moving to spokane

[pablo]

I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???

I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).

Thanks

[Jay Honeck]

> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
> Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
> I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
> there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
> most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).

I dunno about the airports, but it appears to me that an instrument rating
is absolutely required if you want to live in Washington.

I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly little
warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.

(In short, the weather SUCKED.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[vincent p. norris]

>I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
>Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???

I've landed at Felts a couple of times on trips to Alaska. A good
field, with a good restaurant.

Jay responded:

>I dunno about the airports, but it appears to me that an instrument rating
>is absolutely required if you want to live in Washington.

I respectfully disagree, unless you plan to fly into Seattle a lot in
the winter.

>I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly little
>warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.

Jay, you were west of the Cascades. Spokane is east of the Cascades.
Two different worlds.

Moist air comes in from the Pacific, rises, cools, and it rains.
After going over the Cascades, it descends into eastern Washington,
where Spokane is located; it warms, and the sun shines.

Eastern Washington is quite arid. I'm not claiming it's never cloudy
at Spokane, but the wx there is totally different than in the Seattle
area.

Actually, even Seattle is not all that cloudy in summer. You are
generalizing from a sample of four days. I lived there only one
spring and summer, still a small sample. But we had far more sunshine
between March 1 and Labor Day, 1969, than clouds; and had to water
the flowers occasionally. Pretty much like the wx here in central PA.

vince norris

[John Ousterhout]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
>>Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>>
>>I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
>>there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
>>most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
>
> I dunno about the airports, but it appears to me that an instrument rating
> is absolutely required if you want to live in Washington.
>
> I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly little
> warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.
>
> (In short, the weather SUCKED.)

A quick look at a map would show that Spokane is over 200 nm east of
Seattle - well over 100 nm east of the Cascade mountains.

The climate in Spokane is much different than Seattle. Many Washington
Residents consider Western and Eastern WA to be two different states.
(Ditto Oregon)

A moments Googling found this information:


Spokane, WA Climate
* 260 Days of Sunshine a Year
Average Annual Rainfall: 17 inches
Average Annual Snowfall: 51 inches
Average Days with Snow: 73 days
Average January Temperature: 20-30F
Average July Temperature: 54-82F


Seattle, WA Climate
Average number of rainy days each year: 154
Average annual rainfall: 39 inches
Average annual snowfall: 11 inches annually
Average temperature in January: 40F
Average temperature in July: 65F


- John Ousterhout-

[Mike Rapoport]

I live in Sandpoint ID which is about 50nm NE of felts. The weather is
going to be wetter than the Central Valley in CA and quite gray in the
winter. . Check out
http://www.weatherbase.com/weather/state.php3?c=US&refer= and compare
Spokane to some places that you are familiar with. The bad news is that
there will be ice most of the time when there is IMC. The good news is that
you will be really close to some of the best backcountry flying in the US.

Mike
MU-2 (for the ice)
Helio Courier (for the backcountry)


"pablo" <smpharmanautatyahoodotcom> wrote in message
...
> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
> Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
> I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
> there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
> most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
> Thanks
>

[tony roberts]

Hi Pabl.o
Come on over and join us at:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/pnwflying

You'll learn more than you ever wanted to know about the area.

Tony
C-GICE

In article >,
pablo <smpharmanautatyahoodotcom> wrote:

> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
> Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
> I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
> there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
> most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
> Thanks




--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:f1ale.6364$IC6.759@attbi_s72...
> I dunno about the airports, but it appears to me that an instrument rating
> is absolutely required if you want to live in Washington.
>
> I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly
> little warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.

Ahh, yes. Four days is *plenty* to learn everything you need to know about
the weather in a particular place. Never mind that you were here at the
tail end of three days in a row when we had thunderstorms; keeping in mind
that we can go YEARS without having even one thunderstorm.

In any case, as John O. points out, the climate in Spokane is radically
different than that in Seattle anyway. Eastern Washington is basically high
desert; very dry and hot in the summer, cold and snowy in the winter.
Plenty of sun all year 'round.

Pete

[Antoñio]

pablo wrote:
> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. <snip>
> Thanks

I live in Western WA. I will ditto what has been said already: The
climates are vastly different. Eastern WA (east of the Cascade mountain
range) is much drier and extreme temperature-wise. It is mostly like a
high-plains desert, very flat, few trees, rattlesnakes, lots of rich
wheat farmers, very conservative politically, hot in the day and cold
at night.

Spokane has more trees than most of eastern WA. It has, I think, about
300,000 people, lots of Republicans and "neo-cons". Lots of
agricultural stuff going on. The town seems a little run-down in most
areas.

Western WA is almost the diametric opposite: Cloudy and/or wet most of
the time from mid October to about mid may. It is fairly dry in the
summer months, though. More jobs are here because the cities are
larger. Lots of traffic problems on the only freeway that runs north to
south (I-5), more liberal, more beautiful with its lush foiliage, fir
trees, lakes, Puget Sound, and ocean. State capitol is in Olympia on
this side. More TFR's than anywhere in the US. Better colleges. Lots of
liberal types here.

If you like, you can write me with specific questions.

Antonio

[Peter Duniho]

"Antoñio" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> [...]
> More TFR's than anywhere in the US. Better colleges. Lots of
> liberal types here.

I'm still trying to figure out how political leanings got dragged into a
discussion about weather. I mean, without Jay's help, that is.

As far as the TFRs go, I guess you haven't actually been flying in awhile.
We've only got one left.

Are the jobs here because the cities are larger (as you claim)? Or are the
cities larger because the jobs are here? The fact is that it's a little of
both, but mostly both the population AND the jobs are here because we're
much closer to the coast. That's where population centers are, for the most
part. Near shorelines.

I love how it looks here on the west side, and prefer the scenery here, but
I'll bet some folks from the east side would take issue with your assertion
that the west side is "more beautiful". There is lots of wonderful scenery
on the east side, if you just open your eyes to appreciate it.

Other than all that, I think you summed things up nicely. That said, I
think I'm starting to see why your wife contradicts you so often. :)

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, you were west of the Cascades. Spokane is east of the Cascades.
> Two different worlds.

Ah, good point. That's one of the real down-sides of airline (versus
private) travel -- you have no "sense of place." I literally stepped onto
a plane in Chicago, and stepped off in Seattle, without the slightest regard
to geography or distance.

