Stop the noise

"John Doe" wrote
Because if you *don't*, you're giving the extremists and rabid
anti-aviation people all the ammo they need.

It doesn't matter, they have all the ammo they need, hopefully they'll
just do the honorable thing and turn the gun around on themselves.
There is no appeasing some of these, maybe you're not one of those,
but you know they exist. Just like on the pilot side, there are the
ones hellbent on ruining it for the rest of us. I know the type, they'd
also try to help in the airport survival but then they'd go out and
intentionally go **** someone off. It'd always be hard to explain
to the neighbors and only make matters worse - I'm not denying
they exist, and what that one pilot did to you after you 'asked' him
to limit his activities over your house, I wouldnt defend.

If you managed to **** me off, a person who served on a flight crew in
the service of this country and formerly gung-ho supporter, even once
proudly
wearing a Pratt and Whitney round motor belt buckle, imagine how livid
others
in the general public are becoming.

I gotta say something here, as this is the second time you've mentioned
your previous somewhat pro-aviation feelings, and often I've seen many
in the anti-aviation groups say the same thing - how they used to be this
or that. Some people are prone to bitching. Some people are prone to
not letting things get to them as much. Some like to jump into fights,
make a lot of noise, and feel self-important for being in a militant
anti-something cause. I'm speaking more of some of your counterparts
than you, and after your last post it sounds like you might not come
back. But, to me anyway, you could be the most decorated pilot there
ever was, but if you're a whackjob, you're a whackjob, regardless of
what previous aviation manufacturer flag you waived. If you've got
something constructive, I dont care if you've never stepped foot in
an airplane if it's something that can help the situation.

Reach out. Talk to us. Work with us. The so-called efforts to accomodate
the
public that you cite haven't been applied to here at all. It's a joke,
right?

Maybe it's a joke there, doesnt mean it is everywhere else. Isn't here.
It's been a few times the city tried to shovel something through, getting
the public on it's side, when it was many of those people who'd get
screwed later with more noise. Example: a tower for our uncontrolled
field. You'd think that users who want the airport to survive would jump
all over this as it'd make it even harder to do away with the airport.
You'd
think the neighbors would hate it as it'd guarantee the long term survival
of
the airport. The city had the neighbors begging for the tower when they
were done with them. The city said 'that way we can keep a closer eye
on all these (supposed) violaters', 'we can take back control of the sky
over your house' (they got tired of the FAA telling them they have no
jurisdiction above the ground, nevermind this'd be an FAA regulated
contract tower). What they didnt mention was little things like PAYING
FOR IT. Since they always take from the airport fund, and love to
show how broke it is all the time, how would they continue to fund
the tower and it's employees. Can you say 'more airport revenue needed'
and how's that done? More tenants, more fuel sales, charter service, maybe
even airline service - eventually the thing the neighbors fought the
hardest,
a longer runway! They also failed to mention that often towers do what
they need for traffic, as in not follow some voluntary noise abatement plan
if safety or traffic warrant. Like a right hand pattern, or longer upwind
or downwind, etc etc. Sometimes it's just a matter of education, and in the
end, everyone was against the tower and the city dropped the issue.
So the neighbors won, but they didnt even know what the fight was. Not
one of them pointed out those facts above, it was all users/pilots. You
could say it was self-serving, but the implications of the tower would
hurt them more than it'd hurt me.
Just because some haven't reached out, talked, and worked with you,
dont generalize. It's a two way street.

In case you don't get my drift, I've had more than enough, I've patiently
tolerated more than enough and I've been radicalized.

Well, there you have it, radicalized - just like I said before, a militant
anti-something cause, this one aviation. Usually these types are not
new to their anti-something leanings. They usually just add to the
problem and offer little in the way of solutions. Do me a favor and
don't parade your kids around for your cause, holding the signs YOU
made and YOU believe in. Have all the free speech you want, just
dont prostitute out your kids - they may not agree with you when, and
if, you let them have an opinion of their own.
I don't know about some of you, but I'd feel pretty lousy about myself
being 'radicalized' into any cause - short of kill or be killed, that's a
cause worth fighting for. This one though is being fought by a small
vocal inflammatory minority that are getting 'kookier' by the day and
could be in danger of alienating themselves out of any logical person's
thoughts or feelings.

Too long as usual,
Chris

Paul Sengupta wrote:

A couple of years ago there was the case of the "Guildford
aerobatic pilot" which became famous in the pilot magazines
here. Pilots...yes, pilots...from the Guildford area wrote in to
the magazines complaining about the incessant noise from the
pilot who did aeros in the vicinity of Guildford.

There was a pilot named Clancy (IIRC) that did a few airshows which I attended. His
wife did the naration for his act. Lots of low-level stuff in a Pitts. His wife spent
most of the show bragging about how loud his engine was (she was pretty loud
herself). I sure wouldn't want to be anywhere near his practice area.

