A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Aerobatics
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Stop the noise



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 22nd 04, 06:00 AM
Earl Grieda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"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.



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.


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.

I have seen again and again where our attitude in the aviation community is
that everyone else in the world is wrong and we are right. Our attitude is
that they need to adapt to us and our activities. This attitude is
perceived by the general public as selfish and arrogant. As long as we
continue with this attitude we will continue to lose airports, and general
public support. We might win an occasional battle but will eventually lose
the war.

Earl G


Ads
  #12  
Old March 22nd 04, 06:41 AM
Tom Sixkiller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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

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.


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.

I have seen again and again where our attitude in the aviation community

is
that everyone else in the world is wrong and we are right.


In lieu of the above, it would be the case that our group is right.
Right/wrong is NOT determined but the volume and shrillness of the tantrum
thrown.


Our attitude is
that they need to adapt to us and our activities.


As above.

This attitude is
perceived by the general public as selfish and arrogant.


As above.

As long as we
continue with this attitude we will continue to lose airports, and general
public support. We might win an occasional battle but will eventually

lose
the war.


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.




  #13  
Old March 22nd 04, 06:46 AM
Ed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually the guy who started STN is a wealthy lawyer.


"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

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.



  #14  
Old March 22nd 04, 06:48 AM
Ed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Right/wrong is NOT determined but the volume and shrillness of the tantrum
thrown.


Yes, and that applies both ways.


  #15  
Old March 22nd 04, 07:20 AM
'Vejita' S. Cousin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
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.


In the above case aerobatics were only performed during daylight hours.
To my line of thinking people have a right to live in an area free of
excessive noise. The equestion becomes what's excessive?
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. But despite the fact that they choose to live next
to a major airport they feel they have the right to a 'quite' home.
How many times have peopel complained about noise only to discover that
the noise was from a 747 crossing overhead at 5,000ft.
So for me the question is does a compromise exist? Often it doesn't
because the anti-noise groups don't want quiet they what everyone else
gone But we do not have all the facts of the case, maybe pilots are
making excessive noise. 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.
  #17  
Old March 22nd 04, 09:55 AM
David Cartwright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ed" wrote in message
. com...
The problem is, there are many more of them than there are of us. By
"them", I mean people who would just as soon not have airplanes doing
aerobatics directly over their houses. By that definition, "them" is a
large proportion of the general population. Hell, I fly acro, and I
wouldn't want an acro box directly over my house! How about you?


One would assume that the aviation authorities would also prefer people not
to be doing aerobatics over someone's house, given the potential
consequences in the event of an engine or other failure.

D.


  #20  
Old March 22nd 04, 02:39 PM
airads
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.