Re: Private air strip..... yes or no???

[Wdtabor]

>any comments would be appreciated
>

If this is just a private strip for one guy to fly his own airplane in and out,
and not a public strip for all to use, then how much can he really disturb you?

Even if he flys every day, what harm would a couple of takeoffs a day do you?

Do you really want to make a lifetime enemy of your neighbor over that?

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Jim]

Huh? You LOVE planes! He's not talking about building the next O'Hare in
your back yard. On the average if he flew once or twice a week would that
upset you? I'd say that's more of a realistic expectation. Maybe he'd even
give you a ride.

Talk to your local zoning board. Like everything else in this country,
landowners have certain rights, until some asshole complains.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[EDR]

Has your neighbor told you he is going to build a runway (it was not
clear from your posting)?

At 1000 to 1500 feet from the threshhold, your home is in a prime
location for CFIT or departure accidents.

At the very least, common courtesty, your neighbor should agree to
angle the runway so it does not point directly at your house.

They should also agree to turn away from your house after liftoff.

[Brad Z]

Why not talk to your neighbor about your concerns? It's in his best
interests to keep his neighbors happy. And it sounds like its in your best
interest to stay friends with him...if you're taking flying lessons, having
a neighbor with an airstrip will be a benefit after you get your license.

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
> Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
> be
> allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
> there
> are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
> can
> try to input as much as I know.
>
> My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
> 3000
> feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
> is
> located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
> direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
> property
> line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
> fifteen
> years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
> planes
> take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
> acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
> plane
> buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
> money
> to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
> socialites
> and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.
>
> I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
> prospective
> planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
> require
> longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
> expect no
> planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
> or
> pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
> acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
> they
> are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
> or so
> over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
> corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
> over
> them.
>
> Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?
>
> I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
> mine
> told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
> plane
> on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
> off ....
> how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?
>
>
> Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
> small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
> then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
> for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
> pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
> be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.
>
> any comments would be appreciated
>

[Trent Moorehead]

"Brad Z" > wrote in message
news:RMqWb.5697$jk2.19710@attbi_s53...
> Why not talk to your neighbor about your concerns? It's in his best
> interests to keep his neighbors happy. And it sounds like its in your
best
> interest to stay friends with him...if you're taking flying lessons,
having
> a neighbor with an airstrip will be a benefit after you get your license.

My thoughts exactly. But what do I know, I'm just a "redneck".

-Trent
PP-ASEL

[Bill Denton]

One of the most important things to do is immediately contact a lawyer (and
I hate lawyers).

I don't remember the exact legal terms, but here's a layman's explanation...

In some instances, if someone creates a nuisance, and you do not contest
that nuisance immediately, you will never be able to contest that nuisance.

So, while having a light plane fly over your house a couple of times a week
might not bother you, the guy could theoretically suddenly decide to start
running 20 747's a day out of his strip and you would not be able to do
anything about it.

But if you act immediately, you can draft an agreement that would let your
neighbor operate a certain number of flights per day/week/whatever during
certain hours, and that's it. In this way you would be allowing your
neighbor reasonable use of his property while protecting your own property
rights, and hopefully preserving your relationship with your neighbor.

But you want to act on this immediately, as the game changes once the first
airplane takes off or lands.

You might also want to check the FAR's, the FAA's website, and the DOT's
website; I believe you'll find some information there.

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
> Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
> be
> allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
> there
> are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
> can
> try to input as much as I know.
>
> My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
> 3000
> feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
> is
> located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
> direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
> property
> line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
> fifteen
> years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
> planes
> take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
> acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
> plane
> buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
> money
> to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
> socialites
> and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.
>
> I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
> prospective
> planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
> require
> longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
> expect no
> planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
> or
> pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
> acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
> they
> are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
> or so
> over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
> corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
> over
> them.
>
> Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?
>
> I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
> mine
> told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
> plane
> on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
> off ....
> how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?
>
>
> Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
> small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
> then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
> for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
> pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
> be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.
>
> any comments would be appreciated
>

[Kyler Laird]

"" just an average " Farlang..." > writes:

>So far I can only perceive a "redneck" mentality from the replies.

Interesting. I didn't get that at all. Does that make me a "redneck"?

--kyler

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.08aca6e0d6e6c76ad4fd7c32b7325054@107 6508540.nulluser.com
>
> I was hoping for a more mature newsgroup. A more accurate saying would
> be,"We all have rights but not the right to impose on other's rights".

Sounds to me like you're trying to impose your percieved right to "peace and
quiet" on your neighbor's percieved fair use of his land - perhaps purchased
to allow him to build his own airstrip.

Have you talked to this neighbor? What are his intentions? Until you know
that, you're just trying to be as much of a nuisance as you think he is.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Jim]

"I can afford to buy a plane and make a runway on my property that
would be long enough to reach minimum altitude while on my own
property. My neighbor also, can afford to buy a much bigger piece of
land."

Any chance of working together with him and between the two of you creating
an awesome runway that would benefit both of you?

If there is a hearing scheduled, I would think that they would send the
surrounding neighbors a notice and invite your comments or concerns.

Here in redneck Wisconsin, the local zoning board had jurisdiction over
whether or not you can build it. They will also ask the owner what type of
operation and how often the airstrip will be used. They have the hearing
and if all goes well, and if you've located it away from neighbors and
nobody comes to the hearing to complain. Then you apply to the state
department of trans and they have you fill out forms and provide diagrams of
the proposed runway including nearby obstacles and the flight profile of
aircraft using the runway. If it's a private strip and you own the
surrounding land, they usually don't say much about the approach, departure
or side clearances. If it's public or you have neighbors, it's a different
ball game. But that's just how it works here, I wouldn't pretend to know
anything about Idaho.

Our company owns a lot of farm land here, some located next to airports. We
occasionally are forced to sell the airport an "avigation easement" for the
surrounding area, basically giving up our right to park equipment, plant
trees etc. on that part of our land that may interfere with the safety zone
surrounding the airport. I generally don't have a problem with it because
the laws of eminent domain apply and there's no use fighting it. As a pilot
and flight instructor, I'm happy when airports are improved, even if it
effects my own land and business. You are in a different situation.

On another subject, both your and his insurance company's may have an issue
with him building an airstrip that through it's normal use puts you or your
property in harms way.

The FAA typically doesn't get involved, so your problem is really more of a
local situation.

I'd set up a meeting with him and try to see his point of view and his
intentions. It sounds like the lack of communication may be feeding more
dis-information than anything.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.9cc04ee02a8bf61515c8a3baf728e8b9@107 6513463.nulluser.com
>
> I got a dirt bike, does that mean I can go ride it anywhere I please
> on private, public or forest land?

hmmm.... Key phrase there: "public". Look up the phrase "navigable
airspace" and see what it is, who owns it and who can use it.

> Just as a pilot and landowner should have the right to fly his
> airplane shouldn't I have the right to sleep late on a hot summer day
> with my bedroom window open without being woke up by some airplane
> buzzing over my property and house? I paid for my land! I am entitled
> to the use of the land I paid for.

Turn that around now and see how it applies to your neighbor. After all, he
paid for his land, didn't he?

> How about if I were your nextdoor
> neighbor... Is it appropriate for me to park my truck in front of your
> house? How about if I owned 5 cars and had them parked all up and down
> the street in front of your house?

That's why homeowners' assocations exist. Perhaps you should talk to your
other neighbors to gauge their feelings about this.

Listen, I can certainly understand your frustration over this, but it sounds
like you don't have all the facts and you're trying to garner support for a
position that you haven't even researched. I'll be the first in line to say
that pilots need to be good neighbors and try to be considerate of others.

However, that's a two way street and right now it looks like you're trying
to kill his fair use of his land (the very thing you claim to be attempting
with your own land) before you even know what he's doing.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[C J Campbell]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
| Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
| be
| allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property.

It really depends on your local zoning. Federal laws allow a person to build
a runway just about anywhere, so it is up to local government officials to
regulate where and how he can build a runway.

You should talk to your neighbor about your concerns. Be frank -- don't beat
around the bush. Also call your local zoning board and find out when the
hearing is and put yourself on the agenda so that you can speak and tell
them your concerns.

I doubt if your neighbor is running a crop dusting business or even
developing an airpark. Also, he is likely to be well over 1000 feet up by
the time he passes over your house on takeoff, which is when the airplane is
most noisy.

It could be worse, I suppose. You could be living back in town with a
neighbor who runs his noisy leaf blower all day. I don't think there are any
places left where you will find pristine peace and quiet.

[Newps]

just an average Farlang... wrote:

> Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
> be
> allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
> there
> are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
> can
> try to input as much as I know.

You do not own the airspace above your house. As long as it is legal
for him to have a runway on his property you are out of luck.

[Big John]

Thai

1. Will this be a private airfield and listed on the charts? If so,
probably will have to meet some FAA rules. Have you checked with FAA?