I could have been in Argentina, for all it mattered.

>>I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly
>>little
>>warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.
>
>
> Moist air comes in from the Pacific, rises, cools, and it rains.

It was amazing. We were downtown at the aquarium, and we were able to watch
the rain squalls rolling in across the bay (or, rather "sound") every few
minutes. In between, it would be sunny and semi-nice out.

Nor surprisingly, it looked EXACTLY like the Weather Channel depictions of
Seattle, with bands of precip rolling across the state.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[pablo]

> I'm still trying to figure out how political leanings got
dragged into
> a discussion about weather. I mean, without Jay's help,
that is.
>


Actually, I appreciate all information I can get. Thanks to
all of you
who have responded. I'm really just trying to get a feel for
the area
and that's what I'm getting from your responses. Even
(especially) the
political climate is important when I'll be living and working
in the
area.

How about the airports? Anybody land frequently at Mead, Deer
Park,
Felts? I noticed in AFD that Mead has no winter snow removal.
Deer
Park Airport looks pretty large for such a sparsely populated
area. I'm
leaning toward the Mead area, due to schools and real estate
situation.

I live in Hanford, CA. Hanford Muni (HJO) has an indifferent
FBO that
fills the needs of this small town, I suppose. I'm able to
rent an
elderly Warrior II on block time for $80/hr. Anyone know the
FBO's in
the Spokane area? Rental rates and availability?

I've been scrounging up as much information on the web as I
can, but
FBO's are mostly too poor for an info rich website, it seems.

I'll be going there in two weeks to look over the area. I
plan to stop
by the airports and talk to some FBO's. If anyone can point
me to the
better ones now, I'd appreciate it very much.

Thanks again,

Pablo

[H.P.]

The suicide rate is higher on the left side. Dreary wx is a significant
factor. Bush's election is another. God knows what would happen if
Starbucks or BMW raise their prices.


"Antoñio" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> pablo wrote:
>> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. <snip>
>> Thanks
>
> I live in Western WA. I will ditto what has been said already: The
> climates are vastly different. Eastern WA (east of the Cascade mountain
> range) is much drier and extreme temperature-wise. It is mostly like a
> high-plains desert, very flat, few trees, rattlesnakes, lots of rich
> wheat farmers, very conservative politically, hot in the day and cold
> at night.
>
> Spokane has more trees than most of eastern WA. It has, I think, about
> 300,000 people, lots of Republicans and "neo-cons". Lots of
> agricultural stuff going on. The town seems a little run-down in most
> areas.
>
> Western WA is almost the diametric opposite: Cloudy and/or wet most of
> the time from mid October to about mid may. It is fairly dry in the
> summer months, though. More jobs are here because the cities are
> larger. Lots of traffic problems on the only freeway that runs north to
> south (I-5), more liberal, more beautiful with its lush foiliage, fir
> trees, lakes, Puget Sound, and ocean. State capitol is in Olympia on
> this side. More TFR's than anywhere in the US. Better colleges. Lots of
> liberal types here.
>
> If you like, you can write me with specific questions.
>
> Antonio
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:qZjle.9845$IC6.9583@attbi_s72...
> It was amazing. We were downtown at the aquarium, and we were able to
> watch the rain squalls rolling in across the bay (or, rather "sound")
> every few minutes. In between, it would be sunny and semi-nice out.

Actually, you were just fine with "bay". As in, Elliott Bay.

The Puget Sound is the entire large area of water, up to but not including
the Strait of Juan de Fuca. You can't see the whole sound from the Seattle
waterfront (or from any waterfront).

Elliott Bay, on the other hand, is the smaller area of water immediately
adjacent to Seattle.

"Across the Sound" wouldn't be terribly wrong, really...but "Bay" is more
accurate from that vantage point, and certainly not in error.

> Nor surprisingly, it looked EXACTLY like the Weather Channel depictions of
> Seattle, with bands of precip rolling across the state.

Which isn't what rain around here usually looks like, actually. In our
regular "rainy season" we usually just get heavy stratus clouds dumping
precipitation everywhere. The main exception would be the "convergence
zone" where the air mass having been split by the Olympic Mountains
reconverges, causing uplifting. It is often rainier and more turbulent
where the convergence zone happens to be that day (it can wander north or
south by quite a bit, depending on the prevailing wind direction).

Of course, rain is never really that simple, but the generalities hold
pretty well. The main thing to keep in mind is that the weather you saw
when you were here is hardly typical, even for Seattle.

Pete

[Big John]

Used to fly in often to Spokane to visit the Fighter Squadron there.

Most times made a GCA up the river and over the bridges to get in.

Am sure they have good days but also a lot of bad.

Wx not like we had in North Bay, San Francisco, like you, fog in
winter.

You just learn to live with it, some days you fly and some you don't.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ````````````````````````````````````````````````
On Wed, 25 May 2005 20:19:39 -0500, pablo <smpharmanautatyahoodotcom>
wrote:

>I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
>Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
>I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
>there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
>most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
>Thanks

[Antoñio]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Anto=F1io" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > [...]
> > More TFR's than anywhere in the US. Better colleges. Lots of
> > liberal types here.
>
> I'm still trying to figure out how political leanings got dragged into a
> discussion about weather. I mean, without Jay's help, that is.

..=2E.Just describing the "climate". ;-)

> As far as the TFRs go, I guess you haven't actually been flying in awhile.
> We've only got one left.

Actually, I fly quite often. I just don't check the TFR's much! I stand
corrected and so do you...we have two left...Bangon and Mt.St.Helen's

> Are the jobs here because the cities are larger (as you claim)? Or are t=
he
> cities larger because the jobs are here?

I see you are a fan of Zen. The tree falling in the forest koan always
got me.

But I see your point. Boeing and Microsoft probably made the noise
before the non-employment fell...net effect is still the same
though--if you are looking for employment and are moving to WA, you'd
have a better chance on the west side.


> I love how it looks here on the west side, and prefer the scenery here, b=
ut
> I'll bet some folks from the east side would take issue with your asserti=
on
> that the west side is "more beautiful". There is lots of wonderful scene=
ry
> on the east side, if you just open your eyes to appreciate it.

Actually, now that you mention it, I also love the wide-open, expansive
views you get of the landscape and the sky over on the east side.
Sometimes I drive the back country there and enjoy how you can drive
for hours and not see a tree, a house, or a soul.

