Distance to Airport

Actually, it was owned by Republic Aircraft (hence the name) for the
longest
time. The "I was here first" arguement unfortunately will not get a
pro-airport person very far. It will envigorate a me-against-you attitude
and impede progress even though it's a true statement. The fact is, both
entities are here now and both have a right to be there so they better
figure out a way to live together.

So that means it's been there since, what the '40s? At least? Give me a
break! Quit being so danged diplomatic, and tell your whining NIMBY
neighbors to shut the hell up.

I swear, pilots have become so worried about stepping on anyone's toes that
we have become tongue-tied -- which is perceived (by the anti-airport crowd)
as acquiescence. In the end, what some of us perceive to be diplomacy is
only fueling the NIMBY fire.

Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:sDsqb.128529$Fm2.107284@attbi_s04...


I swear, pilots have become so worried about stepping on anyone's toes
that
we have become tongue-tied --

...as well as the rest of society.

Being polite (the basis, IIRC, of the word POLITICS) goes BOTH ways and
inferes dealing with reasonable people, not a bunch of overgrown adolesents.


which is perceived (by the anti-airport crowd)
as acquiescence. In the end, what some of us perceive to be diplomacy is
only fueling the NIMBY fire.

Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.

....and assume, at least the first time, that the target of that response
has all their oars in the water.

I hear and respect your points Jay. I should have added more info because
it's not a black and white situation here. Let me explain.

Republic Airport HAS been around since the 1940's. That's true. The
controversy is not over the closure of the airport but to the proposed
changes. That being said, there are (and always will be) a handful of NIMBY
folks who wouldn't mind if the airport was closed.

One proposed change is to move one runway (RWY 1-19) north a few hundred
feet to clear the approach course of obstacles thus enabling a precision
approach. The other major change is to move a taxiway farther away from the
runway to allow for more wingtip clearance. These are the two main proposal
items but there may be others. There is already an ILS approach for RWY 14
and the DH is right smack over the neighborhood in question. Boeing 727's,
737's, and others can and do land on this runway in both good weather and
low ceilings. They live with the occasional large jet at 1AM on takeoff from
RWY 32 (landing it's almost the same noise level as the biz jets.)

The majority of the neighborhood are against these changes because of the
strong possibility that freight companies like UPS and FedEx may set up
regularly scheduled service from here. Right now, they have admitted that
they will not set up shop because of the availability of a precision
approach on only one runway and the inability for their aircraft to land on
RWY 1-19 due to the taxiway issue. They require at least two possible
runways to operate regularly at an airport. Also as we all know, the bulk of
freight operations occur at night.

Although the second ILS would be nice, the rest of this presents a few
difficulties.
* It's hard to convince these people that more large jets operating at night
is a good thing. Probably impossible.
* I'm not 100% behind something that may negatively affect my flying.
Increased operations means longer wait times before take-off and landings
(yes, making inbounds loiter outside of Class D before landing is a common
occurrence here)
* My family likes to sleep at night too
* The same airport mgmt company manages Teterboro and from talks with local
pilots there, the large number of jet traffic is not making life better for
spam cans

The large majority of these people are not against general aviation and
small airplanes in particular. They are not looking to close the airport.
Some of my neighbors even like to bring their kids to the airport to watch
the planes.

So Jay, if I tell them to "shut the hell up" (I know it's just a figure of
speech) without respecting their views, I look like the narrow-minded
airport fool. Taking their points one by one and judging them on their
individual merits is the way to go I think. In dealing with the
narrow-minded NIMBY-types, yes, I think your approach is on the money. They
should be responded to in a calm, stern manner. I don't think most fall into
that category.

I also understand that one can get into a give-an-inch-take-a-mile situation
where they will want to close the airport next but a large portion of the
village's economy relies on the airport.

This is a delicate situation that requires some level-headedness and I'm one
of the few that sees multiple angles.

Regards,

Marco


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:sDsqb.128529$Fm2.107284@attbi_s04...
Actually, it was owned by Republic Aircraft (hence the name) for the
longest
time. The "I was here first" arguement unfortunately will not get a
pro-airport person very far. It will envigorate a me-against-you
attitude
and impede progress even though it's a true statement. The fact is, both
entities are here now and both have a right to be there so they better
figure out a way to live together.

So that means it's been there since, what the '40s? At least? Give me a
break! Quit being so danged diplomatic, and tell your whining NIMBY
neighbors to shut the hell up.

I swear, pilots have become so worried about stepping on anyone's toes
that
we have become tongue-tied -- which is perceived (by the anti-airport
crowd)
as acquiescence. In the end, what some of us perceive to be diplomacy is
only fueling the NIMBY fire.

Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"





Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

This is a delicate situation that requires some level-headedness and I'm
one
of the few that sees multiple angles.

Agreed, Marco. Thanks for the clarification -- it's obviously a much more
complex situation than the usual "Shut the Airport!" nutcases...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:10:32 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

snip


Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.

Careful here. Remember, people tend to respond in kind. Get forceful
and they in turn either get forceful in return, or dig their heels in.
When some one gets forceful with me I start developing an attitude
against what ever it is they are promoting, even if it was something I
had supported.

