Stop the noise

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.

That's a pretty far stretch.

They
don't like the effects that the existence of other people have on their
lives.

I would imagine that depends on what those effects are. When people live
close
enough to affect each other there are frequently compromises to be made if
everyone is to be reasonably happy.

Partly right, I'd say. What they hate is that someone can afford an
airplane
for a toy, just like the environazis hate those who can have an SUV for a
toy.

In speaking to people who really dislike GA planes (even in the BED area) I
have never found this to be the case. Where do you get this from?

And leave the SUV issue out of this. Your statement is screwy anyhow; are
you implying that because someone can't afford a SUV that they hide this by
claiming the SUVs are bad for the environment?

(Teacherjh) wrote in message ...

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


Maybe when they have to give up their leaf blowers.

Jose

Or when they have to give up their noisy automobiles. "Sorry pal, all
the freeways are shut down from now on since they exceed the new
property owner's DB noise ratings. Enjoy the side-street traffic."

pacplyer

On 20 Mar 2004 08:08:57 -0800, (airads) wrote:

Feb. 24 - The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association on Tuesday
provided initial support to four Massachusetts pilots - all AOPA
members - facing a lawsuit filed by a few residents. The suit alleges
that the noise signature from the aerobatics performed by the pilots
caused significant harm; they are seeking approximately $1 million in
damages. The pilots are based at various airports, some 20 miles from
the homes of the litigants.

"This is potentially an issue that could affect all pilots engaged in
any type of air commerce - from a Cub to a 747," said AOPA President
Phil Boyer. "We are fully prepared to take this through the federal
system if necessary.

I wonder if they've considered getting a "junk yard lawyer" and
counter suit for harrasment.

If the AOPA is serious they really need to come up with a good
countersuit that would cost those filing the original lawsuit far more
than what they are aksing. That they have caused great financial harm
(pilots having to sell planes to meet expenses) is already an arguing
point.

I think in these cases we should not just fight the case but take
agressive counter action "if possible" that would make those
considering similar actions in the future to back up and consider the
consequences.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-108x.html

Frank

They are also suing some Harley Drivers (which to me
is something that the police DO need to do more about, but a suit is silly).

I just read the AOPA editorial, and it seems that the suit against the
four aerobats wasn't at all silly. Three? out of four? of them had to
sell their airplanes to pay their legal expenses. So the litigants
achieved a good part of their goal (assuming the planes weren't simply
purchased by pilots who plan to do the same business in the same box).

That's the problem with lawsuits. They tend to work.

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

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...
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.

That's a pretty far stretch.

Not really. http://tinyurl.com/3gveu Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior, by
Helmut Schoeck

Roger Halstead wrote:

If the AOPA is serious they really need to come up with a good
countersuit that would cost those filing the original lawsuit far more
than what they are aksing.

The problem there is that they have formed an organization, and it is the org
that is sueing these pilots. You don't have grounds for a countersuit unless this
one is settled in favor of the pilots. After that occurs, they'll disolve the
organization, and you won't have anyone to sue. Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit (though
they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide to do so).

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

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:27:02 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

The problem there is that they have formed an organization, and it is the org
that is sueing these pilots.

It sounds like a jurisdictional issue to me. I doubt the local court
has the right to countermand the FAA's decisions.

Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit (though
they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

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

Cub Driver wrote:


Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit
(though they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide
to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

Yet the pilots still had to sell their aircraft?

- Andrew

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:19:03 -0500, Andrew Gideon
wrote:

Cub Driver wrote:


Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit
(though they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide
to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

Yet the pilots still had to sell their aircraft?

They don't have the benefit of their lawyers doing everything for
free.