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
|
|||
|
|||
Cub Driver wrote: And no water landings, right? There used to be a private seaplane base on the Raritan river just below New Brunswick. The guy who owned the property kept a Cessna with amphibs there. He operated from the river during the summer. A few years ago, he was talking about selling the property. Someone at Kupper (probably John Price) was telling me that the license to operate aircraft there would expire unless he sold it to another seaplane owner. Even if that's gone, there are seaplane bases on the Raritan Bay at Atlantic Highlands, on the Navasink river above Rumson, on the inland waterway near Lakewood, at Toms River, and at Manahawkin. Though a few of those are miles inland, all of them are on tidal waters, and may be beyond the control of the State. There're also bases on Greenwood lake and the Delaware, but both of those are on State borders - I can't tell for sure if they're in NJ. George Patterson The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I fly one every day and it is a kool bird for short fields. Out here in
Jackson Hole Wy, the places are unlimited for landing spots. Ben Haas N801BH |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Ernest Christley" wrote in message
. com... Don't the federal regulation forbid dropping under 500ft AGL over someone else's property? Not even close. I think the law is that anything below 500 is the airspace of the private property owner Property owners have no right of ownership of any sort with respect to the airspace above their property. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Don't the federal regulation forbid dropping under 500ft AGL over someone
else's property? Not even close. The regs generally forbid flying an airplane less than 500 feet from any structure or vessel, except for takeoff and landing. Jose -- Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Jose" wrote in message
m... The regs generally forbid flying an airplane less than 500 feet from any structure or vessel, except for takeoff and landing. So what? Those regulations don't apply in congested areas (such as those described by Ernest), and they don't apply during takeoffs and landings in any case (the specific situation this entire thread is about). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Duniho" wrote:
I think the law is that anything below 500 is the airspace of the private property owner Property owners have no right of ownership of any sort with respect to the airspace above their property. Yes they do. A property owner has rights to airspace for any reasonable use thereof under common law, where FAA's 500' reference may be irrelevant. One example is erection of an antenna tower on your property. FAA rules under Part 77 on obstructions apply only to a potential obstruction to public-use airports and to otherwise navigational airspace -- at least 500' for the latter, but not to private strips at all. So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights of the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common law. Of course, to be decided in a court of common pleas, or by Judge Judy, or at minimum a rather good "arguendo" exercise under individual State law as to "neighbor law" in a law school class! Fred F. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"TaxSrv" wrote in message
... Yes they do. No, they don't. [...] So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights of the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common law. That in no way alters the right of any aircraft to pass through that airspace freely. The property owner does not "own" the airspace, and has no privilege to prohibit other people from using it where it is not already being occupied by something else, as suggested by the person to whom I was replying. Pete |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Duniho" wrote:
[...] So if such a tower under 500' AGL poses a hazard to aircraft for an adjoining private airfield, the rights of the antenna owner's property may just be superior under common law. That in no way alters the right of any aircraft to pass through that airspace freely. The property owner does not "own" the airspace, and has no privilege to prohibit other people from using it where it is not already being occupied by something else, as suggested by the person to whom I was replying. It's not really a matter of "ownership," but rather whether use of airspace down low over other people's property denies them their right of enjoyment and freedom from hazards. Here's 3 samples of decisions in various states, concerning private airstrips: "The court emphasized that in this case the airport was private, not public, and ruled that "there is nothing to distinguish a private airport from any other private business with regard to enjoining operations which create a nuisance." "The trial court issued an injunction against use of the airstrip, and the appellate court held the injunction appropriate on the grounds that use of the airstrip, even without actual invasion of the utility's land, constituted a nuisance to the utility's transmission lines." [Note the utility put up the transmission lines; then sued the adjacent private airport owner!] "Neighboring property owners sued owners of a private airport for damages due to aircraft noise. Held: An airport operating in conformance with state and federal law may nevertheless constitute a nuisance, and the Federal Aviation Act does not preempt damages for unreasonable noise from an airport....In addition, plaintiffs may recover for inconvenience, annoyance, and discomfort caused by nuisance as long as the interference with use and enjoyment of their property is unreasonable and substantial." Fred F. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
Bush shot JFK over what he did to Barbara | Ross C. Bubba Nicholson | Home Built | 2 | August 30th 04 03:28 AM |
"W" is JFK's son and Bush revenge killed Kennedy in 1963 | Ross C. Bubba Nicholson | Aerobatics | 0 | August 28th 04 11:28 AM |
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. | Bush Air | Home Built | 0 | May 25th 04 06:18 AM |