Santa Monica to close by July 2018?

[NovemberEcho]

What's wrong with aspen?

I hate the French.

 

[av8tr1]

The same.

Edit: Let me elaborate. It's the one with the non-precision approach off to the side which you very nearly cannot get to the runway from the MAP in the jets I've flown because it's in a valley with a mountain immediately off the end of the runway, accounting the "one way in one way out" nature of the approach/departure (you know, kind of like a roach motel) and the one of a kind ILS sitting on a mountain as part of the missed approach

Yeah, I know it. I've shot it 1 single time and said I would never go in there again IFR. And I was in a slow prop not a jet. And I haven't been back since. That place sux.

 

[Deleted member 27505]

The same.

Edit: Let me elaborate. It's the one with the non-precision approach off to the side which you very nearly cannot get to the runway from the MAP in the jets I've flown because it's in a valley with a mountain immediately off the end of the runway, accounting the "one way in one way out" nature of the approach/departure (you know, kind of like a roach motel) and the one of a kind ILS sitting on a mountain as part of the missed approach

Wow! Sounds like the lower 48's answer to Alaska Envy. The 4WD pickup of the L-48*.

*To be driven only on 3-lane, paved highways between mc'mansion and mall. Any other use voids warranty and any intimations of increased awesomeness implied therein.

 

[trafficinsight]

Where did you get a stupid idea like the FAA is pro-aviation???

It's in their charter and believe it or not they're usually pretty good about it.

Hence why the NTSB hates them.

 

[Dugie8]

It's in their charter and believe it or not they're usually pretty good about it.

Hence why the NTSB hates them.

Not being argumentative. However, the FAA removed the "promoting aviation" from their mission statement a while ago. There is an inherent conflict of interest when a governing body is the safety regulator and at the same time a promoter

https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[trafficinsight]

Not being argumentative. However, the FAA removed the "promoting aviation" from their mission statement a while ago. There is an inherent conflict of interest when a governing body is the safety regulator and at the same time a promoter

https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That sucks that they changed it, it was literally perfect the way it was. The conflict of interest is exactly what made it work so well.

 

[Dugie8]

That sucks that they changed it, it was literally perfect the way it was. The conflict of interest is exactly what made it work so well.

I disagree. IMO it was dangerous to have a government entity promoting a private industry (airplanes) whilst at the same time holding the keys to the jail cell.

Alas. It is what is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[trafficinsight]

I disagree. IMO it was dangerous to have a government entity promoting a private industry (airplanes) whilst at the same time holding the keys to the jail cell.

Alas. It is what is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My opinion is that it forced a balanced approach to regulation.

If they ever forget that approach look for things like acro, skydiving, formation flying, etc. to be axed.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

My opinion is that it forced a balanced approach to regulation.

If they ever forget that approach look for things like acro, skydiving, formation flying, etc. to be axed.

Still an impossible mandate.

 

[RDoug]

Press Release – FAA Reaches Settlement Agreement with City of Santa Monica

For Immediate Release
January 28, 2017
Contact: Laura Brown
Phone: 202-359-3680, email: laura.j.brown@faa.gov

WASHINGTON–The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the City of Santa Monica, California have reached a settlement agreement to resolve longstanding litigation over the future of Santa Monica Airport.

The agreement requires the city to maintain continuous and stable operation of the airport for 12 years, until December 31, 2028, and after that the City has the right to close the airport.

In recognition of the city's authority to make decisions about land use, the agreement allows Santa Monica to shorten the airport's single runway to 3,500 feet from its current length of 4,973 feet. The city is obligated to enter into leases with private aeronautical service providers to ensure continuity of those services until the runway is shortened and it decides to provide such services on its own.

"Mutual cooperation between the FAA and the city enabled us to reach this innovative solution, which resolves longstanding legal and regulatory disputes," said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. "This is a fair resolution for all concerned because it strikes an appropriate balance between the public's interest in making local decisions about land use practices and its interests in safe and efficient aviation services."

 

[RDoug]

Editorial Santa Monica can't be a slumlord to its airport for the next decade