> Other than all that, I think you summed things up nicely. That said, I
> think I'm starting to see why your wife contradicts you so often. :)

..=2E.It's just because she's often wrong! ;-)

Antonio

[Jay Honeck]

Actually, now that you mention it, I also love the wide-open, expansive
views you get of the landscape and the sky over on the east side.
Sometimes I drive the back country there and enjoy how you can drive
for hours and not see a tree, a house, or a soul.

THAT would be a pleasant change from Seattle, which -- from everything I
saw -- is nothing but Chicago West.

Except it's even worse, since many Seattle drivers apparently have no clue
how to deal with their (relatively) new-found traffic. There were many
opportunities for us to study the city-scape as we sat in 8-lanes of
traffic, all stopped for no apparent reason.

(At least in Chicago we could blame the toll booths!)

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> God knows what would happen if Starbucks or BMW raise their prices.

Starbucks (AKA: The Bottled Water of Coffee) couldn't possibly raise their
prices any higher. At SEA-TAC I paid $3.70 for a big cup of their colored
water -- what a rip!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Gardner]

Clear and 88 in Seattle today, Jay, with the same expected tomorrow. No rain
and a little cooler (81) yesterday.

Bob Gardner

"John Ousterhout" > wrote in
message news:AYale.6453$IC6.4343@attbi_s72...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
>>>Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>>>
>>>I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
>>>there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
>>>most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>>
>>
>> I dunno about the airports, but it appears to me that an instrument
>> rating is absolutely required if you want to live in Washington.
>>
>> I was just there for four days. It rained every day, with alarmingly
>> little warning, and with quite suddenly lowered ceilings and visibility.
>>
>> (In short, the weather SUCKED.)
>
> A quick look at a map would show that Spokane is over 200 nm east of
> Seattle - well over 100 nm east of the Cascade mountains.
>
> The climate in Spokane is much different than Seattle. Many Washington
> Residents consider Western and Eastern WA to be two different states.
> (Ditto Oregon)
>
> A moments Googling found this information:
>
>
> Spokane, WA Climate
> * 260 Days of Sunshine a Year
> Average Annual Rainfall: 17 inches
> Average Annual Snowfall: 51 inches
> Average Days with Snow: 73 days
> Average January Temperature: 20-30F
> Average July Temperature: 54-82F
>
>
> Seattle, WA Climate
> Average number of rainy days each year: 154
> Average annual rainfall: 39 inches
> Average annual snowfall: 11 inches annually
> Average temperature in January: 40F
> Average temperature in July: 65F
>
>
> - John Ousterhout-

[[email protected]]

If you are going to move to Spokane, you need to learn how to pronounce
the name of the city. Here is a link to a song that will help you with
that:
http://www.bobrivers.com/audiovault/tunes/tunes.asp?Var=S&Page=2

Scroll down the the song for Spokane and enjoy!

Dean

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:UVple.11852$IC6.534@attbi_s72...
> THAT would be a pleasant change from Seattle, which -- from everything I
> saw -- is nothing but Chicago West.

Again, how astute of you to come up with that *oh* so accurate comparison in
the four days you were here. It's amazing how little time a person needs to
figure out all they need to know about a place.

Suffice to say, Seattle and Chicago have very little in common.

> Except it's even worse, since many Seattle drivers apparently have no clue
> how to deal with their (relatively) new-found traffic. There were many
> opportunities for us to study the city-scape as we sat in 8-lanes of
> traffic, all stopped for no apparent reason.

You're funny. Yes, drivers here have no clue. They have no clue where you
are too. You just don't have as many people crammed into as little space as
we do.

Pete

[Antoñio]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> (At least in Chicago we could blame the toll booths!)

I've seen backups here that could easilly reach to Chicago...Maybe we
should blame the Chicago toll booths for our traffic!


Antonio

[Montblack]

wrote)
> http://www.bobrivers.com/audiovault/tunes/tunes.asp?Var=S&Page=2
>
> Scroll down the the song for Spokane and enjoy!


http://www.bobrivers.com/audiovault/tunes/tunes.asp?Var=D
"Dan Quayle didn't go to Vietnam-ee..." :-)

I'm a sucker for these dumb but funny sites.


Montblack <g>

[[email protected]]

First of all, to answer your question....Felts is a nice little field,
but my experience as a transient was that GEG (the big field) is a
better place to land (certainly easier as a point of entry from
Canada). If you are moving there and looking for a home field, this
may not matter much. Don't know anything about the other two, but I'd
definitely consider Felts as a good candidate for a GA base based on
its location.

The weather is very different in Spokane than Seattle because of the
mountains and wide plain between them. Washington is not Iowa...there
is a HUGE difference between the east and west sides, geographically
and meteorologically. This is what makes flying in the West so
interesting.
Spokane is a very, very nice city. It has first class medical
facilities, etc. Frankly, one would be hard-pressed to find a nicer
place to live, unless you want a large city...in which case Seattle
would be hard to beat for reasons too numerous to mention in this
thread. Politically I'd prefer Seattle in a heartbeat, but that also
is a different issue, and apparantly not one that is open to choice
here.

[Morgans]

"Montblack" > wrote

> I'm a sucker for these dumb but funny sites.

Could it be that you are........dumb but funny? <g>

Sorry, but it was *way* too easy! :-)
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Honeck]

> Again, how astute of you to come up with that *oh* so accurate comparison in
> the four days you were here. It's amazing how little time a person needs to
> figure out all they need to know about a place.
>
> Suffice to say, Seattle and Chicago have very little in common.

Well, I've driven in both now (Chicago extensively, over several
decades), and they both look, smell, and quack like a duck.

And they both suck.

The only real exception to that comparision is the "carpool lane" that
Seattle has built, which was really nice since I was routinely driving
a mini-van stocked with four people on-board.

Sadly, it appeared to be severely under-utilized -- and that extra lane
sure would sure have helped get those other poor schmucks in the right
lanes moving. At more than three million bucks per mile, it's hard to
imagine a more expensive white elephant.

(I'll bet there's quite a market for mannequins in Seattle, eh? :-)

> You're funny. Yes, drivers here have no clue. They have no clue where you
> are too. You just don't have as many people crammed into as little space as
> we do.