George Patterson
Treason is ne'er successful, Sir; what then be the reason? Why, if treason
be successful, Sir, then none dare call it treason.

Yep, 06C it is. The procedure is voluntary, but, as I said, there are
citizen "police" recording which based pilots don't play along. I
usually try not to trigger the governmental immune system by not looking
like a virus (low keyed, non confrontational). So, I play along. After
all, if I fly a "normal" pattern out of RWY 11, I may broadside someone
flying the "voluntary" procedure.

I often wondered how much it would cost to move the two cronies. Gotta
be cheaper than the loss of a life running this goofy pattern.

Mike

Dave Stadt wrote:
Sounds like Schaumburg. The departure procedures to the east are absurd and
dangerous. Ought to be a law against such nonsense. Far as I know the
procedures are voluntary.

"Mike Spera" wrote in message
...

Interesting debate. I too have no use for old cranks who live near an
airport and constantly complain about the noise. But, aerobatic practice
boxes are not published anywhere. Not sure I can defend a "tough $*^!"
attitude on the part of aerobatic jockeys.

We have a similar problem. I have owned an airplane for over ten years.
We live a couple of miles down the road from the airport. We could live
closer, BUT we chose to live here because we did not want to put up with
the noise. Now, 2 old cranks (hey, I'm over 50, I can say it) have
harassed their village and the police enough that a "noise abatement"
procedure was put in place. To avoid bothering these fine citizens (who
bought homes right next to an airport that preceded their houses by 20
years), airplanes now must fly an extended 2.5 mile upwind to, you
guessed it, my house.

I have to draw the line here pardner. My house was here before THE
PATTERN was moved. In addition, flying this non-standard, 2+ mile upwind
is inherently DANGEROUS to those transients who are not aware of this
absurd procedure. It puts aircraft dangerously close (2 miles) to
O'Hare's innermost ring. The 2 crabbies also had touch and gos
eliminated in this "procedure". They even have "airport volunteers" park
their keesters at the airport with a handheld radio to record any
"violators". Those N-numbers based at the airport are sent reminders if
they violate this unsafe, voluntary procedure. For a time, they were
even contemplating terminating the lease (hangar/tiedown) of repeat
"violators". It appears the village attorney talked some sense into them
and they dropped the threat. They have taken in over $10 million in
federal funds and this type of action might attract the FAA into the fray.

So, I can see the beef to some extent. At least move the box around so
the same homes don't get pummeled forever.

Flexibility won't kill you, but inflexibility might. Remember, you're in
RANGE!!!

Good Luck,
Mike




__________________________________________________ __________________________
___

Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -

http://www.uncensored-news.com

The Worlds Uncensored News Source







__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

"SeeAndAvoid" wrote in message
news
"Tarver Engineering" wrote
If you do like Campbell and claim there can be no compromise possible
I
can assue you that all you will do is elimninate small GA.

..and if the other side says there is NO compromise, which many of them
do, then what?

Then when the issue winds up in civil Court that fact will injure their
case.

I've dealt personally with these types, the ones that loved
9/11 because we couldnt fly. The ones that say no improvement to
any traffic pattern is enough, only eliminating the airport and the
airplanes
will do, and glad to see a fatal accident take another airplane/pilot out
of the
equation - I'm not exagerating. Take a look again at
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm
this is the kind of nutcases we're talking about here.

The original poster seems a rational man being harrassed by an individual
pilot for the most part, but I agree that their are nutcases attacked to the
noise issue.

The guy who puts
this craphole website together hates everything and everybody: pilots,
controllers, politicians, aircraft manufacturers, and even some of his
anti-aviation counterparts! These are the real problem, a lunatic
fringe. Most of the neighbors I've dealt with are not like this, they're
pretty hot at first, but not off the deep end like STN and this other
clown. Like I said in a previous post, there is no dealing with some
people, try as you may.

Mullachy is catching on.

"Paul Sengupta" wrote
He said that the movement is making things worse for some people by
concentrating the noise...

I've seen it here, the politically connected (or they have something the
city wants) almosts moves the downwind beyond glide range just to
avoid a couple homes, and I do mean a couple - just to put us all over
a crowded subdivision.

That is a bad idea.

"Mike Spera" wrote in message
...
Yep, 06C it is. The procedure is voluntary, but, as I said, there are
citizen "police" recording which based pilots don't play along. I
usually try not to trigger the governmental immune system by not looking
like a virus (low keyed, non confrontational). So, I play along. After
all, if I fly a "normal" pattern out of RWY 11, I may broadside someone
flying the "voluntary" procedure.

I often wondered how much it would cost to move the two cronies.

There is that swamp off to the south east.

