STOP THE NOISE!

MikeD...no one can say your a man of few words...but you hit the nail on the head. Very informative, thanks.
 
LeonPhelps said:
Saw it a little over a week ago on US1 as you're just leaving Daytona. The sign looks fresh as if it's just been put up.

Well no ....I found an article and a picture of the billboard for your viewing pleasure.. complete with ERAU paint scheme.

http://www.news-journalonline.com/n.../airport-noise-grating-to-some-residents.html

noise10718.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that he's not looking at the planes flying overhead instead of covering his ears.:) "Look at the plane mommy!!!"
 
LeonPhelps said:
the solution is simple. If you don't like airplane noise, DON'T MOVE IN OR BUILD A HOUSE NEXT TO AN AIRPORT!
Click to expand...

That might feel good to say, but the solution is not "simple." My brother-in-law lives under the flight path at SEA-TAC, and so naturally his house is constantly overflown by aircraft. He had to have is house soundproofed. Shouldn't have moved next to the airport, right?

He didn't. He lives several miles from SEA-TAC. As do thousands of other people. To incorporate your "don't move near an airport" solution, we would have to draw about a 10 or 15 mile ring around the airport and forbid any houses or businesses to be in that area. You're talking about a few hundred square miles of undeveloped real estate in a city. Doesn't seem a very practical solution to me.
 
O&M said:
That might feel good to say, but the solution is not "simple." My brother-in-law lives under the flight path at SEA-TAC, and so naturally his house is constantly overflown by aircraft. He had to have is house soundproofed. Shouldn't have moved next to the airport, right?

He didn't. He lives several miles from SEA-TAC. As do thousands of other people. To incorporate your "don't move near an airport" solution, we would have to draw about a 10 or 15 mile ring around the airport and forbid any houses or businesses to be in that area. You're talking about a few hundred square miles of undeveloped real estate in a city. Doesn't seem a very practical solution to me.
Click to expand...
The thread focuses on GA airports. I don't hear any calls for SEA to be shut down. The radius ring for a GA airport is much much smaller, plus most GA airports are located well outside of town.
In addition, no one is talking about forbidding development near the airport...just take some frakking responsibility for your decision. If you move there and find the planes annoying, don't blame the airplanes, take ownership of your decision and either get out, shut up, or soundproof.
 
Roger Roger said:
In addition, no one is talking about forbidding development near the airport...just take some frakking responsibility for your decision. If you move there and find the planes annoying, don't blame the airplanes, take ownership of your decision and either get out, shut up, or soundproof.
Click to expand...

Great in theory, or for normal people who actually do take some personal responsibility. But as I explained on the previous page, none of these people are willing (or in some cases, able) to recognize their own stupidity. And they definitely don't want to take ownership or responsibility for it. No matter how many times I held the mirror in front of them, figuratively speaking, they absolutely refused to see or recognize it. And unfortunately, they had the money, power, and contacts with the city council.
 
Watching the planes isn't just for kids. When I purchased my house, one of the things I liked about this house was that I could sit in my back yard and watch the airplanes coming into MSP.
 
MikeD said:
Great in theory, or for normal people who actually do take some personal responsibility. But as I explained on the previous page, none of these people are willing (or in some cases, able) to recognize their own stupidity. And they definitely don't want to take ownership or responsibility for it. No matter how many times I held the mirror in front of them, figuratively speaking, they absolutely refused to see or recognize it. And unfortunately, they had the money, power, and contacts with the city council.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately: Mission IMPOSSIBLE. General Aviation will sink yelling and screaming at each other, instead of once (just once) mustering up enough common purpose to take effective action in a professional way. The time to hold the mirror in front of the citizenry (to educate them and help them understand) has long passed.
 
Cessna414JJB said:
General Aviation will sink yelling and screaming at each other, instead of once (just once) mustering up enough common purpose to take effective action in a professional way. .
Click to expand...

Im worried that this time has long passed too. GA has sunk itself with this.
 
MikeD said:
Im worried that this time has long passed too. GA has sunk itself with this.
Click to expand...

