![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Airbus writes:
Not surprising that you are not sure, because you are not a pilot. To pilots, the rules and procedures are clear, and vector departures and arrivals may route planes over the city. If only things were so black and white. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote in
: Airbus writes: Well that's handy - If you're talking about Paris, France the arrival and departure procedures are designed to circumnavigate the city . . . Yes, but as I said, even when I lived in another city beneath an arrival path for one of the world's largest airports, I still didn't hear much. It used to be entirely forbidden to overfly Paris without special permission, but now I do see aircraft occasionally flying over the city. I understand that rules were relaxed some years ago (ironically not long after 9/11), but at the same time I still see Paris marked as a prohibited area on the charts, so I'm not sure what the status is exactly. Waht? You're an idiot. Bertie |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
daffy wrote:
Quite a good article in the Nov/Dec AARP magazine titled "Listening for Quiet". It talks about a silent sanctuary in Washington's Olympic National park. The article concluded by someone complaining about the silence broken by a small plane. The article said "The small plane flying north more than doubles the ambient sound, and we react to the intruder as a threat, drawing in, tracking the source, hunching for cover until the last traces of engine noise finally die away." Right. I can count several hundred bass thumping cars and straight pipe motorcycles for each GA plane I hear... Sounds like someone has a hair up their ass. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Stewart writes:
Sounds like someone has a hair up their ass. Maybe, but such people often vote, and they outnumber you. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 17:25:08 -0700, Jim Stewart
wrote in : Sounds like someone has a hair up their ass. When an airman is rude publicly to a member of the non-aviation public, it reflects badly on him as an individual, but it also gives the public the idea that airman are arrogant elitists who don't care who they annoy. That is a mistake today more than ever, IMNSHO. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Larry Dighera wrote in
: When an airman is rude publicly to a member of the non-aviation public, it reflects badly on him as an individual, but it also gives the public the idea that airman are arrogant elitists who don't care who they annoy. That is a mistake today more than ever, IMNSHO. I think the same holds true even when an airman is rude publicly to another airman. After all, it is a public forum. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
daffy wrote in news:1192143437.833720.51620
@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com: Quite a good article in the Nov/Dec AARP magazine titled "Listening for Quiet". It talks about a silent sanctuary in Washington's Olympic National park. The article concluded by someone complaining about the silence broken by a small plane. The article said "The small plane flying north more than doubles the ambient sound, and we react to the intruder as a threat, drawing in, tracking the source, hunching for cover until the last traces of engine noise finally die away." I believe there are better sanctuaries for silence in the world than a park. In the 60's, they made a bunch of bomb shelters, and I think they would be a much better place to find absolute silence if one is searching for that. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2007-10-11 15:57:17 -0700, daffy said:
Quite a good article in the Nov/Dec AARP magazine titled "Listening for Quiet". It talks about a silent sanctuary in Washington's Olympic National park. The article concluded by someone complaining about the silence broken by a small plane. The article said "The small plane flying north more than doubles the ambient sound, and we react to the intruder as a threat, drawing in, tracking the source, hunching for cover until the last traces of engine noise finally die away." The Olympic National Park covers much of northwestern Washington, including a great deal of the coast, all of the Olympic Mountains, the Hoh Rain Forest, and much else. It is bordered by important airports that serve coastal towns, Indian reservations, and international travel. There are several airports within the boundaries of the park. There are also several military training areas in and around the park. There is a narrow corridor between the park and Sub Base Bangor which is one of the major routes for traffic flying Canada, the San Juan Islands, Bremerton, Tacoma, Olympia, and Seattle. Most aircraft avoid flying over the Olympic Mountains because it is relatively dangerous, rugged territory prone to unpredictable weather and icing. Because of the park's location, however, and the fact that the park is broken into two sections, it is not always possible to fly a route around the park. It can mean adding several hours to a flight to go around. Not only that, but bad weather in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, on the coast, or on Puget Sound can leave you little choice. Pilots do try to maintain at least 2000' above wild areas as requested by the National Park Service. However, planes taking off or landing obviously are going to have to fly lower than 2000.' There are additional aircraft that fly lower than 2000' for scientific and law enforcement purposes, as well as search and rescue, fire fighting, and surveying. Specially equipped airplanes regularly fly at low level over the park as part of the effort to control our borders, fight smuggling, and look for terrorist activity. Some areas completely bounded by the park are managed lands set aside for tree farming. There are aircraft actively involved in logging there. Boeing and some airlines have been known to conduct training flights at low altitude over the park. Aviation is a huge and necessary part of the activity at Olympic National Park, perhaps more so than any other park in the nation. Many peoples' lives and much of the health of the park itself are dependent on it. If you want to get away from airplanes and their noise, Olympic National Park is a poor choice. -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 11, 9:03 pm, C J Campbell
wrote: Pilots do try to maintain at least 2000' above wild areas as requested by the National Park Service. However, planes taking off or landing obviously are going to have to fly lower than 2000.' There are additional aircraft that fly lower than 2000' for scientific and law Where can I find the rules and regulations that specify how high or low a plane can fly over various terrain, like cities, wilderness, etc. Also, is there an easy way from the ground to measure the height of a flying plane? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Anybody else listening to Pilotcast? | Paul Tomblin | General Aviation | 3 | May 14th 07 08:24 PM |
Is listening to ATC useful? | 601XL Builder | Piloting | 2 | October 16th 06 02:06 AM |
Is listening to ATC useful? | Dan Luke | Piloting | 0 | October 15th 06 04:42 PM |
Is listening to ATC useful? | tjd | Piloting | 0 | October 15th 06 05:13 AM |
Listening to ATC at Oshkosh | Chief McGee | Home Built | 2 | July 24th 05 09:04 PM |