Gotta
be cheaper than the loss of a life running this goofy pattern.

Mike

Dave Stadt wrote:
Sounds like Schaumburg. The departure procedures to the east are absurd
and
dangerous. Ought to be a law against such nonsense. Far as I know the
procedures are voluntary.

"Mike Spera" wrote in message
...

Interesting debate. I too have no use for old cranks who live near an
airport and constantly complain about the noise. But, aerobatic practice
boxes are not published anywhere. Not sure I can defend a "tough $*^!"
attitude on the part of aerobatic jockeys.

We have a similar problem. I have owned an airplane for over ten years.
We live a couple of miles down the road from the airport. We could live
closer, BUT we chose to live here because we did not want to put up with
the noise. Now, 2 old cranks (hey, I'm over 50, I can say it) have
harassed their village and the police enough that a "noise abatement"
procedure was put in place. To avoid bothering these fine citizens (who
bought homes right next to an airport that preceded their houses by 20
years), airplanes now must fly an extended 2.5 mile upwind to, you
guessed it, my house.

I have to draw the line here pardner. My house was here before THE
PATTERN was moved. In addition, flying this non-standard, 2+ mile upwind
is inherently DANGEROUS to those transients who are not aware of this
absurd procedure. It puts aircraft dangerously close (2 miles) to
O'Hare's innermost ring. The 2 crabbies also had touch and gos
eliminated in this "procedure". They even have "airport volunteers" park
their keesters at the airport with a handheld radio to record any
"violators". Those N-numbers based at the airport are sent reminders if
they violate this unsafe, voluntary procedure. For a time, they were
even contemplating terminating the lease (hangar/tiedown) of repeat
"violators". It appears the village attorney talked some sense into them
and they dropped the threat. They have taken in over $10 million in
federal funds and this type of action might attract the FAA into the
fray.

So, I can see the beef to some extent. At least move the box around so
the same homes don't get pummeled forever.

Flexibility won't kill you, but inflexibility might. Remember, you're in
RANGE!!!

Good Luck,
Mike





__________________________________________________ __________________________
___

Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -

http://www.uncensored-news.com

The Worlds Uncensored News Source








__________________________________________________ __________________________
___
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

47N is one (#16 out of 32) of the airports I'll fly into this summer on my
4,500nm odyssey, of course theres no mention of any special procedures
on my printed out AOPA kneeboard chart for the airport.
Then again, so is BED (#12), where the pilots being sued are based.
Hope during this trip I don't do something that is forbidden locally
but not known beyond the local pilots. Nearly all the 'violations'
at our airport are by pilots not based here, they have no knowledge
of our voluntary noise abatement procedure. They still get a
nastygram in the mail though.
Chris



"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Dave Stadt wrote:

The departure procedures to the east are absurd and
dangerous. Ought to be a law against such nonsense.

There's a complainer that lives off the western end of the runway at 47N.
They
initiated a procedure to try to placate her. Every aircraft was expected
to make a 45
degree left turn about 100 yards from the end of the runway. About a year
after that
went into effect, a Cherokee stalled immediately after turning and
pancaked into a
golf course, killing both occupants. They're back to straight out
departures now.

George Patterson
Treason is ne'er successful, Sir; what then be the reason? Why, if
treason
be successful, Sir, then none dare call it treason.

SeeAndAvoid wrote:

47N is one (#16 out of 32) of the airports I'll fly into this summer on my
4,500nm odyssey, of course theres no mention of any special procedures
on my printed out AOPA kneeboard chart for the airport.

AFAIK, there are no special procedures there now. John Price teaches there, though,
and he can provide the most current info.

George Patterson
Treason is ne'er successful, Sir; what then be the reason? Why, if treason
be successful, Sir, then none dare call it treason.

In article ,
Mike Spera wrote:

Yep, 06C it is. The procedure is voluntary, but, as I said, there are
citizen "police" recording which based pilots don't play along. I
usually try not to trigger the governmental immune system by not looking
like a virus (low keyed, non confrontational). So, I play along. After
all, if I fly a "normal" pattern out of RWY 11, I may broadside someone
flying the "voluntary" procedure.

I often wondered how much it would cost to move the two cronies. Gotta
be cheaper than the loss of a life running this goofy pattern.


You are close enough to Chicago that Louie, Vito, Bruno or Guido should
be able to come out and give you a hand!



Mike

Dave Stadt wrote:
Sounds like Schaumburg. The departure procedures to the east are absurd
and
dangerous. Ought to be a law against such nonsense. Far as I know the
procedures are voluntary.

"Mike Spera" wrote in message
...

Interesting debate. I too have no use for old cranks who live near an
airport and constantly complain about the noise. But, aerobatic practice
boxes are not published anywhere. Not sure I can defend a "tough $*^!"
attitude on the part of aerobatic jockeys.

