Stop the noise

I live right under the aerobatic area northwest of KBED near I-495. About
12 years ago I had had enough of the noise and went looking for the plane
that was the worst offender. That led to my becoming a pilot and now, I do
enjoy watching for a few hours, but not continuously.

A wonderful story. Thank you!


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

In article ,
('Vejita' S. Cousin) wrote:

To my line of thinking people have a right to live in an area free of
excessive noise. The equestion becomes what's excessive?

A huge obstacle is this type of discussion is the fact
that people's perception/recognition of noise is not
rational/logical in that the volume of the sound is not the
main determining factor of whether or not a sound is called
noise.

For example, consider the noise of a dripping faucet (which is
in reality is pretty quiet). It can keep people awake, but
the same people can sleep through louder sounds. We also
have a sensitivity to the importance of sounds (e.g., a telephone
might wake us up quicker than a louder sound).

--
Bob Noel

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:Rvo7c.55569$Cb.862604@attbi_s51...
You know, I'm going to go out on a bit of a limb here and say that I'm
not
entirely unsympathetic to these folks. After years of having my nerves
and
eardrums shattered by every jackass on a Harley Davidson or every
teenager
with a hotrod, my tolerance for someone else's noisy recreational
activities
has hit an alltime low.

Agree 100%. Even though I've been riding motorcycles for over 25 years,
my
blood boils every time some idiot rides by on a Harley with straight
pipes.

They make us all look bad, and bring on lawsuits like the one in question.

Of course, the REAL lawsuit should be filed against the police, who refuse
to enforce the existing laws. Straight pipes *are* illegal, at least
around
here.

Here too.

It used be charged under "Disturbing the Peace", but that was before police
spent half their time on "drug enforcement" or "revenue gathering". Barely
thirty years ago, that was the primary function of smaller town police (any
sort of disturbance), but now...

"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message
...
in article , Tom Sixkiller at
wrote on 3/21/04 9:41 PM:


"Earl Grieda" wrote in message
link.net...

From what I have been able to determine from interacting with members
of
the
local anti-airport crowd is the opposite. They, generally speaking, do
not
have any problem with how an individual spends their discretionary
income.
The problem arises when the "toy", along with its associated use, has a
constant, repetitive, day-in and day-out negative effect on the lives
of
thousands of others who would normally be indifferant towards the
activity.

Doesn't explain the cases (just about every one) where they built homes
near
airports that already existed.

Define "near". If they built a home 50 feet from the end of a runway, I'd
have zero sympathy for them. If they built a house a half-mile away, and
were suddenly inundated with aerobatic maneuvers 300 feet above their
rooftops, I would consider their gripes legitimate.

Anyone who built even a half-mile from an airport is nuts,

And we as a nation continue to slide (call it whimsically "politically
correct") as we kowtow to one tantrum after another. A nation of brats
will
not survive.

Is it your view that everyone else's opinion is a "tantrum"? Just
wondering.

If that's what I'd said, you have a point, but try re-reading what's
written.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
The problem that these people have is not really with airplanes. They just
don't like other people. They don't like the evidence of other people. They
don't like the effects that the existence of other people have on their
lives.

interesting.......



They assume that flying aerobatics is needless recreation -- as if
recreation is somehow something that we can live without. That assumption is
entirely unfounded. They have built their argument on a rotten foundation.
You simply cannot ask everyone who bothers you to stop bothering you or
leave the planet.

............or pay you millions of dollars.

People need to learn to be more tolerant of being constantly touched by
others, hearing their noise, putting up with their smell, and seeing them
everywhere. Those who cannot be tolerant will suffer endlessly, no matter
how many lawsuits they file.

well put

What bugs me about this whole thing is that these pilots were
operating within the framework of the FARs. Some of them had to sell
their airplanes to meet legal fees. The acro box was eventually moved.
Now they want the FAA to require A/C registration numbers to be
enlarged and located under the wings "where they belong".
Their beef is with the FAA. Unfortunately, it looks like these pilots
are going to take it on the chin.


Frank

"'Vejita' S. Cousin" wrote:
...
I'm not familar with the above group, but here in Seattle we have
a
group that lives next to KSEA (class B Seattle-Tacoma International)
which
constantly complains about the noise. Since no one is going to
close KSEA
to night operations or even consider reducing the number of
operations
they are out of luck.
...
Either way local governments should not pass laws
to control airspace. Somethings should be handled at the federal
level,
others at the state level, and others at the local level.

May be more than academic interest that where an airport has air
carrier ops, fed law specifically reserves jurisdiction over noise
matters to the FAA. Otherwise, it's the thorny legal mess of whether
the federal preemption in general trumps, and I believe in general
courts won't object to reasonable restrictions. There's local
prohibitions against late-night student touch-goes and loud jets after
a certain time in a lot of places. Not that I agree, I believe here,
to the extent the issue is beyond citizens' selfish perception
problems, it may be the prolonged noise footprint rather than mere
decibels, compared to now and then in takeoff/landing ops but greater
peak db.

Fred F.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:00:33 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

You simply cannot ask everyone who bothers you to stop bothering you

Municipal ordinances generally prohibit folks from making noise before
7am and after 10pm.

Sure they do.

Even where such ordinances actually exist and (even more rarely) someone
actually tries to enforce them, they really don't reduce noise much. They
can't. You might as well try to pass a law ordering everybody to stop
breathing on Sundays.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:59:02 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:


It used be charged under "Disturbing the Peace", but that was before police
spent half their time on "drug enforcement" or "revenue gathering". Barely
thirty years ago, that was the primary function of smaller town police (any
sort of disturbance), but now...

There is a problem with your theory Tom. As a police officer for
almost 15 years there are even rules that we have to follow. As far
as disturbing the peace, where I was from, there had to be a
complaintant. The police officers Peace could not be broken. He can
be cussed at, yelled at, have a car go right beside him with the glass
pulsating from the base, what ever and he can not do anything about
it. But if I had a citizen complain about it, then I could. It is
the courts that have made it that way. They would throw the case out
without someone else complaining. And as far as your "drug
enforcement" and "Revenue gathering" comment, Most of my 10 hour
shift consisted of going call to call. And I would say approximately
80% +- 10% of those calls involved alcohol or drugs in one fashion or
another. Either it was a domestic violence situation where one or all
parties involved had something on board or a burglary or theft so the
thief could get some quick cash for their fix. If I brought back 2
tickets to the station at the end of my shift that would be a good
night. And that is usually because someone did something real stupid
in front of me and half a dozen other people and they all look at me
like "Well, you going to stop him".

So stop your generalization of officers. Most out there are trying to
do thier job and do it right. I am not saying that there are a few
out there that do make us look bad, just like here in the aviation
world. I have been a pilot for almost 8 years now and have seen my
share of people who dont care about what others think and bust Fars
all the time. But it is the system that ties their hands and prevents
them from doing things, not because they dont want to.

Scott

"airads" wrote in message
om...
Now they want the FAA to require A/C registration numbers to be
enlarged and located under the wings "where they belong".

On this side of the pond, you have to have your registration on the
underside of your left wing anyway.

D.

I'm not defending the way these people are dealing with their issues, but
the pratice area for the KBED-based flight school which is involved in these
suits is 15-20 NM away from the airport. If that's "near", then it's
practically impossible to live in eastern Massachusetts without being near
three or four airports. It would be entirely unreasonable for prospective
house buyers to consider that small plane noise might be a problem in this
area.

If anyone is interested, the practice area in question is NW of KBED, N of
the Ft. Devens MOA.


"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...
Doesn't explain the cases (just about every one) where they built homes
near
airports that already existed.