Must have three blade prop?
- Thread starter Fencer
- Start date
CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
Noise Abatement, I am guessing.
The Gardener
Terrafirma Phobic
Seems arbitrarily restrictive. I can't imagine a J-3 is going to be making an excessive amount of noise. How is this rule being enforced? Normally noise abatement has a max DB output level.
Sounds as if some city councilman got on Wikipedia and determined that three are naturally quieter than two and made it mandatory to "save the spotted owls"
If three are quieter than two, well, lets require eight!
tgrayson
New Member
Or rather, the airport manager. There's no indication that the "requirement" has any basis in law.
The Gardener
Terrafirma Phobic
But wait, wouldn't 3 blades make 50% more noise than 2? and 33% less noise that 4? and 40% less than 5? Ahh crap, better enforce the one bladed propeller law!
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
I'd like to see how they enforce it (or how they plan on enforcing it). Yes, it would be irresponsible to go in there just to mess with them and their crazy rule. But does a J3S really make too much noise to deal with?
SteamyNicks
Well-Known Member
i hope they go out to each aircraft and count the prop blades, as they're spinning
A
Adler
Guest
My guess is someone had a problem with a 2 bladed 185 flying around.
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
Yeah those things are way loud!
Guy
Well-Known Member
Are you contending that a violation of a restriction in the AFD could not result in an enforcement or are you saying there is something unique to that specific restriction?
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
tgrayson
New Member
I'm saying I've never seen any evidence that having something in the AFD makes it regulatory. The airport manager can put whatever he wants there. One locally has in the remarks for a class G airport: "Two way radio communication required." So the airport manager can establish effective Class D airspace? I doubt it.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
Be careful going that route. I've seen several examples of airplanes getting "stuck" at airports where their operation was banned by the city/county/ect.
Say you land your Citation at a small airport that was posted "no turbojet aircraft allowed". The FAA won't care, but you might have to take your fancy jet out of there on a truck.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
From 200 feet away, one can tell the difference between a running turbojet and piston, no? Can you tell from 200 feet away, if a running piston airplane has a 2 blade or 3 blade propeller? I'd sure like to know how they check on that.
Look, I'd follow it, but I'm saying I'm not sure that its enforceable. Plus, what if I land 1/2 a mile down river, not at the "seaport" and taxi up the river. Once your on the water, your a boat.
esa17
Well-Known Member
Isn't it just simpler to follow the rules? Why put yourself in a situation that could result in such a headache?
I'm as big a fan of ignoring stupid laws as the next guy but I left being argumentative just to inflate my ego in my teens*. Isn't taxiing still an airport operation which makes what you're doing contrary to the published information for the airport?
*For the most part.
I'm as big a fan of ignoring stupid laws as the next guy but I left being argumentative just to inflate my ego in my teens*. Isn't taxiing still an airport operation which makes what you're doing contrary to the published information for the airport?
*For the most part.