2. If he is just landing on his own property you may have problems?
Again, ask FAA.

3. Have you set down with your neighbor and in a friendly tone tried
to talk out the problem? If you haven't, do that first, as there may
be a mutual solution to your problem that allows him to fly and not a
big bother to you ?

Point out the flight path over your house and see if he can cock his
strip 'catty corner' across his (2600') land. This will take pattern
away from your house and also give him a longer runway. Best of both
worlds.

What activity and type of A/C is planned? You may not even have a
problem.

Can he give you a call on phone prior to taking off so you can expect
the noise?

etc., etc., etc.

If you follow the don't get mad, get even train of activist:

4. Lay out a landing strip on your land pointing at his house. Use a
few times so he gets the idea.

5. Build a two story barn on your property at the end of his strip.

6. Put a skeet range on your property at the end of his strip :o)

7. Put up a windmill at the end of his strip to pump water for your
cattle to use.

8. Take up kite flying :o)

On prevailing wind. I sited a strip a number of years ago and went to
Wx bureau and got the number of days the wind blew from 360 degrees
around the clock for several years. I used the direction where the
wind blew the strongest and runway was built. Now we find that 'every'
day we have a cross wind as the strong winds only blow a few days in
the year and we just land with the these cross winds. Get winds from
Wx bureau and evaluate as possible ammo in your discussion. i.e., if
strong winds are only in winter when you have 6 feet of snow, they are
not a problem for private strip which will never get plowed :o) If
this is to be a fair Wx summer strip, check winds for those months.

From my Owners Manuals I used while active as a CFI:

All figures with zero wind.

Cessna 150 (at gross)
``````````````````````````````````
2500 feet elevation 5000 feet elevation

Ground run = 910' Ground run = 1115'
Clear 50' obs = 1660' Clear 50' obs = 1985'

Cessna 172 (at gross)
``````````````````````````````````
2500 feet elevation 5000 feet elevation

Ground run = 1040' Ground run = 1255'
Clear 50' obs = 1910' Clear 50' obs = 2480'

Cessna 182 (at gross)
``````````````````````````````````
2500 feet elevation 5000 feet elevation

Ground run - 845' Ground run = 1015'
Clear 50' obs = 1625' Clear 50' obs = 1990'

Cessna 210 (at gross)
``````````````````````````````````
2500 feet elevation 5000 feet elevation

Ground run = 1325' Ground run = 1600'
Clear 50' obs = 2305' Clear 50' obs = 2855'

All of these figures are for a hard surface runway so have to be
adjusted (increased) for dirt R/W.

Hope some of this errata helps with your problem.

Keep the thread informed how you come out.

Big John

Sometimes you can't win for trying :o(



On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:21:21 -0500 (EST), "" just an average "
Farlang..." > wrote:

>Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
>be allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
>there are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
>can try to input as much as I know.

----clip----

[[email protected]]

>
>You do not own the airspace above your house. As long as it is legal
>for him to have a runway on his property you are out of luck.
>

In Benton County Oregon, the neighbors have considerable say in a situation
like this if the proposed use is on a list of conditional uses allowed on the
particular zoning of the land. Getting a conditional use permit requires the
county to notify and collect data from all the neighbors, then develop a plan
to mitigate concerns, or deny the application if they don't see a way to keep
the peace.

I think the operative word is to find out if the airstrip is a totally allowed
use or if some conditions or permit process is required in your county.

good luck,
tom

[Peter R.]

just an average Farlang... ) wrote:

> My message topic was never intended to start up any flame war. I asked
> a simple dam question of what can or can't be done just as the subject
> of the thread suggests. Why can't people like you stop making things
> out of it that were never put to it!

This is Usenet and it is best if you try not to take things too personally.
From where I sit reading this thread you are getting some pretty excellent
help from all involved. The only one descending this thread into a flame
war appears to be you.

FWIW...

--
Peter R.















----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter Duniho]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.9cc04ee02a8bf61515c8a3baf728e8b9@107 6513463.nulluser.com...
> I wouldn't say that. In fact the collective IQ of the message thread
> increased exponentially after the first two posts.

You jumped to your conclusion about this newsgroup after two posts, one of
which wasn't even offensive (Don's)? You can't really expect this newsgroup
(which is for pilots, people probably more like your neighbor than like you)
to be 100% sympathetic to a person who is apparently looking to raise a
ruckus over an activity we all enjoy. Frankly, if you're handling the
neighbor situation the same way you're dealing with us, I think you're going
to find that this sort of knee-jerk, quick-to-judge attitude won't serve you
well.

Let's see if you can get all the way through this post without accusing me
of being a redneck too...

> Maybe some are blind-sided by their interests... let me use a couple
> exmamples:

"Blind-sided" isn't the phrase you want to use there.

As for your examples...

> I previously lived on 5 acres and the police department told me I
> could legally target shoot on my property with a gun but does that
> mean it is ok?

Define "ok". Absent any other restrictions (property covenants and
restrictions found on the deed, for example), since it's not against the
law, you had every right to use a firearm on your property.

> [...] Really, using common sense and good
> judgement I concluded it is not appropriate to do this.

It probably wasn't, from a safety standpoint, unless you improved your
property to create an area where you could safely fire a weapon and be
assured the ammunition would remain on your property. Five acres doesn't
give a bullet very much room. But then, a bullet is deadly, and isn't the
same kind of thing as an airplane.

Yet, this really isn't relevant to the question you asked.

> I have a racing motorcycle, just because it will go 165 miles per hour
> does that mean I am allowed to do it?

Sure, on your own property or other private property. You could even drive
it at 165 miles per hour on public property where such things are allowed.
But there aren't any public roads in the US where you are permitted to drive
that fast.

Yet again, this really isn't relevant to the question you asked.

> I got a dirt bike, does that mean I can go ride it anywhere I please
> on private, public or forest land?

Again, the various lands you might operate your dirt bike on will have their
own use restrictions. Where dirt bikes are allowed, you may ride the dirt
bike. Where they aren't, you may not. Simple, no?

Yet again, this really isn't relevant to the question you asked.

If you're going to raise a fuss over your neighbor's "airport" (which
appears to not even be a sure thing at this point), you need to learn enough
about the legalities and issues to come up with valid comparisons. None of
the other examples you've given have any relevance at all, except VERY
vaguely from a "being neighborly" point of view. Frankly, you're not being
any more neighborly than the neighbor you're describing, and possibly less
so (hard to say, since all we know about his actions, we learn from you).

> The theme of my message thread I believe is about acting responsible.

If you say so.

> Just as a pilot and landowner should have the right to fly his
> airplane shouldn't I have the right to sleep late on a hot summer day
> with my bedroom window open without being woke up by some airplane
> buzzing over my property and house?

You may or may not have that right. But you probably don't. I know I don't
in my house.

> I paid for my land! I am entitled to the use of the land I paid for.

Unless the aircraft is taxiing on the ground, on your property, then the
operation of aircraft in the vicinity of your property has nothing to do
with the land you paid for. You bought the land, not exclusive rights to
the airspace over it.

I live in a residential neighborhood, near a medium-sized city. At various
times of the day, including late at night and in the wee hours of the
morning, there are the occasional aircraft that fly overhead. Usually it's
jets flying into the nearby (15 miles away or so) commercial airport. Other
times, it's a low-flying helicopter (as if there are any other kind :) ) or
less frequently a small plane (they are more often found during normal
daytime hours).

All of those aircraft have the legal right to overfly my house, and if that
disturbs my sleep or other activity (as it sometimes does), I have no legal
recourse.

> How about if I were your nextdoor neighbor... Is it appropriate for me to
park
> my truck in front of your house?

Are you parking your truck on my property? You don't have that right. Are
you parking your truck on public property, or on your own property adjacent
to mine? Then you do have that right, though local laws may restrict how
long you can leave your truck on public property, how it should be parked,
that sort of thing.

And yet again, that example has nothing to do with your original question.

> How about if I owned 5 cars and had them parked all up and down
> the street in front of your house?

How about it? If the street is public property, and you have not abandoned
them (by whatever legal definition exists in your neighborhood...it varies
from neighborhood to neighborhood, and in my neighborhood a vehicle needs to
be moved daily to avoid it being legally abandonded), you have every right
to park your five cars on the street in front of my house.

Oops...but yet again, this has nothing to do with the original question.

Speaking of which, I might as well use this post to comment on your original
post, rather than making a separate reply...

First of all, how did you come to the conclusion that "the prevailing winds
position the optimal take-off direction to be directly over" your house?
Runways do NOT need to be aligned directly into the prevailing winds, nor do
I believe that you have done a serious survey of the prevailing winds well
enough to determine what the optimal direction for a runway would be.
Finally, the direction the runway is pointed is only half the equation; you
also need to know *where* the runway is located. Offset the runway by fifty
feet or so in one direction or the other, and the departure path no longer
winds up over your house (assuming it was over your house in the first
place).