We have a similar problem. I have owned an airplane for over ten years.
We live a couple of miles down the road from the airport. We could live
closer, BUT we chose to live here because we did not want to put up with
the noise. Now, 2 old cranks (hey, I'm over 50, I can say it) have
harassed their village and the police enough that a "noise abatement"
procedure was put in place. To avoid bothering these fine citizens (who
bought homes right next to an airport that preceded their houses by 20
years), airplanes now must fly an extended 2.5 mile upwind to, you
guessed it, my house.

I have to draw the line here pardner. My house was here before THE
PATTERN was moved. In addition, flying this non-standard, 2+ mile upwind
is inherently DANGEROUS to those transients who are not aware of this
absurd procedure. It puts aircraft dangerously close (2 miles) to
O'Hare's innermost ring. The 2 crabbies also had touch and gos
eliminated in this "procedure". They even have "airport volunteers" park
their keesters at the airport with a handheld radio to record any
"violators". Those N-numbers based at the airport are sent reminders if
they violate this unsafe, voluntary procedure. For a time, they were
even contemplating terminating the lease (hangar/tiedown) of repeat
"violators". It appears the village attorney talked some sense into them
and they dropped the threat. They have taken in over $10 million in
federal funds and this type of action might attract the FAA into the fray.

So, I can see the beef to some extent. At least move the box around so
the same homes don't get pummeled forever.

Flexibility won't kill you, but inflexibility might. Remember, you're in
RANGE!!!

Good Luck,
Mike




__________________________________________________ __________________________
___

Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -

http://www.uncensored-news.com

The Worlds Uncensored News Source







__________________________________________________ ____________________________
_
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

In no way, shape or form are the pilots involved saying "tough $*^!" to the "Stop the Noise"
people. They have been working for years in good faith to try and reach a settlement that
everyone can live with. These people in the Shirley area are out to ban *all* recreational
flying and now motorcycles as well.

The aerobatic boxes have been shuffled around, altitudes scrutinized, the works. If this suit
succeeds, aerobatic flight over most of the East Coast of the United States will be a thing of
the past. The entire area will be declared "congested" by the courts.

As a Mass. pilot who has been following this thing for some time (and even peripherally involved
in it) I can assureyou nobody is just trying to blow these people off: this has become a test
of survival for non-commercial aviation.

Dave Reinhart


Mike Spera wrote:

Interesting debate. I too have no use for old cranks who live near an
airport and constantly complain about the noise. But, aerobatic practice
boxes are not published anywhere. Not sure I can defend a "tough $*^!"
attitude on the part of aerobatic jockeys.

We have a similar problem. I have owned an airplane for over ten years.
We live a couple of miles down the road from the airport. We could live
closer, BUT we chose to live here because we did not want to put up with
the noise. Now, 2 old cranks (hey, I'm over 50, I can say it) have
harassed their village and the police enough that a "noise abatement"
procedure was put in place. To avoid bothering these fine citizens (who
bought homes right next to an airport that preceded their houses by 20
years), airplanes now must fly an extended 2.5 mile upwind to, you
guessed it, my house.

I have to draw the line here pardner. My house was here before THE
PATTERN was moved. In addition, flying this non-standard, 2+ mile upwind
is inherently DANGEROUS to those transients who are not aware of this
absurd procedure. It puts aircraft dangerously close (2 miles) to
O'Hare's innermost ring. The 2 crabbies also had touch and gos
eliminated in this "procedure". They even have "airport volunteers" park
their keesters at the airport with a handheld radio to record any
"violators". Those N-numbers based at the airport are sent reminders if
they violate this unsafe, voluntary procedure. For a time, they were
even contemplating terminating the lease (hangar/tiedown) of repeat
"violators". It appears the village attorney talked some sense into them
and they dropped the threat. They have taken in over $10 million in
federal funds and this type of action might attract the FAA into the fray.

So, I can see the beef to some extent. At least move the box around so
the same homes don't get pummeled forever.

Flexibility won't kill you, but inflexibility might. Remember, you're in
RANGE!!!

Good Luck,
Mike

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

Hope during this trip I don't do something that is forbidden locally
but not known beyond the local pilots.

I hope you'll report on this very subject, which is a whole lot more
interesting than gallons pumped, hours flown, etc!

I suspect that most airports have their peculiarities. At mine, for
example, there's a nuclear plant to the SSE. The runway is 02/20 with
the prevailing winds favoring a landing from the north. The ocean is
on the east. Most of the locals fly all 45s from the west, using a
midfield or lower crossover if we have to get on the downwind for 20.

(Did I really write that paragraph? It seems very confusing to me,
though the procedure is second nature


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: -- put Cubdriver in subject line!

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