Sadly, Seattle looks just like every other really nice area -- 20 years
after everyone has discovered it. We found some really seedy areas,
suffered through way too much traffic, and witnessed endless strip
malls blighting the landscape -- which more than offset the pretty
trees and distant mountains.

I'm sure it was once gorgeous. (But, then, so was Chicago, once upon a
time...)

And, hey -- what's up with your new monorail system? The press
coverage of THAT "little" boondoggle while we were there was pretty
severe, and quite entertaining. Do you REALLY pay a couple of hundred
bucks more in ANNUAL taxes if you own a car in Seattle -- just to pay
for a TRAIN?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> The only real exception to that comparision is the "carpool lane"...
> Sadly, it appeared to be severely under-utilized -- and that extra lane
> sure would sure have helped get those other poor schmucks in the right
> lanes moving.

IF it were not severely underused, it would be just as clogged as the
lane the other schmucks were using. For a freeway to work properly, it
must be mostly empty, a fact most people don't realize.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Honeck]

> Clear and 88 in Seattle today, Jay, with the same expected tomorrow. No
> rain and a little cooler (81) yesterday.

Glad to hear it.

It's been clear and in the mid-70s all week. Got in a nice little dinner
flight tonight with the kids, before their baseball games...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> IF it were not severely underused, it would be just as clogged as the lane
> the other schmucks were using. For a freeway to work properly, it must be
> mostly empty, a fact most people don't realize.

There must be enough open space to allow proper merging, and an educated
fleet of drivers who know how to use it properly.

In my experience, it's the latter that's normally the "missing link"...
And all it takes is a relative hand-full of ignoramuses to foul up the whole
system.

But, back to Seattle. I think it's safe to say that building 1/4th of your
freeway system to only serve (perhaps?) 1/10th of your users is not the way
to speed things along. The vast majority of the drivers in Seattle were
"flying solo" -- and will continue to do so, no matter how fervently they
try to force car-pooling or mass-transit on them.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:5Vwle.9569$PS3.867@attbi_s22...
>> Clear and 88 in Seattle today, Jay, with the same expected tomorrow. No
>> rain and a little cooler (81) yesterday.
>
> Glad to hear it.

I'm not. 88 for folks who live here is like 110 for folks who live in
Phoenix (for example). That is, it's not unheard of and it does happen now
and then, but it's enough out of our acclimated temperature range to be VERY
uncomfortable.

I'm looking forward to the weekend, when they are saying we'll get some
clouds and cooling (little or no rain though).

Pete

[Philip S.]

in article , pablo at
smpharmanautatyahoodotcom wrote on 5/25/05 6:19 PM:

> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
> Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
> I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
> there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
> most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
> Thanks
>

I live in Spokane. Since I've only been a pilot for a couple of years, and I
did all my training here (including my instrument rating), I really don't
have much basis for comparison to other places. There have been relatively
few occasions when I've been grounded by weather. Maybe I've been lucky.

Actually, there are many similarities between the weather here and where you
are. Summers are hot and dry, winters can have extended temperature
inversions, resulting in fog.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Well, I've driven in both now (Chicago extensively, over several
> decades), and they both look, smell, and quack like a duck.

I'm not sure why you think that traffic is the only relevant characteristic
of a region that is worth considering. But if that's the only similarity to
Chicago you can come up with for Seattle, you're a long way from justifying
calling Seattle "Chicago West".

> And they both suck.

IMHO, there are few urban areas that don't suck. That's life.

> The only real exception to that comparision is the "carpool lane" that
> Seattle has built, which was really nice since I was routinely driving
> a mini-van stocked with four people on-board.
>
> Sadly, it appeared to be severely under-utilized -- and that extra lane
> sure would sure have helped get those other poor schmucks in the right
> lanes moving. At more than three million bucks per mile, it's hard to
> imagine a more expensive white elephant.

It must be nice to live such a sheltered life. However, carpool lanes are
par for the course in most urban areas (and no, Iowa City does not count as
an "urban area). They are "underutilized" in most urban areas, in that it
always looks like few cars are using them. However, the truth is that the
*volume* of passengers carried in the carpool lane compares quite favorably
to the volume carried in the other lanes, which is the whole point.

> Sadly, Seattle looks just like every other really nice area -- 20 years
> after everyone has discovered it. We found some really seedy areas,
> suffered through way too much traffic, and witnessed endless strip
> malls blighting the landscape -- which more than offset the pretty
> trees and distant mountains.

Everything's so black and white to you. But then, we already knew that.
However, for the rest of us, while we might agree that there are aspects
about Seattle (or any large city) that could be improved upon, we value the
other characteristics of living near a large city that provide great
benefits. I doubt I could stand to live in a place so backwater as Iowa
City; the lack of real cultural diversity alone would have me going insane
in short order.

I think it's funny that you would criticize us for having "seedy areas" and
"strip malls". As if there aren't any of those in the Midwest.

As far as the "distant mountains" go...how long would it take you to drive
to even a 4000' mountain (which is considered a foothill around here) from
where you live? We can get to the foothills in half an hour, and serious
peaks in an hour. And it's not just the mountains. The perpetual green,
the vast waterways (two enormous fresh water lakes, hundreds of smaller
lakes, hundreds of miles of shoreline in the Puget Sound), and the San Juan
Islands an easy 45 minute flight away, just to name a few other things I
love about this place. Almost every day I look around and thank my lucky
stars that I wound up living in such a beautiful place.

I don't doubt Iowa City is a nice place to live. Heck, I have even been
known to compliment Iowa in general as a state.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.student/msg/221db68037d18731
But I've traveled all over the US, and have yet to find a place with the
combination of big city benefits alongside geographical, topographical,
ecological beauty that Seattle has. And that's *including* Iowa. As far as
I'm concerned, your criticism of Seattle is just plain sour grapes.

> I'm sure it was once gorgeous. (But, then, so was Chicago, once upon a
> time...)

It is still gorgeous. A person who doesn't recognize that simply hasn't
opened his eyes. Of course, there are a great many things to which you
haven't opened your eyes, so it doesn't surprise me you don't see the beauty
in Seattle either. On the bright side, I assume that means you won't be
considering a move here any time soon.

> And, hey -- what's up with your new monorail system? The press
> coverage of THAT "little" boondoggle while we were there was pretty
> severe, and quite entertaining. Do you REALLY pay a couple of hundred
> bucks more in ANNUAL taxes if you own a car in Seattle -- just to pay
> for a TRAIN?