Secondly, how is that you have 500 acres, and yet your house is only 1500'
from the supposed runway? For someone who wanted peace and quiet, you sure
built your house pretty close to the property line. Not that this really
matters...the choice of where to build your house was yours, not your
neighbors. You can only ensure "peace and quiet" in as much as you obtain
enough land to buffer yourself from potential disruptions.

For what it's worth, 1500' from the property line is too close to ensure
peace and quiet insulated from any number of disruptive activities, any of
which are likely legal on your neighbor's property. Most of the examples
one might think of are noise-related (firearms, dirt bikes, go-karts, loud
automobile engines, etc.) but others might involve things like smoke or
other vapors drifting over from the property.

As far as what kind of airplanes your neighbor might operate, if he's only
got 2600' across his property to work with, there's no way he's going to
have any large airplane there. Probably bigger than an ultralight, since
you hardly need a runway for those. But he's not going to be able to make
full use of the 2600'...probably closer to 2000', and assuming he doesn't
pave it, that restricts the size of the aircraft even more. Especially
given the altitude of 3000' (the maximum temperature is less of an
indicator, since he might just not fly on those hot days).

As far as the "socialite parties" go, sure, he might have a few friends
over. I'd be surprised if more than a handful of airplanes show up at one
time though. But even if they did, that's just how it goes. Our house is
less than 50' from our neighbor's pool, where they have parties in the
summer all the time. Lots of loud goings-on. But since the parties occur
during the daytime, they're not in violation of any noise ordinances, nor do
I have any basis for complaint.

With respect to your question of whether your neighbor is "helping himself
to a sort of easement", rest assured he is not. You have no legal right to
restrict the use of the airspace above your property -- it's not yours -- so
he's not helping himself to anything.

As far as farm animals go (which you don't even have yet), there may be some
period of adjustment, but they will quickly learn that the aircraft is not a
threat, and the noise won't bother them at all. They don't have the human
capacity for hate or empathy, so they won't be sitting on the ground fuming
about how their neighbor is ruining their lives.

Bottom line: it is likely that your pilot is well within his legal rights
with respect to his planned airport. You can either be the ugly neighbor,
raise a big stink about it, make a bunch of lawyers rich fighting over
something in court when you'll likely lose anyway (unless you can outspend
the other guy), and so forth. Or, you can have a NICE conversation with
your neighbor, recognize that he's within his legal rights and work with him
to try to ensure that you both come out with a solution you're each happy
with.

Your choice.

Pete

[Bill Denton]

I didn't make myself clear.

The purpose of hiring a lawyer is not necessarily to represent you at some
particular hearing. As the zoning commissioner noted, sometimes having a
lawyer representing you means you are simply screwing yourself.

The main purpose of hiring an attorney is to have him/her advise you as to
all of the avenues that may be open to you regarding this matter.

Sure, the zoning board may allow your neighbor to lay down a strip of
asphalt, but if there's a migratory bird range (or something) at the end of
the strip, your neighbor won't be flying any airplanes off of it.

So an attorney can advise you of all of the ways you can stop this thing,
whether you want to use them or not. And he would be able to help you
prepare the documents you would need to preserve your rights.

As I said, I don't like lawyers, but this is a time when you really need to
hire one. The $200 or so you would pay for a consultation would be money
well spent...





"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.36a3367ae106408230a699a6630b24d0@107 6516792.nulluser.com...
> Bill Denton wrote:
>
> > One of the most important things to do is immediately contact a
> lawyer (and
> > I hate lawyers).
> >
>
> I don't believe this myself but I asked the zoning commissioner if I
> would be allowed to have a lawyer represent me at the hearing and he
> laughed and said if I did that he thought I would surely be voted
> against. I don't know if it was a lawyer joke or the attitude of the
> local people about having a lawyer address them.
>
> (Thank you for your reply)
>
> > I don't remember the exact legal terms, but here's a layman's
> explanation...
> >
> > In some instances, if someone creates a nuisance, and you do not
> contest
> > that nuisance immediately, you will never be able to contest that
> nuisance.
> >
> > So, while having a light plane fly over your house a couple of times
> a week
> > might not bother you, the guy could theoretically suddenly decide to
> start
> > running 20 747's a day out of his strip and you would not be able to
> do
> > anything about it.
> >
> > But if you act immediately, you can draft an agreement that would
> let your
> > neighbor operate a certain number of flights per day/week/whatever
> during
> > certain hours, and that's it. In this way you would be allowing your
> > neighbor reasonable use of his property while protecting your own
> property
> > rights, and hopefully preserving your relationship with your
> neighbor.
> >
> > But you want to act on this immediately, as the game changes once
> the first
> > airplane takes off or lands.
> >
> > You might also want to check the FAR's, the FAA's website, and the
> DOT's
> > website; I believe you'll find some information there.
> >
> > "just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
> > message
> >
> news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com.
> .
> > > Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person
> needs to
> > > be
> > > allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I
> know
> > > there
> > > are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but
> I
> > > can
> > > try to input as much as I know.
> > >
> > > My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is
> about
> > > 3000
> > > feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The
> land
> > > is
> > > located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take
> off
> > > direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
> > > property
> > > line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
> > > fifteen
> > > years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
> > > planes
> > > take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is
> buying 500
> > > acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
> > > plane
> > > buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
> > > money
> > > to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
> > > socialites
> > > and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the
> weekend.
> > >
> > > I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
> > > prospective
> > > planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
> > > require
> > > longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
> > > expect no
> > > planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off,
> landing
> > > or
> > > pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and
> every
> > > acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that
> means
> > > they
> > > are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred
> feet
> > > or so
> > > over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a
> barn,
> > > corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
> > > over
> > > them.
> > >
> > > Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?
> > >
> > > I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
> > > mine
> > > told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
> > > plane
> > > on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
> > > off ....
> > > how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required
> elevation?
> > >
> > >
> > > Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
> > > small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
> > > then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He
> thought
> > > for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
> > > pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway
> will
> > > be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.
> > >
> > > any comments would be appreciated
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.79091ef375f43760b097c51b2b91c89a@107 6516246.nulluser.com...
> [...]
> I have not heard one reply in this thread commenting whether the
> neighbor is allowed to do such a thing as he would be flying very low
> over my property and below the minimum federally regulated altitude.

You didn't ask that question. The minimum federally regulated altitude
during takeoff and landing is 0' AGL. Yes, that's a zero.

> I realize this is during a take off or landing but the fact remains with
> this amount of land it is not possible to take off or land without
> using other people's land for his runway to be possible.

"Possible"? That word means something other than what you seem to think it
means. He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
operate an aircraft from it. No "not possible" about it.

If you are asking whether he's permitted to actually construct a portion of
his runway on your property, then no...of course he's not allowed to do
that. But that's not what your original post appeared to be asking.

Pete

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.79091ef375f43760b097c51b2b91c89a@107 6516246.nulluser.com
>
>> hmmm.... Key phrase there: "public". Look up the phrase "navigable
>> airspace" and see what it is, who owns it and who can use it.
>
> It was an example that may apply in part but the land in question is
> privately owned.

Your example may have been arbitrary, but my request wasn't. "Navigable
airspace" is federal domain and you have no claim to it - even if it is over
your property. As others have stated, if your land is under the
approach/departure path of an airport, planes may legally be lower than the
500' minimum that may otherwise apply - and you would have no legal
recourse.

> Very true but what I am trying to address is where his rights on his
> property end and where my rights on my property begin as it applies to
> his plane taking off on his land and barely clearing a border fence
> and his plane then affecting my rights

That's just it: The plane would not be affecting your rights. You're
claiming some "right" to "peace and quiet" - the only thing that you've
specifically claimed would be affected by this possible airport. Perhaps
Idaho is different, but I am aware of no jurisdiction that provides you with
a legal right to "peace and quiet".

> I appreicate your thoughts but I hope you realize I do not
> have "homeowner's associations" in outside areas.

I knew that was likely the case, but it doesn't preclude you from organizing
one with your neighbors, does it?

> I have not heard one reply in this thread commenting whether the
> neighbor is allowed to do such a thing as he would be flying very low
> over my property and below the minimum federally regulated altitude. I
> realize this is during a take off or landing but the fact remains with
> this amount of land it is not possible to take off or land without
> using other people's land for his runway to be possible.

See Peter's response. Simply put: You're wrong.

> Please do not misunderstand my personal feelings and confuse that with
> all I am trying to present as a topic of discussion in this newsgroup.
> I am not asking for anyone's sympathy and I would never expect to get
> it in this newsgroup.

Then what exactly are you hoping to achieve here?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[EDR]

In article <busWb.278549$xy6.1422325@attbi_s02>, Newps
> wrote:

> You do not own the airspace above your house. As long as it is legal
> for him to have a runway on his property you are out of luck.

Not quite true.
Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
line with the runway.

[G.R. Patterson III]

" just an average Farlang..." wrote:
>
> Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
> small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
> then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute.

