Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:20:58 -0400, Morgans wrote:

There are many, many airports that have structures or natural obstacles much
closer than this one. Yet, airplanes land and takeoff from these places for
many years with no incidents. Occasionally there are problems, but that is
why you buy insurance.

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path? is the Subject, note the ?

You might even have to decide to give the airplane
to the insurance company someday, if a particularly crappy incident happens
to you - if you take up being a pilot. Planes and houses don't grow on
trees, but they are much easier to replace than people.

I suppose you could say you are at a higher risk if you live within two
miles of any airport. Is it a reasonable risk? I think so.

Two miles and 20 meters is entirely 2 different discussions.

Are the houses in the airpark in an overly risky location? No, I don't
think so. Are they at a higher risk? Probably, but most would say they are
at a reasonable risk level.

So what you are telling me is that it is a reasonable risk to live next to
a landing strip/field in relation for what convenience?

Flying will put you at a higher risk than many other activities in your
life. The rewards outweigh the risks, to the people that stay in it. You
can choose to live your life safe and boring, or live your life rich and
full of reward, and not be afraid of the somewhat higher risks. I know what
I choose, as do most of the flying folks in this group.

If you believe that life is rewarding based upon the level of risk you
take, I feel very sorry for you.

This comes from a risk taker of the penultimate degree.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!