If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
We need more property manager expertise in today's airport managers.
True -- but more importantly we need stupid, know-nothing bureaucrats to keep their hands off the airports. Our airport in Iowa City is a perfect example. At one time, it owned everything around. Then, in the 50s and 60s, it sold a bunch of land to a nearby farmer. Then, in the 80s and 90s, the airport bought most of it back for clear zones. That farmer's family made MILLIONS on *that* act of stupidity. Here's an even worse example: Recently, in an effort to make the airport self-sufficient, a previous airport commission carved off a chunk of airport land, named it "North Airport Commerce Park", and tried to lease it out to businesses, in hopes of providing a steady stream of non-tax income to keep the airport running. Great idea -- until the city "experts" got ahold of it. After an incredible series of bureaucratic blunders our airport is now FAR worse off than before. Example: When creating the "commerce park" our city "experts" counted the easements into the total square footage, and came up with a per-acre priced based on land that no one could use. When the error was discovered, they simply upped the price per acre to keep the value the same, because "that's what they needed". This raised the price far above surrounding available land, and no one wanted it. Another example: Wal-Mart wanted to buy all the land, for a fantastic price. Some idiot city bureaucrat didn't file all the zoning paperwork correctly, which gave the anti-Wal-Mart activists a way to legally challenge Wal-Mart's purchase. After several years of screwing around in court, with no end in sight, Wal-Mart just said "To hell with Iowa City" and walked away from the deal. The land lost a prime retail area, and the airport lost millions of dollars. Now, after sitting empty for years, the city is selling the land off at bargain prices. And NOT giving the airport the money! So, rather than making the airport self-sufficient, we have: 1. Lost our North/South runway 2. Lost land for future expansion 3. Not gained a nickel for the airport, because the city is going to keep the money from the land purchase. 4. The businesses they're selling to are crap. Warehouses, outside storage -- all the junk you DON'T want around your airport. Talk about a cluster-f*ck. It's truly been an education in just how bad government bureaucrats can be. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
On Apr 2, 9:47*pm, Stella Starr wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote: If you go look at the local paper (it takes a while to load, as they're back in the 20th century and put a PDF of the thing on their website) you'll note a couple interesting things, including a number of runway overrun accidents in recent years. *And after the jump (when the story's continued to page 17) the aerial photo shows the city snuggled right up * around the landing strip, a clear example of bad metro development. Its not surprising. The instrument approach into SMO is one of the most challenging I've ever flow. It puts you about 1,000 feet AGL at less than a mile from the numbers. I have a hard time landing in the Mooney w/o running over. I'm sure the jet jocks that fly in there regularly must be cheating the approach. I've broken out more than once only to look straight down at the numbers. Technically its listed as a circle approach (even though its aligned with the runway) but I've never seen anyone do the circle, certainly not any jets. -robert |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
[Default] On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:47:18 -0700, Stella Starr
wrote: We need more property manager expertise in today's airport managers. We need the appropriate parties to bring suit against the city of Santa Monica for permitting housing development so close to the airport. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote: [Default] On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:47:18 -0700, Stella Starr wrote: We need more property manager expertise in today's airport managers. We need the appropriate parties to bring suit against the city of Santa Monica for permitting housing development so close to the airport. Have you contacted the Caaliafornia Pilots' Assn? -- Remove _'s from email address to talk to me. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
In article Stella Starr writes:
If you go look at the local paper (it takes a while to load, as they're back in the 20th century and put a PDF of the thing on their website) you'll note a couple interesting things, including a number of runway overrun accidents in recent years. And after the jump (when the story's continued to page 17) the aerial photo shows the city snuggled right up around the landing strip, a clear example of bad metro development. http://www.smdp.com/site/archives/032908.pdf The story tells of a proposal to buy up homes to give a little safety room around the airport, but a lot of homeowners resist the idea, which would be pretty spendy (California real estate -- ya THINK?!) and kind of after the fact. We need more property manager expertise in today's airport managers. I think you will find that there were houses just across the street from both ends of the runway at Santa Monica well over 30 years ago. I know that they were there 30 years ago when I first flew in and out of SMO. They were nowhere near new, then, either. I would expect that 50 to 60 years back there were houses at both ends. Yes, we need to not build up housing in the desirable area around airports, but this is not a recent problem. As I mentioned before, they had a big "NO JETS" on the slope just before runway 21 back in 1977, which was about the time they lost on banning jets then. (I think they claimed jets were noisier, and lost when it was pointed out that some jets are quieter than props. But, that was a long time ago, and I was not that intimately involved with activity there.) Alan |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:58:43 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