A Maule 235 will be off the ground in 250'. It will be about 1,000' up when it
passes over your house. An Aviat Husky will be higher than that. Performance
varies a lot from aircraft to aircraft.

> He thought for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
> pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet.

Well, there isn't any regulation specifying a "necessary elevation" when landing
or taking off, so he's wrong there. The FAA *does* specify some requirements for
public use fields, but not for private ones. That instructor may have been
thinking of those.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Ryan]

> I think I
> already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
> landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
> peachy.
>

Have you tried to the novel approach of going down there and talking to him
to see what he is planning?? Maybe its not as bad as you imagine.

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:21:21 -0500 (EST), "" just an average "
Farlang..." > wrote in Message-Id:
<bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@10765056 81.nulluser.com>:

>Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
>be allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property.

The FAA and AOPA can provide that information:

www.faa.gov
www.aopa.org

Visit the web sites, and search for pertinent information. Contact
them by phone, and ask questions.

>I know there are many factors that are not presently known in this
>scenario but I can try to input as much as I know.

>My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
>3000 feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
>is located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
>direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
>property line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
>fifteen years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
>planes take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
>acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
>plane buzz my house at will.

I can see how the threat of aircraft might be disturbing to someone
seeking solitude. But if you are located near a highway, the highway
traffic noise will occur NON STOP day and night continuously.
Aircraft noise, on the other hand, is an infrequent, intermittent
occurrence lasting significantly less than a minute in duration. It
the impact won't be nearly as unpleasant as I think you might be
imagining.

>The person wanting to put in the runway has
>money to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
>socialites and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.

Landing aircraft are typically operating at low power in a glide, so
half of the operations will be significantly quieter than you may be
anticipating. Take offs are generally full-power, and can be quite
noisy, but of short duration.

Should your worst case scenario (weekend fly-in barbecue) occur, I
think you'd be pleasantly surprised at how painless it might really
be.

>I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
>prospective planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
>require longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
>expect no planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
>or pattern flying.

Unfortunately, Code of Federal Regulation Title 14: Aeronautics and
Space, PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES, § 91.119 exempts
landing and departing aircraft from the 500' minimum proximity to any
person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=e967b92fe6f3c5499e2839a9c3d289bd&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10&idno=14#14:2.0.1.3.10.2.5.10

But I suspect that the environmental impact you are
imagining/anticipating is of a vastly larger magnitude than that which
may actually occur. In any given 24-hour period, given the single
owner commuting to/from work or town, there would likely be a total of
about one minute or two of objectionable noise; that's a very small
proportion.

>I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
>acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
>they are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
>or so over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
>corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
>over them.

I understand. I would feel the same. But feelings are no substitute
for hard facts.

A thoughtful neighbor would have contacted the land owners who may be
affected before planning the construction of a runway. He would then
have an opportunity to mollify and assuage the fears of those who may
be adversely impacted. Why not give your neighbor an opportunity to
present his side before getting yourself too worked up over the rumor?
Even if your new neighbor doesn't know how to be neighborly, it
doesn't mean you can't enlighten him, and show him how a responsible
and considerate neighbor should behave in a small community.

>Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?

Perhaps.

>I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
>mine told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
>plane on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
>off ....
>how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?

How long is a piece of string; quantifying such parameters requires
knowledge of the type of aircraft, its load, meteorologic conditions,
pilot proficiency, ...

>Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
>small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
>then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
>for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
>pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
>be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.

That estimate seems in the ball park.

>any comments would be appreciated

Take courage in hand, and talk to your neighbor. Quit guessing and
imagining what he has planned. Ask him about the type of aircraft he
intends to operate, the frequency of operations, the time of day/night
of intended operations, how he intends to mitigate the noise impact of
his operations on his neighbors, etc. Tell him of your concerns
regarding safety, livestock impact, noise pollution, ... If he proves
unreasonable, retain an attorney; if he is willing to consider your
needs and accept responsibility for minimizing the negative impact his
intended activities may have, it'll probably work out fine.

If you are training to become a pilot, it might make more sense to
build the runway on a part of your 1.5 mile strip of land, so
operational noise impacts both of you less than it might if the runway
were on his parcel. And sharing the expenses involved in constructing
and maintaining the runway will be half. Who knows, he might be
willing to grant you use his airplane in exchange for use of your
runway: win-win.

[Ron Natalie]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
> Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
> be
> allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property.

The FAA just requires 90 day notice of intent to construct an air strip.
There are no rules or permission required from them. Just notification.

The bigger issue is always the local land use people.

[Newps]

EDR wrote:
> In article <busWb.278549$xy6.1422325@attbi_s02>, Newps
> > wrote:
>
>
>>You do not own the airspace above your house. As long as it is legal
>>for him to have a runway on his property you are out of luck.
>
>
> Not quite true.
> Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> line with the runway.

Which doesn't affect what I said one iota.

[Newps]

I would like to think it is being fair for me to
>>expect no planes flying over my land below 500 feet

The reg is 500 feet from persons and property, when not taking off or
landing. If an airplane is just flying by there is no minimum altitude
required over the surface.

[Ron Natalie]

"Newps" > wrote in message news:FWtWb.148128$U%5.676158@attbi_s03...

> >
> > Not quite true.
> > Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> > line with the runway.
>
> Which doesn't affect what I said one iota.
>
Also the premise is true. You can't erect a tower with impunity either.
In addition to the local land use issues, towers that tall would require
FAA notification before they are constructed.

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.a91bf72558d3777dd8d2f281cb08ef0c@107 6521641.nulluser.com
>
> In Short... See original subject of message. I am trying to collect
> information, (not personal feelings) as to whether a private air strip
> is allowed according to federal regulations or common sense if it
> known a plane cannot possibly take off with regards to a total of 2600
> feet.

That question has been answered several times in this thread.

BTW, what makes you think it is "known a plane cannot possibly take off"
with a 2600' runway? I do it all the time.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[G.R. Patterson III]

" just an average Farlang..." wrote:
>
> In Short... See original subject of message. I am trying to collect
> information, (not personal feelings) as to whether a private air strip
> is allowed according to federal regulations or common sense if it
> known a plane cannot possibly take off with regards to a total of 2600
> feet.

In short, plenty of planes can take off in that distance, so your statement
as to what you're trying to do is false on the face of it.

> I lived on 5 acres and it is possible to take off and land a
> cessna on that length of area so does that mean I can do as I please
> and buzz over the next few miles just because the plane left the
> ground on my own property?

Pretty much.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[G.R. Patterson III]

EDR wrote:
>
> Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> line with the runway.

I would not care to be the defense lawyer if his neighbor crashes due to the
tower and it comes out that the only reason he built it was to interfere with
airplanes.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.e280925b7ce137109f1ad739f078cbd4@107 6524004.nulluser.com
>
> There is no denying I am overly-concerned..

Huh. Candidate for "Understatement of the Year"?

> and there is great reason to be.

You don't know that. You've admitted to a) not talking to the neighbor in
question and b) not attending any zoning hearings. Until you have all that
information, you have *no* reason to be "overly-concerned".

> ...it gets out of control and turns into something extreme.
>
> Try to keep your composure...because you certainly have no
> idea and just making blind accusations.

From the mouths of babes... :-D

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Peter Duniho]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.e280925b7ce137109f1ad739f078cbd4@107 6524004.nulluser.com...
> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out you trying to turn
> this into a personal attack.

Uh, right. Whatever. Clearly, you didn't bother to read my post.

Bottom line: you probably don't have a leg to stand on, your neighbor can
probably install his airport whether you like it or not, so your best bet is
to be less defensive with your neighbor than you have been here and just
talk to him about your concerns.

If your behavior here is any indication, it seems unlikely you're capable of
this, and we will probably read in the trade papers about your legal action
against your neighbor before too long. But the advice remains the same
regardless.

Pete

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> There is no denying I am overly-concerned and there is great reason to
> be.

Look, the reality is that this is a decidely local issue. There have been
close to a dozen responses, all by people far more knowledgable than myself,
which have said that there is nothing in the federal rules to address the
questions you have raised here. And this is probably as it should be, since
the private airstrip in question is only likely to raise local -- and not
national -- areas of concern.

There are people who read this newsgroup from your state. I doubt that any
of them are real estate lawyers who are licensed to practice there, but I
could be wrong. The point is that it's rather unlikely that you are going
to encounter anyone here who can do anything but guess about the situation.
We don't have any real details concerning the location of the proposed
runway. We don't know anything more about the area than what you have told
us. And most importantly, we just don't know anything about your state's
real estate laws.

If you are so concerned about the situation, the only way you are going to
get decent advice on this question is to consult an attorney, preferrably
one who specializes in real estate and zoning in your local area. I can
understand how you don't want or feel that you need someone to represent you
at the zoning board hearings, but you should talk to a lawyer privately.
Posting to this newsgroup is not going to answer any further questions for
you. If you are of a mind to argue about things, you may find posting to be
fun in some bizarre way, but you won't find any further answers here.

