American Lake SPB Closing

Larry Dighera wrote:

As search using those terms (and even with the correct spelling of
'amendment') failed to turn up anything for me. If you are able to
provide any links to articles referencing it, I'd be interested.

Mentioned in
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-160x.html
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite.../03-2-196.html
http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pi...4/act0412.html

and others. It's a provision of the FAA reauthorization act passed about a year
ago.

It's quite possible that the
authorities gave the FAA notice last month but didn't make a public announcement
about it. Let's hope that isn't the case.

At best, that will only delay the inevitable for 30-days unless the
FAA finds that deactivation will affect the national airspace system.

If I understand the regs correctly, it won't postpone it at all. I believe the
regs state that the owners have to give the FAA 30 days notification. They don't
have to give anyone else notification. IF (and that's a big if) they notified
the FAA last month, they will be able to close the airport at the end of this
month without penalty.

Perhaps my understanding is incorrect. It's based on the fact that every mention
of the situation states that Chicago was "required to provide 30 days notice
before deactivating the airport." None have stated that public notice is
required.

Anyone more familiar with the wording of the regs? Rick Durden, perhaps?

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Even WSDOT has not identified the base as essential. It is going to be a
tough fight.

If it's not essential, then what's the worry? Are they also going to then
prohibit water operations at the lake? Otherwise, the closure of the
seaplane base shouldn't affect most people's operations at all.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Even WSDOT has not identified the base as essential. It is going to be a
tough fight.

If it's not essential, then what's the worry? Are they also going to then
prohibit water operations at the lake?

Well, most seaplane pilots think it is essential, but it somehow escaped
designation as such by the WSDOT. With Alderbrook now closed by Microsoft,
you are basically left with Lake Union and Renton. Renton is also threatened
with closure. There just are not many seaplane bases left.

It would not be unreasonable to expect that the next step will be an attempt
to ban seaplanes from the lake, given the attitude of many officials of the
City of Lakewood.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Well, most seaplane pilots think it is essential, but it somehow escaped
designation as such by the WSDOT.

Most? I doubt that. Perhaps "most seaplane pilots who actually use
American Lake", but then if that's just a half-dozen people, it's not really
meaningful to say "most". I'm a seaplane pilot based in the Northwest and
have never had a need to land at American Lake. It certainly isn't
essential to me.

I don't know how many seaplane pilots there are in the US. There are 7500
pilots in the SPA, and I'm guessing they don't have the "market penetration"
AOPA does, so I'd guess that extrapolates to maybe 30,000 seaplane pilots in
the US. I'll bet "most" of those seaplane pilots have never even heard of
American Lake, never mind have an opinion on whether it's essential or not.

Perhaps the seaplane base IS essential. I don't know. But the basis for
"essential" is in what the seaplane base is used for, and whether that need
can or cannot be served by other similar facilities nearby. The basis
cannot be the unqualified opinion of an unqualified number of seaplane
pilots. You can't answer the question "is American Lake SPD essential?" by
saying "most seaplane pilots think it is essential". Clearly, "most
seaplane pilots" don't even have an opinion, and even if "most seaplane
pilots of some

With Alderbrook now closed by Microsoft,

Now you're just being irrational. I don't know what "Alderbrook" you're
talking about, but Microsoft isn't in the business of seaplane bases. It's
not possible for them to close a seaplane base. It boggles my mind that
even a thread entirely about aviation has become a vehicle for baseless
accusations of a software company.

you are basically left with Lake Union and Renton. Renton is also
threatened
with closure. There just are not many seaplane bases left.

Forgot Kenmore? Poulsbo? Quartermaster Harbor? Even Harvey Field supports
seaplanes (though I'll admit it's nowhere near as convenient as a real
seaplane base). Probably others I've forgotten. Lake Union and Kenmore
aren't going anywhere in any case, and various aspects of Renton have been
"threatened with closure" off and on for years.

That said, I'm not going to dispute that "there just are not many seaplane
bases left". It's just that there haven't been all that many for a long
time anyway. SPA hasn't provided me with any insight as to WHY the seaplane
base is being closed. Just that they are alarmed that the seaplane base is
closing and that I should be alarmed too.

If the seaplane base is being closed due to lack of economic viability
and/or use, then it would seem to me that the WSDOT's not calling it
"essential" is reasonably accurate. But in any case, it seems to me that
it's a bit premature to be alarmed about the closure, given the lack of
facts about both sides that is available.