Don't know, don't care. I don't actually live IN Seattle, and I don't pay
the taxes that will fund that project. As near as I can tell, the voters
there were as much interested in the aesthetic of a monorail as they were in
having some sort of transportation solution. We've had plenty of
boondoggles around here...the Monorail just happens to be one of them.

And yes, the taxes are on the order of $100-300 for most vehicles. See
http://www.dol.wa.gov/vs/monorailqa.htm for more details.

Keep in mind, this is an area where sales and excise taxes are generally
high anyway, since there is no income tax. Until recently, annual
registration (based on the value of the vehicle) for a new luxury sedan
could easily run $500 or more, with a depreciation schedule that lowered the
value of the vehicle by less than 10% per year. The Monorail tax uses the
same depreciation schedule, charging 1.4% of the depreciated "value" of the
vehicle each year.

Did you rent a car while you were here? If so, the folks who go to see the
Mariners play their home games thank you. You helped pay for that stadium,
with the car rental surcharge designed to avoid people who actually live
here pay for things they use. :)

Another thing to consider is that, as with most other places, many of these
projects would cost a LOT less if they could simply be designed and
implemented, without all the public ruckus. Sometimes it seems as though
our government spends as much money defending lawsuits filed by
vocal-but-very-tiny minority groups as they do actually building. And of
course, delays cost money just because of the delay, along with rises in
costs of materials, labor, etc.

Anyway, not to defend the Monorail...everything I hear about it suggests
it's not going to be much of a connector, won't be more effective than
simply adding buses, and of course will cost a lot more than it should.
But, I'll bet if I wandered over to Iowa City, I'd find your tax money going
to some projects I think are pretty silly too.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:fZwle.10071$Is4.5901@attbi_s21...
> There must be enough open space to allow proper merging, and an educated
> fleet of drivers who know how to use it properly.

The former exists only in places where very few people live. The latter
exists nowhere.

> In my experience, it's the latter that's normally the "missing link"...
> And all it takes is a relative hand-full of ignoramuses to foul up the
> whole system.

There is an endless supply of ignoramuses. Everywhere. Having to suffer
the consequences of a large number of them in a small space is simply one of
the modest costs of living in or near a large city, with all of the benefits
that entails.

> But, back to Seattle. I think it's safe to say that building 1/4th of
> your freeway system to only serve (perhaps?) 1/10th of your users is not
> the way to speed things along. The vast majority of the drivers in
> Seattle were "flying solo" -- and will continue to do so, no matter how
> fervently they try to force car-pooling or mass-transit on them.

Your numbers are off. Not surprising, considering that I'm sure you didn't
actually bother to count anything, relying only on your intuitive
observation (which, no doubt, has proved so very effective in the past).

For example, one report shows us that the buses alone, not even counting all
the other vehicles using the lane, carry more passengers in the HOV lane
than are carried in ALL of the other lanes of one regional highway:
http://www.pbworld.com/library/technical_papers/pdf/10_HOVFacilityDevelopment.pdf
Another report shows similar data, but for more of our local highways (see
"Exhibit 33"):
http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/report/public_transportation.pdf
For all of the HOV lanes listed, the ratio of passengers carried in HOV
lanes to passengers carried in mainline lanes *exceeds* the ratio of HOV
lanes to mainline lanes, usually by a significant amount. In one stretch of
I-5, south of downtown Seattle, even though there are generally three or
four mainline lanes to the single HOV lane, the HOV lane still carries more
than a third of the total traffic on the highway. Which is the whole point.
Study after study show that HOV lanes, in Seattle and elsewhere, carry their
fair share of passengers and then some.

And of course, none of that even considers the fact that many passengers in
the carpool lane represent a car that's NOT using one of the other lanes.

But regardless, as far as the mindset of the typical driver in the US
refusing to drive in the carpool lane, the same is true of drivers
everywhere in the US. Even Iowa. For you to assert that Seattle is somehow
unique in this respect simply illustrates your ignorance about how US
citizens think, everywhere.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> IMHO, there are few urban areas that don't suck. That's life.

Precisely. I certainly didn't mean to limit my observation to your beloved
Seattle -- they *all* suck.

> It must be nice to live such a sheltered life. However, carpool lanes are
> par for the course in most urban areas (and no, Iowa City does not count
> as an "urban area). They are "underutilized" in most urban areas, in that
> it always looks like few cars are using them. However, the truth is that
> the *volume* of passengers carried in the carpool lane compares quite
> favorably to the volume carried in the other lanes, which is the whole
> point.

It's a nice idea -- as are all these types of government-sponsored things --
that flies in the face of human nature. People *like* to drive their own
cars -- that's "the American Way" -- and no special highway lanes are going
to change that fact.

> Everything's so black and white to you. But then, we already knew that.
> However, for the rest of us, while we might agree that there are aspects
> about Seattle (or any large city) that could be improved upon, we value
> the other characteristics of living near a large city that provide great
> benefits. I doubt I could stand to live in a place so backwater as Iowa
> City; the lack of real cultural diversity alone would have me going insane
> in short order.

Which pretty much confirms my suspicions. For those of us who actually fly,
there is no "backwater" -- anywhere.

A pilot can live in a nice area, with a great lifestyle, no crime, little
traffic, and safe schools, while still being "close" (time-wise) to the big
cities. I can be in Kansas City, St. Louis or Chicago within the hour
(although I seldom feel the need, thanks to our University) -- which is
about what it takes you to drive from one side of town to the other.

Any pilot -- hell, any person -- who knowingly chooses to live in an area
with 8 lanes of slow-moving traffic between home and work -- every day of
their lives -- is a friggin' moron.

> I think it's funny that you would criticize us for having "seedy areas"
> and "strip malls". As if there aren't any of those in the Midwest.

Iowa City has very strict zoning laws to prevent this kind of blight.
Unfortunately, these laws have virtually killed commercial development in
Iowa City -- but they *do* result in a very nice looking community.

> As far as the "distant mountains" go...how long would it take you to drive
> to even a 4000' mountain (which is considered a foothill around here) from
> where you live?

It rained all four days we were there, off and on -- and it was dark half
the time. I'm told Mt. Rainier (well named!) is beautiful, although I never
actually saw it.