[Jim]

What about a land swap? You buy him land that would offer him a better
runway, away from your house and he gives you his land that joins yours. It
also has certain tax benefits.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[Ben Jackson]

In article <bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@10765056 81.nulluser.com>,
" just an average " Farlang... > wrote:
>Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to

[...] An odd question to ask on a pilot newsgroup. A troll?

>My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. [...]
>The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
>direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
>property
>line.

That pretty much describes the airport I fly out of. It's 2450 feet
long, with a river on one end and a road on the other. For a long time
it was one way, with takeoffs to the south. There is a noise sensitive
house straight off the end of the runway. Local procedures call for an
immediate left turnout of about 30 degrees.

With those dimensions there's no reason that any informed pilot (which
should be all of them, at a private airport) would ever be directly over
your house on takeoff. They may land over your house but you won't even
hear them.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
EDR > wrote:
>Not quite true.
>Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
>line with the runway.

Actually I know that you can't erect antennas over 200' without the FAA
getting involved. Are they not concerned with buildings?

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Big John]

After reading all the posts on this thread, I've almost come to the
conclusion we have a troll here?

1. He won't take advice.
2. Argues with everyone who posts in reply to his initial and
subsequent posts.
3. Hasn't/didn't do his home work if he HAS a problem.

Big John


On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:21:21 -0500 (EST), "" just an average "
Farlang..." > wrote:

>Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
>be
>allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
>there
>are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
>can
>try to input as much as I know.
>
>My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
>3000
>feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
>is
>located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
>direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
>property
>line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
>fifteen
>years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
>planes
>take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
>acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
>plane
>buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
>money
>to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
>socialites
>and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.
>
>I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
>prospective
>planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
>require
>longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
>expect no
>planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
>or
>pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
>acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
>they
>are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
>or so
>over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
>corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
>over
>them.
>
>Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?
>
>I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
>mine
>told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
>plane
>on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
>off ....
>how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?
>
>
>Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
>small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
>then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
>for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
>pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
>be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.
>
>any comments would be appreciated

[gerrcoin]

just an average Farlang... wrote:
> EDR wrote:
>
>
>>Has your neighbor told you he is going to build a runway (it was not
>>clear from your posting)?
>
>
> No, I found out from another neighbor that there is a hearing in a
> week to be held by planning and zoning
>
>
>>At 1000 to 1500 feet from the threshhold, your home is in a prime
>>location for CFIT or departure accidents.
>>
>>At the very least, common courtesty, your neighbor should agree to
>>angle the runway so it does not point directly at your house.
>>
>>They should also agree to turn away from your house after liftoff.
>
>
> I asked that question to the chief pilot I consulted. He said to turn
> while climbing will make it harder to climb and could be dangerous.
>
> My biggest fears are that the landowner pilot did not have the
> courtesy to sit down and talk to me. I did find out who the person is
> and left a message asking to talk to him to ask questions like how
> often, what planes would be used.
>
>
Yes. And also the loudest noise is emmitted on the plane of the
propellor so by turning the noise may be slightly lower in decibels but
will be heard for longer.

[S Green]

"Ryan" <f> wrote in message ...
> > I think I
> > already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
> > landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
> > peachy.
> >
>
> Have you tried to the novel approach of going down there and talking to
him
> to see what he is planning?? Maybe its not as bad as you imagine.

I think you made a mistake asking such a question in this NG. One thing you
will not get is any objective advise if you are perceived to be criticising
pilots unless you are a pilot.

The contributors here are all so f****** expert at everything to do about
aviation that I am surprised they spend so much time at the NG.

So I am sorry you should clear off and ask your question somewhere else.

[TaxSrv]

"Ben Jackson" wrote:
> >Not quite true.
> >Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property
in
> >line with the runway.
>
> Actually I know that you can't erect antennas over 200' without the
FAA
> getting involved. Are they not concerned with buildings?

That would be Part 77 of the rules, but it covers only affected
airports which are available for public use.
For a private strip, any obstruction erected so as to deny the owner
of the landing strip free enjoyment of his property is a private legal
matter.

Fred F.

[Richard Russell]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:11:09 -0500 (EST), "" just an average "
Farlang..." > wrote:

>John T wrote:
>
>> "just an average Farlang" > wrote in
>> message
>>
>news:bm9yaWtv.a91bf72558d3777dd8d2f281cb08ef0c@107 6521641.nulluser.com
>> >
>> > In Short... See original subject of message. I am trying to collect
>> > information, (not personal feelings) as to whether a private air
>strip
>> > is allowed according to federal regulations or common sense if it
>> > known a plane cannot possibly take off with regards to a total of
>2600
>> > feet.
>>
>> That question has been answered several times in this thread.
>>
>> BTW, what makes you think it is "known a plane cannot possibly take
>off"
>> with a 2600' runway? I do it all the time.
>>
>
>I hope you are good enough to take off on 1000 feet of runway because
>I was told there is no reason any pilot cannot take off with that
>amount in a plane such as a cessna. You misunderstand the context of
>where you read that comment. What was meant was that it takes more
>than simply the land you lift off from to include in the total
>distance needed to take off.
>


I'm a yankee and never, ever had the slightest thought that I might be
a redneck but you've definitely got me thinking...
Rich Russell

[Ron Natalie]

"TaxSrv" > wrote in message ...

> That would be Part 77 of the rules, but it covers only affected
> airports which are available for public use.
> For a private strip, any obstruction erected so as to deny the owner
> of the landing strip free enjoyment of his property is a private legal
> matter.
>
The clause for towers in vicinity of airports applies only to public use.
However, a 500' tower would need to be reported regardless of where
it was built and it's quite possible it would interfere with some other (public)
airport.

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.a96bf4cd5061b4b2c5c7c0f003c75cff@107 6533869.nulluser.com
>
>
> I hope you are good enough to take off on 1000 feet of runway...

Much less than that, typically.

> ...I was told there is no reason any pilot cannot take off with that
> amount in a plane such as a cessna. You misunderstand the context of
> where you read that comment.

Really? Let's review the post I quoted:

<quote>
"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.a91bf72558d3777dd8d2f281cb08ef0c@107 6521641.nulluser.com...
In Short... See original subject of message. I am trying to collect
information, (not personal feelings) as to whether a private air strip
is allowed according to federal regulations or common sense if it
known a plane cannot possibly take off with regards to a total of 2600
feet.
</quote>

Most light GA planes can easily takeoff in much less than 2600ft. What you
said and what you meant to say may not have been the same thing, but I
quoted correctly.

> What was meant was that it takes more
> than simply the land you lift off from to include in the total
> distance needed to take off.

Gee. I hadn't thought of that. I guess that whole category in the
performance section of my plane's POH has something to do with how much
distance it takes to achieve a certain altitude then, huh?

Why don't you take your trolling someplace else? We've tried to be nice and
answer your questions politely.

--
John T
____________________

[John T]

"just an average Farlang" > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.87ea7f298039956990fa1d1c165dea01@107 6535291.nulluser.com
>
> ...you run full throttle
> taking off over someone's house taking off with a total disregard for
> other people's rights ...

What rights would those be?

--
John T
____________________

[Big John]

Farlang

You, not a pilot, come on News Group and post a series of questions to
a group of pilots who in the cumulative have hundreds of thousands
hours flying time in aircraft from 3 cylinder certified aircraft to
supersonic birds and in flights all around the world in all kinds of
weather and you don't want to take their advice but continue to argue
with them. All the characteristics of a troll.

Again in plain language.

1. Get with your neighbor.You may not have a problem. If you do you
can find out what it is so you can start working on it. Right now you
are just blowing wind in the air (and posting crap on the News Group).

2. Also go talk to the individual county Commissioners about your
problem, if you determine you have one, before the meeting. It's a lot
easier one on one to get your points across prior to meeting.

3. If you want expert advice about land use in your area, go talk to a
lawyer about your possible (actual) problem.

I'm gone!!!!!!!!!!

Big John

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:34:51 -0500 (EST), "" just an average "
Farlang..." > wrote:

----clip----

>You may or may not be able to realize that a large factor of approving
>a private runway is not from hard calculations because if it were
>there would be no reason for a planning and zoning hearing. It all
>seems to balance out pretty good don't it... you run full throttle
>taking off over someone's house taking off with a total disregard for
>other people's rights and I am just supposed to consider myself lucky
>you chose my house.

Who's taking off over your house. You don't know from s**t and won't
go and find out.Sheeeees

----clip----

[David Brooks]

"John T" > wrote in message
ws.com...
> > What was meant was that it takes more
> > than simply the land you lift off from to include in the total
> > distance needed to take off.
>
> Gee. I hadn't thought of that. I guess that whole category in the
> performance section of my plane's POH has something to do with how much
> distance it takes to achieve a certain altitude then, huh?