Lets rearrange the deckchairs and keep the magazines shiny and full of luxurious jets. At least we'll look good...
I think people are slowly catching on to the major direction and maybe, just maybe, there will be an organized grassroots movement.

It was grassroots which made and brought GA to where it once was... it will be grassroots efforts fixing it.
 
O&M said:
That might feel good to say, but the solution is not "simple." My brother-in-law lives under the flight path at SEA-TAC, and so naturally his house is constantly overflown by aircraft. He had to have is house soundproofed. Shouldn't have moved next to the airport, right?

He didn't. He lives several miles from SEA-TAC. As do thousands of other people. To incorporate your "don't move near an airport" solution, we would have to draw about a 10 or 15 mile ring around the airport and forbid any houses or businesses to be in that area. You're talking about a few hundred square miles of undeveloped real estate in a city. Doesn't seem a very practical solution to me.
Click to expand...


He shouldn't have moved there if he didn't like the noise. Leave the houses for people like me, people who accept the results of their actions.
 
What about noise abatement T/O procedures and a departure route? Harbor Springs (Michigan) (KMGN) did this not long ago because the extended centerline to RWY 28 went right over downtown about five miles to the west. No turbines 2300-0700, and all westbound departures turn S over the water (Little Traverse Bay) as soon as practical.
 
The problem with noise abatement procedures in many places is that it will never be enough. People will still complain no matter what the airport or pilots agree to, and once given an inch, people will want to take a mile unfortunately.

"No turbines 2300-0700" opens the door to "no turbines 1600-1200", etc, etc. Some airports such as KSDL have a noise hotline people can call to complain, while others like KSNA had a full-blown noise office at the airport. People who complain about the noise ceaselessly, won't be happy until the airport they complain about is closed.
 
pullup said:
He shouldn't have moved there if he didn't like the noise. Leave the houses for people like me, people who accept the results of their actions.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. The point is not about taking responsibility. It's about the impracticality of saying "don't move near an airport." Airplane noise carries quite a distance, and to say that people shouldn't live near an airport would mean that dozens, or perhaps hundreds of square miles of prime real estate would go undeveloped. There's a reason airports are so important to the local economy, and one of those reasons is the development of real estate around the airport.
 
MikeD said:
I've been fighting this battle in the AZ area for over a decade and a half.
Click to expand...
MikeD said:
Yes, airports have been here longer than most residents and their homes.

Yes, if one doesn't want to hear airplane noise, then don't move next to an airport.

No, you shouldn't be able to move next to an airport and then complain about the noise there.

And you know what I learned in all the years of fighting this issue: No one cares about the above.
Click to expand...


Absolutely correct and a point that 99% of the aviation enthusiast seem to miss.

I once overheard a loud argumentative fellow berating the people in the administration building of an airport about the noise those airplanes were making. He had purchased a home that was in a VERY exclusive and expensive area and he wanted the noise to stop. I knew that I wanted to stay out of it because I tend not to interact well with jerks, but curiosity got the better of me and I just had to take a look around the corner. To my surprise, I recognized the loud mouthed jerk. He was a Captain for a major carrier.

It is all too common for people to only view the world only as it appears to THEM.
 
tomokc said:
What about noise abatement T/O procedures and a departure route? Harbor Springs (Michigan) (KMGN) did this not long ago because the extended centerline to RWY 28 went right over downtown about five miles to the west. No turbines 2300-0700, and all westbound departures turn S over the water (Little Traverse Bay) as soon as practical.
Click to expand...
They do have noise abatement at New Smyrna.
 
O&M said:
You missed the point. The point is not about taking responsibility. It's about the impracticality of saying "don't move near an airport." Airplane noise carries quite a distance, and to say that people shouldn't live near an airport would mean that dozens, or perhaps hundreds of square miles of prime real estate would go undeveloped. There's a reason airports are so important to the local economy, and one of those reasons is the development of real estate around the airport.
Click to expand...



I didn't miss the point. I'm saying leave the real estate to people like me who like the noise or tune it out. It wouldn't go undeveloped, it would just go to people who can stand it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top