Stop the noise

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 18:07:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

This case has been covered at length in GA News.

What a bunch of friggin' idiots. I hope the judge summarily throws the case
out -- and fines the plaintiffs for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

Too bad our system doesn't allow for such penalties.

Unfortunately the judge is not only not dismissing the case, but has
denied all motions for it to be transferred to Federal District court.

Evidently there is a real problem under that particular "box," and the
folks opposed to the aerobats include more than one pilot. To live
there and stay sane requires that you close the doors and windows and
keep the air conditioning on high, all summer.

There are nuts on both sides of the issue, and from what I hear, the
AOPA should save its powder for another battle.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:29:04 -0500, Saryon
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 18:07:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

This case has been covered at length in GA News.

What a bunch of friggin' idiots. I hope the judge summarily throws the case
out -- and fines the plaintiffs for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

Too bad our system doesn't allow for such penalties.

Unfortunately the judge is not only not dismissing the case, but has
denied all motions for it to be transferred to Federal District court.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

There are nuts on both sides of the issue, and from what I hear, the
AOPA should save its powder for another battle.

Yeah, after re-reading the issue, it seems they are flying aerobatics from
dawn till dusk, all summer long. (Of course, that's what the reactionary
website says -- not a very reliable source.)

THAT might get to be too much, even for me.

I wonder why they don't just compromise on a four-hour window per day, or
something?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 05:52:06 -0500, Cub Driver
wrote:


Evidently there is a real problem under that particular "box," and the
folks opposed to the aerobats include more than one pilot. To live
there and stay sane requires that you close the doors and windows and
keep the air conditioning on high, all summer.

Well, I live at one edge of the box. The path to/from the practice
area goes right next to my house, so where I am I get the flights
coming, going, and during maneuvers, and that's not restricted to
aerobatics. I don't have to close my windows during the summer. The
practice area itself is centered over I-495, I-290, and the industrial
areas of Marlboro/Hudson at the mall.

Standard bookings are 12 hours/day, 2hr blocks, takes at least 1/2 to
preflight and get to the practice area, 45min, then leave. Total,
4hr/day onsite, and that's if the aerobatic aircraft are booked for
100% of their possible bookings. However, it should be noted that
they're not just griping about aerobatics, they want to "deal with the
unnecessary noise that is a direct consequence of unnecessary
recreational flying. We believe that such activities force you to
subsidize them by giving up your property, your privacy, your peace
and your quiet so that a wealthy few may zoom about in their noisy
little airplanes." That is targeting normal PPL and instrument and
commercial maneuvers, etc. Their end-goal is to make pilots *BUY*
their practice areas and go fly over that instead.

The group in question is headed up by a lawyer who is doing it all
pro-bono. I don't know of any pilots on the stop-the-noise crew, but
of course just like they're griping that we don't paint 50' tall
N-numbers on the aircraft so they can't write in and complain, they
don't list themselves by name on their site either so it's hard to
tell who they really are.

The people aren't even contending that any FAR's or laws have been
broken. I believe that airspace is the reserve of the Federal
Government, so it seems to be a proper request to have it moved out of
state court.

There are nuts on both sides of the issue, and from what I hear, the
AOPA should save its powder for another battle.

Dunno. They're targeting *all* aircraft doing anything within earshot
of them. Where does it stop?


On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:29:04 -0500, Saryon
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 18:07:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

This case has been covered at length in GA News.

What a bunch of friggin' idiots. I hope the judge summarily throws the case
out -- and fines the plaintiffs for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

Too bad our system doesn't allow for such penalties.

Unfortunately the judge is not only not dismissing the case, but has
denied all motions for it to be transferred to Federal District court.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

I don't know of any pilots on the stop-the-noise crew, but
of course just like they're griping that we don't paint 50' tall
N-numbers on the aircraft so they can't write in and complain, they
don't list themselves by name on their site either so it's hard to
tell who they really are.

I find this statement extraordinarily funny/ironic, coming as it does from
an anonymous poster.

There are nuts on both sides of the issue, and from what I hear, the
AOPA should save its powder for another battle.

Dunno. They're targeting *all* aircraft doing anything within earshot
of them. Where does it stop?

Thanks for clarifying the issue.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dunno. They're targeting *all* aircraft doing anything within earshot
of them. Where does it stop?

Thanks for clarifying the issue.

Upon re-reading my response, this statement comes across as sarcastic -- and
I didn't mean it that way.

Your post truly did clarify the issue for me -- thanks.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:02:34 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

I don't know of any pilots on the stop-the-noise crew, but
of course just like they're griping that we don't paint 50' tall
N-numbers on the aircraft so they can't write in and complain, they
don't list themselves by name on their site either so it's hard to
tell who they really are.

I find this statement extraordinarily funny/ironic, coming as it does from
an anonymous poster.

Difference is that I'm doing this for spam avoidance. I'm more than
happy to give real contact info to those who ask for it. Check your
email.

Take care.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:52:48 -0500, Saryon wrote:

Difference is that I'm doing this for spam avoidance.

Then don't use a domain that possibly could be available or be in use.
use a non existing/invalid TLD.

#m
--
A far-reaching proposal from the FBI (...) would require all broadband
Internet providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire
their networks to support easy wiretapping by police.
http://news.com.com/2100-1028-5172948.html

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:26:22 GMT, Martin Hotze
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:52:48 -0500, Saryon wrote:

Difference is that I'm doing this for spam avoidance.

Then don't use a domain that possibly could be available or be in use.
use a non existing/invalid TLD.

I rather thought I had since I do occasionally check to see that mail
would bounce if someone did attempt to mail me:

; DiG 9.2.1 yourlifetime.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 64708
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0

but fine, if it makes you both feel better.

Saryon wrote:

Dunno. They're targeting *all* aircraft doing anything within earshot
of them. Where does it stop?

According to AOPA, they also have plans to sue motorcycle owners.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.