I can't tell whether you are being sarcastic by now, but (in case anyone
who's not a pilot is still listening; pilots know this) most POH's do. Mine
tells me the distance the ideal plane requires to break pavement, and in
addition the distance to clear the proverbial 50 foot obstacle. Perhaps
that's what Farlang had heard of.

But I admit I really don't know the difference between "land you lift off
from" and "distance needed to take off" because as far as I know breaking
free of the pavement is legally taking off. Unless there's something weird
about ground effect that I didn't know.

-- David Brooks

[Newps]

just an average Farlang... wrote:


> I hope you are good enough to take off on 1000 feet of runway because
> I was told there is no reason any pilot cannot take off with that
> amount in a plane such as a cessna.

Whats your elevation there in Idaho? This may or may not be true.


You misunderstand the context of
> where you read that comment. What was meant was that it takes more
> than simply the land you lift off from to include in the total
> distance needed to take off.

Only if there are obstacles to clear.

[Mike O'Malley]

"Big John" > wrote in message

> If you follow the don't get mad, get even train of activist:
>
<snip>
>
> 8. Take up kite flying :o)
>

Good ideas so far, but I wouldn't want to try that one. Towing banners I've had
that run in before while towing banners. Unless it's a freakin huge kite with
some heavy duty string, all that's likely to happen is you'll loose your kite.
I did get a few little marks in the fabric where they hit, but that was about
it.

FWIW, the company I flew for had their own private strip, 1500' long and rough
grass. It took them a few years of battleing to get it built, but they did win
out in the final appeals. Even so, we still did our darndest to be good
neigbors, and flew rather unorthadox patterns to keep from disturbing the
neigbors. Did this increase the risk to us in the plane? Slightly, yes, but it
wasn't overly so, and looked at as a necessary tradeoff for the convienience of
the private strip.

I'll second the suggestion to contact your neighbor and talk to him about it
(did you try his doorbell?)

[Doug]

These "ranch strips" usually cause very few problems. If you can, set
up a social meeting with the guy and ask him if he can take the
location of your house into account on his takeoffs and landings
(takeoffs are noisier). But I doubt that his operations are going to
impact you very much, as he simply wont be taking off and landing that
often.

Since you like airplanes and aviation, why don't you see if the guy
will give you a ride in his airplane? He probably is keeping it at the
local airport right now. The two of you could go over there and fly
around. Bring your camera.

[Brian Burger]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, just an average Farlang... wrote:

<snip>
> you run full throttle
> taking off over someone's house taking off with a total disregard for
> other people's rights and I am just supposed to consider myself lucky
> you chose my house.

Other people's rights? Huh? Given that most airspace is *public* in most
countries (certainly in the US, Canada, UK, etc), aircraft are neither
breaking the law or disregarding anyone's rights by using that airspace.
You bought the land, not the air. Think of it as traffic noise from a
public highway, because that's exactly what it is.

As for 'consider myself lucky', I'll confess: I love aircraft noise. When
I hear an aircraft overhead I know that someone within earshot is doing
one of the coolest things humanity has ever done, and probably
having fun doing it. Knowing that I can do it too just makes me like the
noise a lot more.

Brian.

[Big John]

Tom

"Farlang" is Thai for 'white'.

Big John


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 02:02:32 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> wrote:

>What is a Farlang, anyway?

[Cub Driver]

> He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
>operate an aircraft from it.

This depends on state and local regulations.

My town specifically regulates "airports", and as I read the zoning
ordinance a private runway qualifies as an airport.

Where is the poster from?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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

[Cub Driver]

>>I would like to think it is being fair for me to expect no
>>planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
>>or pattern flying.
>
>The applicable federal regulations don't support that
>expectation. They permit the pilot to come closer when
>landing or taking off. A

It's even worse than that, from the neighbor's point of view. The
neighbor can't build a structure or allow a tree to grow to a height
that obstructs the takeoff.

At Plum Island airport in Newburyport MA, the previous operator owned
the east end of the runway. When a new operator was hired, he (the
eastie) built a raggedy pile on his own bit of runway. I thought it
was rather funny, but the courts didn't, and he had to remove the
pile.



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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

[Cub Driver]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:27:32 GMT, EDR > wrote:

>Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
>line with the runway.

The FAA can and probably will stop him.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

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

[EDR]

In article >, Ron Natalie
> wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:FWtWb.148128$U%5.676158@attbi_s03...
>
> > >
> > > Not quite true.
> > > Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> > > line with the runway.
> >
> > Which doesn't affect what I said one iota.
> >
> Also the premise is true. You can't erect a tower with impunity either.
> In addition to the local land use issues, towers that tall would require
> FAA notification before they are constructed.

Only if it to be 250 or more feet AGL.

[Mike Rapoport]

It depends on the county, talk to the county planner. Many places it
depends on how far you are from the closest land that is zoned residential.


Mike
MU-2


.."just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.2c49808e3f2f35f5431910160ea416b5@107 6505681.nulluser.com...
> Can anyone tell me what criteria, rules, regulations a person needs to
> be
> allowed to construct a private runway on his or her property. I know
> there
> are many factors that are not presently known in this scenario but I
> can
> try to input as much as I know.
>
> My neighbor owns land that is 2600 feet wide. The elevation is about
> 3000
> feet and the hottest temperature is 91 degrees in the summer. The land
> is
> located in Idaho. The prevailing winds position the optimal take off
> direction to be directly over my house about 1500 feet from the
> property
> line. I LOVE airplanes! I worked for Boeing (Lazy B) for the last
> fifteen
> years. I worked at Cessna in Witchita before that. I stop to watch
> planes
> take off and land. I LOVE PLANES!!! But what I don't love is buying 500
> acres to finally get some peace and quiet and then having some loud
> plane
> buzz my house at will. The person wanting to put in the runway has
> money
> to build a 3 floor nice house so I expect they will want to be
> socialites
> and invite all their friends to fly in for a barbacue on the weekend.
>
> I talked to planning and zoning and they don't even know what
> prospective
> planes will be flown there i.e. ultralites or larger planes that
> require
> longer runways. I would like to think it is being fair for me to
> expect no
> planes flying over my land below 500 feet whether taking off, landing
> or
> pattern flying. I bought my land and paid for the use of each and every
> acre. If by putting in a runway on the edge of my property that means
> they
> are helping themselves to a sort of "easement" flying a hundred feet
> or so
> over my land that doesn't seem at all fair. I may wish to build a barn,
> corral animals (which might go crazy) penned up with planes buzzing
> over
> them.
>
> Can I get some ideas on what is realistic?
>
> I don't even know what a common length of runway is but a friend of
> mine
> told me using generic table calculations that a fully loaded small
> plane
> on a hot day could very well need a long take off and after lift
> off ....
> how long a distance til that plane gets to minimal required elevation?
>
>
> Yesterday I took a flying lesson with a chief piot and he told me a
> small plane can lift off after about a thousand feet of runway and
> then the maximum climb would be about 500 feet per minute. He thought
> for a plane to stay the necessaary elevation over my property the
> pilot is required a total of no less than 4000 feet. The runway will
> be a dirt strip which also requires more distance.
>
> any comments would be appreciated
>

[EDR]

In article >, G.R. Patterson III
> wrote:

> EDR wrote:
> > Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> > line with the runway.
>
> I would not care to be the defense lawyer if his neighbor crashes due to the
> tower and it comes out that the only reason he built it was to interfere with
> airplanes.

There are no federal protections afforded to private airstrips.
Ten to fifteen years ago, outside Marysville OH, Honda knowingly built
a private communications tower off the end of a private strip new their
assembly plant. There was no recourse for the airstip owner.

[Mike Rapoport]

No sniveling when you don't get the answer you wanted.

Mike
MU-2
"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.08aca6e0d6e6c76ad4fd7c32b7325054@107 6508540.nulluser.com...
> Jim wrote:
>
> > Huh? You LOVE planes! He's not talking about building the next
> O'Hare in
> > your back yard. On the average if he flew once or twice a week
> would that
> > upset you? I'd say that's more of a realistic expectation. Maybe
> he'd even
> > give you a ride.
> >
> > Talk to your local zoning board. Like everything else in this
> country,
> > landowners have certain rights, until some asshole complains.
> > --
> > Jim Burns III
> >
> > Remove "nospam" to reply
>
> I was hoping for a more mature newsgroup. A more accurate saying would
> be,"We all have rights but not the right to impose on other's rights".
>
> So far I can only perceive a "redneck" mentality from the replies. You
> people question if "I" love airplanes but I question if "YOU" love
> airplanes because if you did you would be concerned to help preserve
> this instead of thinking you can do anything you please. I think I
> already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
> landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
> peachy. One flight every day, every hour, a crop dusting business ran
> out of the home or whatever would be extreme. This is not a question
> of pilots fighting for their rights because it is clear there is not
> enough land in this example to not violate the rights of others.
>

[Mike Rapoport]

While I understand and share your desire for peace and quiet, it is not a
"right" and does not have legal protection. If you really have 500 acres
and want peace and quiet, then why is your house on the edge of the
property?