> And it's not just the mountains. The perpetual green, the vast waterways
> (two enormous fresh water lakes, hundreds of smaller lakes, hundreds of
> miles of shoreline in the Puget Sound), and the San Juan Islands an easy
> 45 minute flight away, just to name a few other things I love about this
> place.

I love the mountains, and I'm sure it's a beautiful area, once you escape
the city.

> As far as I'm concerned, your criticism of Seattle is just plain sour
> grapes.

Hardly. It's just another big city that has ruined an otherwise beautiful
setting. Which, of course, is why the Seattle suburbs are booming,
covering virtually every empty lot of land that we saw during our visit.

It's nothing specific against Seattle, Pete.

Big cities are all alike -- it doesn't matter if they're on the shores of
the Great Lakes, or on the shores of Puget Sound. If you like McDonalds and
Starbucks, you'll LOVE them. If you enjoy home-made pie, non-chain hotels,
restaurants that are owned by your neighbors, and leaving the top down on
your convertible when you're eating dinner, you'll escape them.

> Did you rent a car while you were here? If so, the folks who go to see
> the Mariners play their home games thank you. You helped pay for that
> stadium, with the car rental surcharge designed to avoid people who
> actually live here pay for things they use. :)

Yeah -- I paid a THIRTY PERCENT tax on that rental van. 30%!

And I thought we were in hell, having to charge 12% tax on our hotel rooms.
Seattle makes Iowa City look like tax heaven.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> There must be enough open space to allow proper merging, and an educated
> fleet of drivers who know how to use it properly.

There must also be enough space w/r/t the traffic so that an accident
doesn't clog things up. If you look at the "design capacity" of
freeways, you'll see that when they are actually functioning at that
capacity, they are mostly empty and an accident is usually no big deal
traffic wise. Some freeways are now functioning at something like five
times their capacity. A sneeze clogs things up.

> I think it's safe to say that building 1/4th of your
> freeway system to only serve (perhaps?) 1/10th of your users is not the way
> to speed things along. The vast majority of the drivers in Seattle were
> "flying solo" -- and will continue to do so, no matter how fervently they
> try to force car-pooling or mass-transit on them.

Those that make the sacrifice (of carpooling) should get the reward (of
a fast trip). It's like another proposal (that I'd expect you's
support) of having toll booths have different tolls for each lane - the
further right you go, the more expensive it is. Those (few) that are in
enough of a hurry can pay $15 to go through, those (most) that are cheap
enough can wait in line to pay ten cents.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Honeck]

> It's like another proposal (that I'd expect you's support) of having toll
> booths have different tolls for each lane - the further right you go, the
> more expensive it is. Those (few) that are in enough of a hurry can pay
> $15 to go through, those (most) that are cheap enough can wait in line to
> pay ten cents.

Tollways -- of *any* design -- are the ultimate stupidity.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> Tollways -- of *any* design -- are the ultimate stupidity.

Depends what you are trying to accomplish, and for whom.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:nzFle.10731$PS3.8357@attbi_s22...
> Precisely. I certainly didn't mean to limit my observation to your
> beloved Seattle -- they *all* suck.

Fortunately, most people disagree.

> It's a nice idea -- as are all these types of government-sponsored
> things -- that flies in the face of human nature. People *like* to drive
> their own cars -- that's "the American Way" -- and no special highway
> lanes are going to change that fact.

The facts show otherwise. Carpool lanes DO get drivers to change their
habits.

Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the more congestion, the better. It's a
waste to have one person in each car, and to have everyone in cars in the
first place. The more painful it is to drive alone, or to drive at all, the
more people will use more efficient transportation.

Your assertion that carpool lanes are useless is ignorant, failing to take
into account the numerous demonstrations that they do exactly what they are
intended to do. I even provided some documentation of that for you, but
apparently you have no interest in actually learning new information,
especially when it conflicts with your own uninformed opinion.

> Which pretty much confirms my suspicions. For those of us who actually
> fly, there is no "backwater" -- anywhere.

Baloney. You live in one. It's right there, and you are in it. Flying is
great, but it's no panacea.

> A pilot can live in a nice area, with a great lifestyle, no crime, little
> traffic, and safe schools, while still being "close" (time-wise) to the
> big cities. I can be in Kansas City, St. Louis or Chicago within the
> hour (although I seldom feel the need, thanks to our University) -- which
> is about what it takes you to drive from one side of town to the other.

I can drive into Seattle in 15 minutes. 20 during rush hour (because of the
carpool lanes). And that's total travel time. You fly an hour to a "large
city", and you still need to arrange for transportation there, dealing with
all of the same issues you criticize large cities for.

Because of the urban nature of the area, most of the time I don't even have
to go into Seattle. A wide range of services -- cultural, dining,
recreation, etc. -- are just minutes away from me.

I love flying, and it DOES get me a lot closer to other areas of the world.
But to claim that because you fly, even when you practically live at the
airport, you have the same access to urban benefits as someone who actually
lives in or near a large city, well...that's just idiotic.

> Any pilot -- hell, any person -- who knowingly chooses to live in an area
> with 8 lanes of slow-moving traffic between home and work -- every day of
> their lives -- is a friggin' moron.

Well, I think you're a ****ing moron too. As do the thousands of pilots who
also live around here, I'm sure.

The fact that you think your plane provides the same benefits as actually
living in an urban area simply proves your moronic status.

> Iowa City has very strict zoning laws to prevent this kind of blight.
> Unfortunately, these laws have virtually killed commercial development in
> Iowa City -- but they *do* result in a very nice looking community.

Well, goody for you. However, in your moronic state you obviously missed
the fact that my statement wasn't limited to Iowa City.

> It rained all four days we were there, off and on -- and it was dark half
> the time. I'm told Mt. Rainier (well named!) is beautiful, although I
> never actually saw it.

Ahh, back to the weather again. Well, you've had it explained to you plenty
of times already. I'm not wasting time doing it again.

By the way, the name "Rainier" has nothing to do with rain.

> I love the mountains, and I'm sure it's a beautiful area, once you escape
> the city.

There is beauty right here in Seattle, once you open your eyes. True, that
means you'll never see it. But it's here.

> Hardly. It's just another big city that has ruined an otherwise beautiful
> setting.