Seaplanes are not the critical element of our nation's transportation
infrastructure that they used to be. They haven't been for a long time.
They serve a niche market, and if a city wants to get out of the seaplane
operations subsidy business, why should they be forced to stay in?

It would not be unreasonable to expect that the next step will be an
attempt
to ban seaplanes from the lake, given the attitude of many officials of
the
City of Lakewood.

What attitude? Maybe they have attitude, but no one's provided any
documentation of that. But in any case, a ban on seaplane operations can be
fought separately, and an underused seaplane base shouldn't be forced to
stay open just so that water rights can be protected.

I suspect (even though no seaplane advocate will provide this information)
that the primary reason for the closure is that the city of Lakewood has
been providing budgetary support for the seaplane base, that the seaplane
base is not benefiting the city, and that they want to get rid of that
liability. If other people feel that the seaplane base is so important,
then they need to find funding elsewhere and talk the city into transferring
ownership. Forcing the city to continue to fund the seaplane base against
their desire isn't reasonable.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

With Alderbrook now closed by Microsoft,

Now you're just being irrational. I don't know what "Alderbrook" you're
talking about, but Microsoft isn't in the business of seaplane bases.
It's
not possible for them to close a seaplane base. It boggles my mind that
even a thread entirely about aviation has become a vehicle for baseless
accusations of a software company.

Alderbrook is located at the Great Bend of the Hood Canal. You do know who
owns Alderbrook, don't you? It is Microsoft. Bill Gates and John Nordstrom
fly into there frequently.

The good news is that Microsoft may build a new base there, but there has
been a lot of foot-dragging. The idea is that the base would serve their new
convention center they are building.

You again seem determined to disagree with me no matter what.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Alderbrook is located at the Great Bend of the Hood Canal. You do know who
owns Alderbrook, don't you? It is Microsoft.

No, I never heard of Alderbrook, and I'm not aware of Microsoft owning any
property out there. Any documentation that shows that Alderbrook is
property of the Microsoft Corporation?

Bill Gates and John Nordstrom fly into there frequently.

Nordstrom is a pilot. Gates, not really. In any case, if the site is
closed, how do they "fly into there frequently"?

The good news is that Microsoft may build a new base there, but there has
been a lot of foot-dragging. The idea is that the base would serve their
new
convention center they are building.

Your claim is that Microsoft would actually maintain a full seaplane base,
complete with services and presumably a fleet of airplanes, just for a
convention center?

Uh, right.

You again seem determined to disagree with me no matter what.

As long as you keep coming up with hard-to-believe claims, I'm going to
comment on them. In any case, I notice that you had absolutely no rebuttal
to the real issue at hand, which is the question of whether American Lake
SPD is "essential" or not.

Pete

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 11:58:42 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::


I suspect (even though no seaplane advocate will provide this information)
that the primary reason for the closure is that the city of Lakewood has
been providing budgetary support for the seaplane base, that the seaplane
base is not benefiting the city, and that they want to get rid of that
liability.

While this argument may not be germane to Lakewood SPB, it can be said
that outlaying airports, though not currently essential, will be key
elements in the Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS)* strategy.
Without them, SATS will be crippled.

Regaining the right to construct replacement airports and finding
sufficient open space once the uneconomical municipal airports are
closed will be difficult and greatly hinder the SATS alternative
solution to international airport hubs sited in urban locations.

So SATS foresight can be used as a reasonable argument to persuade
cities to continue to subsidize their municipal airports or get left
behind when (if) SATS is implemented.

* http://sats.nasa.gov/

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 12:27:12 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote in
::

You do know who owns Alderbrook, don't you? It is Microsoft.

I wasn't able to find Alderbrok he
http://www.airnav.com/airports/us/WA

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
While this argument may not be germane to Lakewood SPB, it can be said
that outlaying airports, though not currently essential, will be key
elements in the Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS)* strategy.
Without them, SATS will be crippled.

I agree that airports not necessarily considered "essential" today may wind
up categorized that way, if and when SATS ever becomes reality.

However, I don't expect SATS to ever rely in any significant amount on
seaplanes, nor would I expect American Lake SPB to have any significance
with respect to SATS.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
Alderbrook is located at the Great Bend of the Hood Canal. You do know
who
owns Alderbrook, don't you? It is Microsoft.

No, I never heard of Alderbrook, and I'm not aware of Microsoft owning any
property out there. Any documentation that shows that Alderbrook is
property of the Microsoft Corporation?


There is nothing I could say that you would not claim is a lie. We are done.