Mike
MU-2

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.e280925b7ce137109f1ad739f078cbd4@107 6524004.nulluser.com...
> Peter,
>
> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out you trying to turn
> this into a personal attack. It just might help (and I know this isn't
> the first time you heard this) to re-read my initial post. I have a
> basic concern of my rights being violated. I don't care what any
> landowner or aircraft pilot does if his "rights" don't impose on "my"
> rights. I said it once before I wasn't looking for sympathy here. I
> know people who fly airplanes are biased to those feelings. It may
> surprise you to realize though as one person stated that pilots must
> act responsibly to preserve their interests. Just because you got a
> shiny plane out there and love it to death doesn't mean everyone else
> feels the same as you all the time. Keep in mind I really like to see
> planes take off and land. I would like to watch it up close, but other
> times it is not appropriate. You want an exmple you can understand?
> Maybe you have a loud stereo in your living room. Most people enjoy
> music and sometimes like to turn up the volume. It is unlikely you
> have a stereo in your bedroom and if you did it would likely not be on
> high volume. If you ponder that concept it gets back to the idea of
> being responsible.
>
> There is no denying I am overly-concerned and there is great reason to
> be. This is just the way things are Peter that nowdays people do
> things like this where they get approved for an airstrip and the idea
> is it will be kinda cool and won't bother anyone but after all is said
> and done it gets out of control and turns into something extreme.
>
> Try to keep your composure and not accuse me of things like
> understanding prevailing winds Peter when you have no clue of whether
> I know this or not. You are free to question me but when you just
> start spewing off you should be careful because you certainly have no
> idea and just making blind accusations.
>
>
>
>

[Newps]

Cub Driver wrote:
>>He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
>>operate an aircraft from it.
>
>
> This depends on state and local regulations.
>
> My town specifically regulates "airports", and as I read the zoning
> ordinance a private runway qualifies as an airport.
>
> Where is the poster from?

Not a city. He own 500 acres.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> Where is the poster from?

Idaho.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Newps wrote:
>
> Whats your elevation there in Idaho? This may or may not be true.

He said 3,000'.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> It's even worse than that, from the neighbor's point of view. The
> neighbor can't build a structure or allow a tree to grow to a height
> that obstructs the takeoff.

As far as I can tell from the "Applicability" sections of the FARs, they only
apply to public use airports. Local laws might cover such a case, of course.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[G.R. Patterson III]

EDR wrote:
>
> In article >, G.R. Patterson III
> > wrote:
>
> > EDR wrote:
> > > Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> > > line with the runway.
> >
> > I would not care to be the defense lawyer if his neighbor crashes due to the
> > tower and it comes out that the only reason he built it was to interfere with
> > airplanes.
>
> There are no federal protections afforded to private airstrips.
> Ten to fifteen years ago, outside Marysville OH, Honda knowingly built
> a private communications tower off the end of a private strip new their
> assembly plant. There was no recourse for the airstip owner.

That doesn't change the fact that juries tend to dislike SOBs. The tower owner
would almost certainly lose his shirt in the civil suit over such a case, IMO.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Brad Z]

Bi John,

Isn't that "Farang", not "farlang"?

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> Tom
>
> "Farlang" is Thai for 'white'.
>
> Big John
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 02:02:32 -0500, Tom Fleischman
> > wrote:
>
> >What is a Farlang, anyway?
>

[Big John]

George

Idaho??

He uses the name "Farlang" which is used in Thailand to describe a
white foreigner.

His e-mail address uses the abbreviation "Thai" for Thailand.

Go to Google and look up "Farlang" and you will find it is commonly
used among the bar girls who entertain the men who fly in from all
over the world to get laid. Big business in Bangkok.

Maybe he is one who goes there and is using the name and address in
remembrance or is just a Troll????

Big John


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:28:42 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Cub Driver wrote:
>>
>> Where is the poster from?
>
>Idaho.
>
>George Patterson
> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
> you look forward to the trip.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Tom Fleischman wrote:
>
> What is a Farlang, anyway?

Well, I found a reference that translates it as "plea". The language is Yiddish.
http://www.tanjasolnik.com/lyrics102.htm

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Ron Natalie]

"EDR" > wrote in message ...
> In article >, Ron Natalie
> > wrote:
>
> > "Newps" > wrote in message
> > news:FWtWb.148128$U%5.676158@attbi_s03...
> >
> > > >
> > > > Not quite true.
> > > > Nothing to stop him from erecting a 500 foot tower on his property in
> > > > line with the runway.
> > >
> > > Which doesn't affect what I said one iota.
> > >
> > Also the premise is true. You can't erect a tower with impunity either.
> > In addition to the local land use issues, towers that tall would require
> > FAA notification before they are constructed.
>
> Only if it to be 250 or more feet AGL.

A 500 foot tower would be more than 250 feet AGL, unless you dug a big hole to put
it in.

[G.R. Patterson III]

An Metet wrote:
>
> Where in Idaho are you located? Your neighbor sounds like someone I might
> like to meet and visit.

Hey, there's an idea! Sounds like an ideal place for the next rec.aviation
flyin! I'm not sure I can shoehorn my Maule into 2,600', though. Sounds a
bit tight. :-)

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Peter Duniho]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> > He certainly CAN build a runway only on his property and still
> >operate an aircraft from it.
>
> This depends on state and local regulations.

Please review the difference between the words "can" and "may". I was only
commenting on the claim that it would not be possible to build a runway from
which an airplane could be operated (clearly false).

Pete

[Dennis O'Connor]

I don't have answers for the technical and/or zoning portions of your
questions because I don't have sufficient information... I gather the
runway is in the planning stage so it is possible that anticipation is worse
than reality.. Discussion with the neighbor/pilot is the best method to
arrive at a solution that all can live with..

Consider that if his property border is 1500 feet from your buildings and
given that he will likely be airborne well before reaching the boundary of
his property, it is likely that the departing airplanes can turn enough to
avoid flying directly over your head...

As a person who also owns acreage and lives a quarter mile off the road, I
appreciate not hearing civilization too loudly, also... However, it is
rarely possible in this modern world to avoid noise... The farmers who work
the adjacent farms can be heard for well over a mile when their turbocharged
tractors, combines, etc., are working... The diesel pump for the half mile
long, circle irrigation system on the next section to my south can be heard
clearly at night in the summer <thump thump thump all night long> The
neighbor 3/4 of a mile to my southeast has music parties in the summer,
outside, and the banging drums and wailing horns are amazingly loud for the
distance...

Anyway, good luck with settling this between you and your neighbor as it is
tough living when there is animosity between neighbors...
denny

"just an average Farlang..." <Thai-no-

[bryan chaisone]

Ask me! I'm from Laos, my father is Thai. I speak, read and write
Thai and Laotian, plus a couple other languages. I was in Thailand
just last New Years Eve. stayed there only two weeks though.

Bryan Chaisone ~Fly safe, fly free~
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_a-h.htm#C

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...
> Tom Fleischman wrote:
> >
> > What is a Farlang, anyway?
>
> Well, I found a reference that translates it as "plea". The language is Yiddish.
> http://www.tanjasolnik.com/lyrics102.htm
>
> George Patterson
> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
> you look forward to the trip.

[Big John]

Byran

OK. What does "Farlang" mean inThai and how is it used?

Big John

On 12 Feb 2004 17:27:09 -0800, (bryan chaisone)
wrote:

>Ask me! I'm from Laos, my father is Thai. I speak, read and write
>Thai and Laotian, plus a couple other languages. I was in Thailand
>just last New Years Eve. stayed there only two weeks though.
>
>Bryan Chaisone ~Fly safe, fly free~
>http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_a-h.htm#C
>
>"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...
>> Tom Fleischman wrote:
>> >
>> > What is a Farlang, anyway?
>>
>> Well, I found a reference that translates it as "plea". The language is Yiddish.
>> http://www.tanjasolnik.com/lyrics102.htm
>>
>> George Patterson
>> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
>> you look forward to the trip.

[SeeAndAvoid]

This interested me, as once someone becomes a pilot, the first thing they
want is an airplane, the second might be their own private airstrip. For me
anyway.
I think you've got a big problem on your hands. Just from reading the posts
from the last couple days, I get the impression your 'meeting' with this guy
will have you coming in all friendly but ready to pounce once you hear what
you expect to hear. It'll then slide into 'too bad, I can do it if I want
and theres not much you can do about it'. Good luck.
Now I see why people live at airparks instead.
I can see your point that his 'dream' shouldnt destroy yours, but it's not
as if theres going to be touch and go's going on all day long. It'll be
occasional, and not last too long. You got a Harley? You do anything
noisy? If you put your home that close to the possibility of being
disturbed and had all those acres to work with, well, that's just dumb,
especially if you want peace and quiet.
How do you know he's "got all this money" etc, you've got all that land, he
probably thinks the same of you, may have no sympathy. That's no excuse to
intentionally make your life a living hell either though.
I think you made your mind up before coming here, regardless of your "any
comments would be appreciated" line.
And "just an average <white>" from Idaho calling someone a redneck is sure
calling the kettle black. Got a cult goin on up there?
I'm JOKING, take a breath.

