandatory.

Not if everyone is following them, which is the whole point.

The system is broken because a perfectly reasonable procedure is not
"official" to the lawyer types like you, who would then ignore it
because they are within their legal rights to do so and cause a
conflict.

There is no difference in practice between a local noise abatement
procedure and an established ATC procedure. The only difference is
in the legal fine print.



And if they do, the noise complaints, lawsuits and pressure on local
authority mounts to turn that noisy, worthless airport into a WalMart
and stand a good chance of being in conflict with the existing traffic.

So, what you are saying is, if the procedure isn't in the A/FD for
whatever reason, just ignore it, no matter the consequences to the
airport and despite the fact that the rest of the traffic is following
those procedures and doing so invites a conflict because the law is
on your side?


No, what I'm saying is local actions cannot regulate routes, altitudes, or
any other flight procedures. Do you really think the CCB "noise abatement"
procedure limits exposure to lawsuits? It conflicts with the ODP. What if
a departing aircraft comes to grief while following the noise abatement
procedure?

Of course it limits lawsuits; it limits noise lawsuits.

If a departing (or arriving, CCB has procedures for both) aircraft comes
to grief following the noise abatement procedures, it will only be because
some anal legal eagle such as yourself chose to ignore them and caused
havoc in an otherwise peaceful pattern full of students expecting the
rest of the traffic to be following the same procedures.

As much as I hate to say it, I think a rule is needed along the lines
of "unless deviation is required for safety, all local noise abatement
procedures at non-towered airports shall be followed" and that they
all get published in the A/FD just to take care of people like you
who would rather be right than safe.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.