I didn't expect you to admit it's sour grapes for you. People calling the
grapes sour never want to admit that they aren't. That doesn't change the
fact that that's exactly what you're doing.

> Which, of course, is why the Seattle suburbs are booming, covering
> virtually every empty lot of land that we saw during our visit.

Population growth in the suburbs has nothing to do with whether Seattle is
"another big city that has ruined an otherwise beautiful setting".

> It's nothing specific against Seattle, Pete.

The fact that you feel it needs to be "against" any city is simply proof of
your close-mindedness. Not that we needed any more proof of that anyway.

> Big cities are all alike -- it doesn't matter if they're on the shores of
> the Great Lakes, or on the shores of Puget Sound. If you like McDonalds
> and Starbucks, you'll LOVE them. If you enjoy home-made pie, non-chain
> hotels, restaurants that are owned by your neighbors, and leaving the top
> down on your convertible when you're eating dinner, you'll escape them.

Everything in that last sentence exists right here, in ample quantity. The
fact that you didn't see it further provides proof of your close-mindedness.

On the bright side, at least someone wrote a song about you and your ilk.
"Iowa Stubborn", from "The Music Man", fits you to a tee.

Pete

[Rich Ahrens]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> I don't doubt Iowa City is a nice place to live. Heck, I have even been
> known to compliment Iowa in general as a state.
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.student/msg/221db68037d18731
> But I've traveled all over the US, and have yet to find a place with the
> combination of big city benefits alongside geographical, topographical,
> ecological beauty that Seattle has.

And don't forget the extra points it gets for not having Jay around...

[Peter Duniho]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote in message
...
> And don't forget the extra points it gets for not having Jay around...

Certainly. :) I think I even mentioned that benefit earlier in this
thread.

[George Patterson]

Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> But, I'll bet if I wandered over to Iowa City, I'd find your tax money going
> to some projects I think are pretty silly too.

If not, you wouldn't have to go far. Can you say "rain forest"?

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

[Jay Honeck]

>> But, I'll bet if I wandered over to Iowa City, I'd find your tax money
>> going to some projects I think are pretty silly too.
>
> If not, you wouldn't have to go far. Can you say "rain forest"?

Yeah, they're STILL planning to build that absurd temple to pork-barrel
politics.

Imagine: A RAIN FOREST in Iowa!

Only the U.S. Congress could make *that* sound like a winner...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Don Tuite]

On Sat, 28 May 2005 01:41:03 GMT, George Patterson
> wrote:

>Peter Duniho wrote:
>>
>> But, I'll bet if I wandered over to Iowa City, I'd find your tax money going
>> to some projects I think are pretty silly too.
>
>If not, you wouldn't have to go far. Can you say "rain forest"?

Aw c'mon. They wanted to do a zoo, but zoos are non-PC animal jails.
(cf. "Madagascar" this weekend.) Now a big corn maze would be the
epitome of Iowa culture, but there are liability problems. People from
North Dakota would get lost in one and you'd only find their skeletons
years later. A butterfly habitat would be terrific, but Iowans
wouldn't know what to eat them with. So a rainforest was the answer.
I mean, you couldn't have one near Seattle. They already have a real
rainforest somewhere betwen Humptulips and Forks, (are they ever going
to have a casino at La Push, or are the Indians concentrating them all
along 99 in Tukwila?) which Seattlites can find if they're a) smart
enough to find the right carpool lane to get to the Fauntleroy Ferry,
and b) not smart enough to get off at Vashon.

Don

[Montblack]

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
> Imagine: A RAIN FOREST in Iowa!
>
> Only the U.S. Congress could make *that* sound like a winner...


WARNING:
(Read on *only* if you enjoy government boondoggles)


Wonder if they hired the same PR team that sold Duluth on the idea of a
fresh-water Aquarium?

<http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/200007/28_kelleherb_aqua-m/>
(2000) Duluth fresh-water aquarium is opening - and they all cheered.

<http://wcco.com/localnews/local_story_066104731.html>
(2005) Duluth's (35 million dollar) fresh-water aquarium is closing - and
they all cheered.


Montblack

[Philip S.]

in article , Peter Duniho at
wrote on 5/26/05 11:33 PM:


> But I've traveled all over the US, and have yet to find a place with the
> combination of big city benefits alongside geographical, topographical,
> ecological beauty that Seattle has. And that's *including* Iowa. As far as
> I'm concerned, your criticism of Seattle is just plain sour grapes.

I recall reading somewhere that Washington is the only state to contain
every known type of climate/topography within its borders--desert,
rainforest, alpine, steppe, etc. Do you happen to know if this is true?

[Peter Duniho]

"Philip S." > wrote in message
...
> I recall reading somewhere that Washington is the only state to contain
> every known type of climate/topography within its borders--desert,
> rainforest, alpine, steppe, etc. Do you happen to know if this is true?

I suppose that depends on how you define the various climates. We do have a
rainforest, for example. But it's hardly tropical, and as a result is quite
different from what most people think of as a rainforest. I think there are
probably other examples of climates that are similar to, or related to,
climates and/or topography in Washington State, but which really aren't the
same.

So, sure...if you define your terms broadly enough, we've got a little bit
of everything. :) But I think a biologist, geologist, or other -ologist
would take issue with any claim that, for any climate, ecology, topography,
etc. found elsewhere in the world, one can find an exact replica in
Washington.