One thing to consider is the State of Michigan has a video for
airports to use in combating unfriendly neighbors. I believe it can
be obtained from the Michigan Department of Transportation
(aeronautics) in Lansing Michigan. That's at least close.

We've gone through unfriendly neighbors and attempts to close the
airport (3BS). Our fight is one of the examples used on the tape.

Another recent example is the county decided to build a jail. Their
approach is a prime example of how not to go about doing something
like this according to the National Institute of Corrections. They
arbitrarily set up some standards, looked at some sites and kept
changing the standards to fit each site. They excluded the public and
played down any opposition as NIMBY when that was relatively small
part of the opposition. Basically 7 commissioners got together and
decided how they are going to do things. One even made the statement
that the issue was too complex for the public to be included. (great
statement to win support)

Now they have found a county wide group has been formed, that is well
organized, has more than sufficient financial backing to tie the
county up in the court system for years, and they have alienated the
voters to the point where they may not (most likely won't) be able to
even get necessary millages passed. Most likely several commissioners
will be out of a job and the county may end up in deep financial
trouble. Any bond issues will be challenged and put to a referendum.
Plus the Township where they decided to put the thing has told them
they will take them to court as well. The township refused to grant
the county permission to run a sewer from town out to the remote site.
There is far more involved, but this basically covers the area I
wanted to cover.

Incidentally the county wide group has become basically a watchdog
group to make sure they don't put the thing in a residential area,
they use a tried and true methods of site selection that will be
applied uniformly, they investigate alternative forms of
incarceration/treatement such as work release programs and they spend
the county's money wisely.

Had the county commissioners not taken such an elitist attitude to
begin with they'd probably already be under construction. Of course
the *appearance* of having lied to the public (whether justified or
not) hasn't helped their stance. One thing we have to remember about
the general population. They see pilots as a rich and elitist group of
people with expensive toys. They don't realize that *most* small
planes are owned by groups and many of the single owner planes are
old enough to be called, classics. It takes a lot of work to dispel
that notion and to demonstrate just how much money the airport brings
into an area. Some will never listen to logic, but don't make the
ones who might be swayed, more rigid in their stance.

When trying to close the airport the city hired a firm to find out how
much money the little airport brings into the area. The value was
given as a conservative 10 million a year. They said "that can't be
right" and commissioned another study. That one came up with 16
million. People were complaining about the $100,000 plus the city was
paying to run and maintain the airport. Then they discovered all the
money they'd been raking in from parking cars on the airport property
(purchased with federal funds) for the county fair and several antique
shows, was supposed to go to the airport. That alone would have made
the airport show a direct profit. They had been putting the money in
the general fund and claiming any of it used on the airport as a
subsidy. Soooo...What did the city do? Instead of putting all that
money in the airport fund as required, they quit charging for parking
and raised the entrance fees to the events.

18/36 is only 3000 feet long. The expensive subdivision directly off
the south end was/is the one that does the complaining. We wanted to
lengthen the runway. The subdivision said we'd be getting jets in and
they didn't want that. They didn't realize the modern small jets are
quieter than most high performance singles and twins, or that we get 3
or 4 per week already. So...on windy days people like me end up going
over their homes at close to 200 feet when a 4000 foot runway would
have put me near or even at pattern altitude.

In the end they ended up with a compromise. We ended up with lots of
improvements lengthening 06/24, new taxi ways and it looks like a new
$400,000 (give or take) terminal building, but 18/36 is still a short
3000 feet and they still get big planes rattling the shingles. Any
longer on 06/24 and they'd have to move a road and some businesses.

So... I agree with the Immediate, calm, and logical approach, but the
forceful puts you on shaky ground with potential dangerous and counter
productive consequences.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

In article , Roger Halstead
wrote:

Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.

Careful here. Remember, people tend to respond in kind. Get forceful
and they in turn either get forceful in return, or dig their heels in.
When some one gets forceful with me I start developing an attitude
against what ever it is they are promoting, even if it was something I
had supported.

otoh - a wimpy response can be interpreted as weaknessed, inviting
even more outrageous attacks by the anti-airport crowd.

perhaps "forcefully" implies something unintended. Maybe
"emphatically" would be more accurate.

--
Bob Noel

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 12:06:15 GMT, Bob Noel
wrote:

In article , Roger Halstead
wrote:

Whenever we hear someone utter an anti-airport opinion, be it in the
newspaper or in person, I believe we (as pilots) should respond calmly,
logically, immediately and forcefully.

Careful here. Remember, people tend to respond in kind. Get forceful
and they in turn either get forceful in return, or dig their heels in.
When some one gets forceful with me I start developing an attitude
against what ever it is they are promoting, even if it was something I
had supported.

otoh - a wimpy response can be interpreted as weaknessed, inviting
even more outrageous attacks by the anti-airport crowd.

Agreed!


perhaps "forcefully" implies something unintended. Maybe
"emphatically" would be more accurate.

and again I agree.

You are in that area where different people interpret the same
intonations differently. You need to come across as knowledgeable
but not aggressive. One extreme will be taken advantage of and the
other will be seen as a challenge.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)