Chris

[bryan chaisone]

You are correct John, Farlang means French or Caucasian. It is their
way of saying France.

"Farlang" is Laotian, You do not Roll your toungue when you say this
word in Laotian. You pronounce the "L" in the second syllable. The
eastern part of Thailand used to be Laos, and the people from that
region pronounces it like the Laotians.

"Farrang" is Thai, you roll your toungue or pronounce the "R" in the
second syllable.

Bryan Chaisone ~Fly safe, fly free~
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_a-h.htm#C


Big John > wrote in message >...
> Byran
>
> OK. What does "Farlang" mean inThai and how is it used?
>
> Big John
>
> On 12 Feb 2004 17:27:09 -0800, (bryan chaisone)
> wrote:
>
> >Ask me! I'm from Laos, my father is Thai. I speak, read and write
> >Thai and Laotian, plus a couple other languages. I was in Thailand
> >just last New Years Eve. stayed there only two weeks though.
> >
> >Bryan Chaisone ~Fly safe, fly free~
> >http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_a-h.htm#C
> >
> >"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...
> >> Tom Fleischman wrote:
> >> >
> >> > What is a Farlang, anyway?
> >>
> >> Well, I found a reference that translates it as "plea". The language is Yiddish.
> >> http://www.tanjasolnik.com/lyrics102.htm
> >>
> >> George Patterson
> >> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
> >> you look forward to the trip.

[Paul Sengupta]

Alternatively, if you have 500 acres, put your own airstrip in
away from your house, build some hangars and rent the use to
your neighbour.

Paul

[Paul Sengupta]

"just an average Farlang..." > wrote in
message
news:bm9yaWtv.beee428d5c5bfe285b1a48ec7e19d47a@107 6517174.nulluser.com...

> You got a great idea if it would work for both parties. Unfortunately,
> I honestly planned on penning up animals like cows in the general area
> under the runway and my house as I said was to be nearby on the top of
> a hill.

Cows don't give a damn, and are sometimes even curious of the
flying machines. The airstrip I use has cows and sheep around the
runway, fenced off one one end with a permanent fence which keeps
the cows off the runway. and on other sides with a moveable electric
fence to keep the sheep off. Half way down one edge of the runway
is another fence which borders a field containing deer.

The deer can actually get out and like grazing on the runway. They will
part as I taxi past then get back on. They will part again as I stick on
full thottle and start moving towards them.

The cows are on two sides of me as I do my run-up. Most just ignore
me (even the ones directly behind me in my propwash!) but some stop
what they're doing and watch. On approach I come in right over the top
of them as the runway starts just the other side of the fence. They're
never bothered.

Paul

[Big John]

Bryan

Thanks Bryan. Nice to get the straight poop.

"Farlang" hasn't posted for a while. Maye he took the good advice many
gave him and went and talked to his neighbor and found he doesn't have
a big problem? Let us hope so.

Big John


On 13 Feb 2004 08:20:00 -0800, (bryan chaisone)
wrote:

>You are correct John, Farlang means French or Caucasian. It is their
>way of saying France.
>
>"Farlang" is Laotian, You do not Roll your toungue when you say this
>word in Laotian. You pronounce the "L" in the second syllable. The
>eastern part of Thailand used to be Laos, and the people from that
>region pronounces it like the Laotians.
>
>"Farrang" is Thai, you roll your toungue or pronounce the "R" in the
>second syllable.
>
>Bryan Chaisone ~Fly safe, fly free~


----clip----

[Nathan D. Olmscheid]

Don't you think the first step before really worrying too much about it
is to find out what he plans to do with the airstrip. Like you said if
he plans to take off for personal flight now and then its probably not a
big deal. But if he plans to run a business off of it, it probably is.

Find out the facts before wasting energy on worrying about.

Take Care,

Nathan


>
> I was hoping for a more mature newsgroup. A more accurate saying would
> be,"We all have rights but not the right to impose on other's rights".
>
> So far I can only perceive a "redneck" mentality from the replies. You
> people question if "I" love airplanes but I question if "YOU" love
> airplanes because if you did you would be concerned to help preserve
> this instead of thinking you can do anything you please. I think I
> already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
> landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
> peachy. One flight every day, every hour, a crop dusting business ran
> out of the home or whatever would be extreme. This is not a question
> of pilots fighting for their rights because it is clear there is not
> enough land in this example to not violate the rights of others.
>

[Mike Z.]

Frankly I would be more worried about the noise from his mower. It will be running for hours keeping the grass cut.

MIke Z

"Nathan D. Olmscheid" > wrote in message . 159.8...
> Don't you think the first step before really worrying too much about it
> is to find out what he plans to do with the airstrip. Like you said if
> he plans to take off for personal flight now and then its probably not a
> big deal. But if he plans to run a business off of it, it probably is.
>
> Find out the facts before wasting energy on worrying about.
>
> Take Care,
>
> Nathan
>
>
> >
> > I was hoping for a more mature newsgroup. A more accurate saying would
> > be,"We all have rights but not the right to impose on other's rights".
> >
> > So far I can only perceive a "redneck" mentality from the replies. You
> > people question if "I" love airplanes but I question if "YOU" love
> > airplanes because if you did you would be concerned to help preserve
> > this instead of thinking you can do anything you please. I think I
> > already commented that I didn't know the extent of what the other
> > landowner intended to do. One flight one day of the month would be
> > peachy. One flight every day, every hour, a crop dusting business ran
> > out of the home or whatever would be extreme. This is not a question
> > of pilots fighting for their rights because it is clear there is not
> > enough land in this example to not violate the rights of others.
> >
>

[John T]

"Mike Z." > wrote in message
ink.net
>
> Frankly I would be more worried about the noise from his mower. It
> will be running for hours keeping the grass cut.

Nah, just the occassional "baa". :)

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Dave Buckles]

just an average Farlang... wrote:

> Very true but what I am trying to address is where his rights on his
> property end and where my rights on my property begin as it applies to
> his plane taking off on his land and barely clearing a border fence
> and his plane then affecting my rights

If he clears the fence, he's not necessarily affecting your rights. I
understand your concern about noise (and will address it momentarily),
but consider this: when somebody flies over at 1500 AGL, or 5000 AGL,
there's noise as well. When somebody drives a car past your property,
there's noise (sometimes considerable, depending on the type and
condition of the car). Motorcycles--ever heard a Harley? I ride a
Kawasaki for a reason, but I could ride a hog past your driveway every
morning and be completely within the law. Polite, no, but quite legal.

> This is what is being discussed in circles without addressing the
> issue. True, I don't know his intentions but in all my years of
> experience concerns are better addressed before the event takes place
> as legal presidence comes into play, example, In Idaho the first
> farmer in the area has primary water rights and any and all people who
> move in will shut down their water pumps if they cause the first owner
> to run low on water out of his well.
>
> I have not heard one reply in this thread commenting whether the
> neighbor is allowed to do such a thing as he would be flying very low
> over my property and below the minimum federally regulated altitude. I
> realize this is during a take off or landing but the fact remains with
> this amount of land it is not possible to take off or land without
> using other people's land for his runway to be possible.
"Minimum Federally regulated altitude?" I assume the operation would be
under Part 91 (14 CFR 91); the relevant rule, then, would be 91.119,
which reads:



**Except when necessary for takeoff or landing**, no person may operate
an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency
landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or
settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of
1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of
2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the
surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those
cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any
person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters. Helicopters may be operated at less than the minimums
prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section if the operation is
conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface. In
addition, each person operating a helicopter shall comply with any
routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the
Administrator.


[emphasis mine]

Please note the emphasis on the "Except when necessary for takeoff or
landing;" that clause gives authorization to operate at lower altitudes
for the purposes of takeoff and landing, which would likely be the use
of this proposed runway.

As far as noise goes, you're probably out of luck. Several court cases
(most notably US v. Causby and Griggs v. Allegheny County) have held
that aircraft noise does not constitute a "taking" of property unless it
makes the property completely unusable. I sincerely doubt that would be
the case here.

As you yourself have admitted, you don't know how the airstrip will be
used; you come across as somebody looking to cause problems before he
knows the facts. I don't presume to make that accusation against you, I
merely state that your posts convey such a feeling. Perhaps you ought
to contact your neighbor and find out more. As pilots, we all
understand the importance of working with the rest of the general public
to minimize problems and present a positive image of general aviation;
nobody wins if we're seen as an annoyance. I'm sure you'll find the
people in this group are more than happy to help you enjoy your
property, while at the same time granting your neighbor the same
courtesy, if you'll give them a fair chance with all the information.

--Dave

--
Dave Buckles

http://www.flight-instruction.com