Pete

[[email protected]]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:nzFle.10731$PS3.8357@attbi_s22...
> > Precisely. I certainly didn't mean to limit my observation to your
> > beloved Seattle -- they *all* suck.
>
> Fortunately, most people disagree.
>
> > It's a nice idea -- as are all these types of government-sponsored
> > things -- that flies in the face of human nature. People *like* to drive
> > their own cars -- that's "the American Way" -- and no special highway
> > lanes are going to change that fact.
>
> The facts show otherwise. Carpool lanes DO get drivers to change their
> habits.
>
> Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the more congestion, the better. It's a
> waste to have one person in each car, and to have everyone in cars in the
> first place. The more painful it is to drive alone, or to drive at all, the
> more people will use more efficient transportation.
>
> Your assertion that carpool lanes are useless is ignorant, failing to take
> into account the numerous demonstrations that they do exactly what they are
> intended to do. I even provided some documentation of that for you, but
> apparently you have no interest in actually learning new information,
> especially when it conflicts with your own uninformed opinion.
>
> > Which pretty much confirms my suspicions. For those of us who actually
> > fly, there is no "backwater" -- anywhere.
>
> Baloney. You live in one. It's right there, and you are in it. Flying is
> great, but it's no panacea.
>
> > A pilot can live in a nice area, with a great lifestyle, no crime, little
> > traffic, and safe schools, while still being "close" (time-wise) to the
> > big cities. I can be in Kansas City, St. Louis or Chicago within the
> > hour (although I seldom feel the need, thanks to our University) -- which
> > is about what it takes you to drive from one side of town to the other.
>
> I can drive into Seattle in 15 minutes. 20 during rush hour (because of the
> carpool lanes). And that's total travel time. You fly an hour to a "large
> city", and you still need to arrange for transportation there, dealing with
> all of the same issues you criticize large cities for.
>
> Because of the urban nature of the area, most of the time I don't even have
> to go into Seattle. A wide range of services -- cultural, dining,
> recreation, etc. -- are just minutes away from me.
>
> I love flying, and it DOES get me a lot closer to other areas of the world.
> But to claim that because you fly, even when you practically live at the
> airport, you have the same access to urban benefits as someone who actually
> lives in or near a large city, well...that's just idiotic.
>
> > Any pilot -- hell, any person -- who knowingly chooses to live in an area
> > with 8 lanes of slow-moving traffic between home and work -- every day of
> > their lives -- is a friggin' moron.
>
> Well, I think you're a ****ing moron too. As do the thousands of pilots who
> also live around here, I'm sure.
>
> The fact that you think your plane provides the same benefits as actually
> living in an urban area simply proves your moronic status.
>
> > Iowa City has very strict zoning laws to prevent this kind of blight.
> > Unfortunately, these laws have virtually killed commercial development in
> > Iowa City -- but they *do* result in a very nice looking community.
>
> Well, goody for you. However, in your moronic state you obviously missed
> the fact that my statement wasn't limited to Iowa City.
>
> > It rained all four days we were there, off and on -- and it was dark half
> > the time. I'm told Mt. Rainier (well named!) is beautiful, although I
> > never actually saw it.
>
> Ahh, back to the weather again. Well, you've had it explained to you plenty
> of times already. I'm not wasting time doing it again.
>
> By the way, the name "Rainier" has nothing to do with rain.
>
> > I love the mountains, and I'm sure it's a beautiful area, once you escape
> > the city.
>
> There is beauty right here in Seattle, once you open your eyes. True, that
> means you'll never see it. But it's here.
>
> > Hardly. It's just another big city that has ruined an otherwise beautiful
> > setting.
>
> I didn't expect you to admit it's sour grapes for you. People calling the
> grapes sour never want to admit that they aren't. That doesn't change the
> fact that that's exactly what you're doing.
>
> > Which, of course, is why the Seattle suburbs are booming, covering
> > virtually every empty lot of land that we saw during our visit.
>
> Population growth in the suburbs has nothing to do with whether Seattle is
> "another big city that has ruined an otherwise beautiful setting".
>
> > It's nothing specific against Seattle, Pete.
>
> The fact that you feel it needs to be "against" any city is simply proof of
> your close-mindedness. Not that we needed any more proof of that anyway.
>
> > Big cities are all alike -- it doesn't matter if they're on the shores of
> > the Great Lakes, or on the shores of Puget Sound. If you like McDonalds
> > and Starbucks, you'll LOVE them. If you enjoy home-made pie, non-chain
> > hotels, restaurants that are owned by your neighbors, and leaving the top
> > down on your convertible when you're eating dinner, you'll escape them.
>
> Everything in that last sentence exists right here, in ample quantity. The
> fact that you didn't see it further provides proof of your close-mindedness.
>
> On the bright side, at least someone wrote a song about you and your ilk.
> "Iowa Stubborn", from "The Music Man", fits you to a tee.
>
> Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> WARNING:
> (Read on *only* if you enjoy government boondoggles)

Hey -- they're not closing the aquarium yet! You've still got tens of
thousands of dollars to spend before you reach that point!

And that's the "good news"???
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Al Gilson]

pablo wrote:
> I'm considering moving to Spokane in a year. Any comments on
> Mead airport, Deer Park, or Felts field???
>
> I'm a new pilot and I'm wondering about the weather situation
> there. I live in San Joaquin Valley in California. Sunny
> most of the time, except in winter (fog!!!).
>
> Thanks
>

Pablo:

I hadn't been monitoring the group for awhile and noticed this thread.
Since only one reply came from a person who lives in Spokane, (Hi
Philip), I guess it's time to weigh in.

I live in Spokane, learned to fly here, and have a Cessna 172 in a
partnership based at Felts Field (KSFF). We fly VFR all year 'round.
Yes, there can be fog in Spokane in the Winter, but suprisingly KSEA has
more foggy days. I flew a lot last February. Seattle is a 2 hour flight
to the west in our Cessna. with 30 minutes of that over the Cascade
Range. Until you reach the mountains, the route is over desert,
irrigated farmland, and the Columbia River. To the north are mountains
up to around 7,000 msl, with river valleys leading into Canada. To the
east are mountains, mountains, and mountains for about 300 miles. First
the Bitterroots, then the Rockies. To the south area the rolling hills
of the Palouse with farmland, the Snake River, then Hells Canyon.

Most GA ops are from Felts Field. It's a towered airport with parallel
runways. It can get busy on the weekend with touch and go traffic. A
full-service FBO with Cessna 172 rentals at $82/hobbs/wet. 100LL is
about $3.30 the last time I checked (we buy from a co-op).

Spokane International (KGEG) has some GA with Spokane Airways and
University of North Dakota (yes, in Spokane) training, however there are
no individual hangers, just community hangers. Plus, the airline and
cargo planes can sometimes mean a wait to get on the runway. GEG is
Class C. There is also a lot of military traffic with the adjacent
Fairchild Air Force Base.

Our Approach/Departure controllers are very friendly and we use VFR
flight following almost all the time. In fact, they encourage it.

Mead Airport has a short runway and a few open hangers. There is no
winter snow removal. The owner recently passed away.

Deer Park is a nice training airport with some hangers and fuel.

Coeur d'Alene (KCOE) is also a nice airport about 30 miles to the east.

There you go. Let me know if you have more questions.