wrote: In article , Larry Dighera wrote: [Default] On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:47:18 -0700, Stella Starr wrote: We need more property manager expertise in today's airport managers. We need the appropriate parties to bring suit against the city of Santa Monica for permitting housing development so close to the airport. Have you contacted the Caaliafornia Pilots' Assn? I'm not personally involved in the issue, but the CPA is a good group: http://www.calpilots.org |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
Well when you break out why not circle left or right? It would be a good
opportunity to shed some altitude. John Robert M. Gary wrote: On Apr 2, 9:47 pm, Stella Starr wrote: Larry Dighera wrote: If you go look at the local paper (it takes a while to load, as they're back in the 20th century and put a PDF of the thing on their website) you'll note a couple interesting things, including a number of runway overrun accidents in recent years. And after the jump (when the story's continued to page 17) the aerial photo shows the city snuggled right up around the landing strip, a clear example of bad metro development. Its not surprising. The instrument approach into SMO is one of the most challenging I've ever flow. It puts you about 1,000 feet AGL at less than a mile from the numbers. I have a hard time landing in the Mooney w/o running over. I'm sure the jet jocks that fly in there regularly must be cheating the approach. I've broken out more than once only to look straight down at the numbers. Technically its listed as a circle approach (even though its aligned with the runway) but I've never seen anyone do the circle, certainly not any jets. -robert |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
On Apr 4, 9:08*am, The Visitor
wrote: Well when you break out why not circle left or right? It would be a good opportunity to shed some altitude. In theory you can tell the tower you are going to do that. I've never flow the approach without a warning that there was a Gulf Stream or similar in trail though. I'm not sure what the tower would do if you said you needed to circle but I wouldn't be surprised if they sent you back to approach. The "line up" for the approach is pretty far out; likely because of the dense LA traffic and the fact that there are always several jets on the approach. Interestingly tower always provides speed checks on final. Its the only tower I've ever seen that does that. As you cross the fence you get a "your fast"; "on speed" etc. -Robert |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
Ah, good point. Didn't know it was that busy.
I guess if the ban sticks, a lot of the income will dry up and the airport will be closer, to being closed. Just one more nail.... John Robert M. Gary wrote: On Apr 4, 9:08 am, The Visitor wrote: Well when you break out why not circle left or right? It would be a good opportunity to shed some altitude. In theory you can tell the tower you are going to do that. I've never flow the approach without a warning that there was a Gulf Stream or similar in trail though. I'm not sure what the tower would do if you said you needed to circle but I wouldn't be surprised if they sent you back to approach. The "line up" for the approach is pretty far out; likely because of the dense LA traffic and the fact that there are always several jets on the approach. Interestingly tower always provides speed checks on final. Its the only tower I've ever seen that does that. As you cross the fence you get a "your fast"; "on speed" etc. -Robert |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic
On Apr 4, 1:25*pm, The Visitor
wrote: Ah, good point. Didn't know it was that busy. I guess if the ban sticks, a lot of the income will dry up and the airport will be closer, to being closed. Just one more nail.... I suspect that is the point. It would be very difficult to close SMO right now because of the continuous stream of jets flying in. This is the primary airport to the stars and generally the well off in LA. By slowly reducing the airport until its just Cessnas they can eventually close it without too much attention. Next best airport is probably Van Nuys but that's over the mountain. In LA no one measures driving distance in miles, just hours. So Van Nuys is perhaps an hour and a half from SMO, maybe 2 hours. -robert |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which Came First, the Santa Monica Airport, Or Those Who Chose To Build Their Homes Adjacent To It? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 16 | May 7th 07 10:34 PM |
Annual Xmas Post - Santa Traffic.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 21st 06 02:55 AM |
Santa Barbara Airport Sculpture | Fish | Soaring | 3 | October 27th 06 12:23 AM |
Santa Monica (KSMO) Tips or Gotchas? | Hamish Reid | Piloting | 9 | July 12th 05 11:51 PM |
Can they do this? Restrict airport to IFR traffic only? | [email protected] | Piloting | 54 | April 23rd 05 05:34 PM |