A new twist on complaints

Well, here we go again although so far there is just the one nut.

A few years back there was an organized effort to close Midland
Barstow (3BS). Of course the argument was noise even though we were
here first. As the noise issue was not working they tried to fire up
the residents by complaining about the airport subsidy for a bunch of
hobbyists, or amateur pilots. Turned out that a study showed the
airport brings in about $10 million dollars into the area each year.
They weren't satisfied with that so they paid to have their own study
done. It did say the first study was wrong. I came up with
considerably *more* than ten million. :-)) When they found out how
many millions of dollars it'd cost to close the airport and dispose of
the land the effort died.

However, trying to be good neighbors the departure was changed to
straight out with the preferred runway being 06/24 as there was
nothing off the end of 24 outbound except a few houses and a lot of
trees. Departing 06 takes you out over the north end of a mall and a
few businesses.

Well, the inevitable happened and people built some new subdivisions
off the departure end of 24. It's now almost solid homes for about a
mile and a half and they are the big expensive ones. There is a bit
more traffic in the mornings lately so they are now complaining about
the changes in the traffic and the noise.

Oh yah! This group is complaining there are too many business
flights and we should keep the airport for the local pilots to use.

There is also the argument against lengthening the runways, but try
and convince them that if a plane starts its take off roll a 1000 feet
farther away it'll be much higher and quieter when it goes over their
home off the end of the runway. They're worried about jets, but most
of today's smaller jets are far quieter than most of our high
performance singles and twins.

One other thing, now that we have GPS they are in line with the
straight in approach for 06, so inbound will only be about 500 feet
above them. I don't think they have figured that one out yet.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

In article ,
Roger wrote:

Well, here we go again although so far there is just the one nut.

A few years back there was an organized effort to close Midland
Barstow (3BS). Of course the argument was noise even though we were
here first. As the noise issue was not working they tried to fire up
the residents by complaining about the airport subsidy for a bunch of
hobbyists, or amateur pilots. Turned out that a study showed the
airport brings in about $10 million dollars into the area each year.
They weren't satisfied with that so they paid to have their own study
done. It did say the first study was wrong. I came up with
considerably *more* than ten million. :-)) When they found out how
many millions of dollars it'd cost to close the airport and dispose of
the land the effort died.

However, trying to be good neighbors the departure was changed to
straight out with the preferred runway being 06/24 as there was
nothing off the end of 24 outbound except a few houses and a lot of
trees. Departing 06 takes you out over the north end of a mall and a
few businesses.

Well, the inevitable happened and people built some new subdivisions
off the departure end of 24. It's now almost solid homes for about a
mile and a half and they are the big expensive ones. There is a bit
more traffic in the mornings lately so they are now complaining about
the changes in the traffic and the noise.

Oh yah! This group is complaining there are too many business
flights and we should keep the airport for the local pilots to use.

There is also the argument against lengthening the runways, but try
and convince them that if a plane starts its take off roll a 1000 feet
farther away it'll be much higher and quieter when it goes over their
home off the end of the runway. They're worried about jets, but most
of today's smaller jets are far quieter than most of our high
performance singles and twins.

One other thing, now that we have GPS they are in line with the
straight in approach for 06, so inbound will only be about 500 feet
above them. I don't think they have figured that one out yet.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

It sounds as if some developer is hiding in the woodpile somewhere.

"Roger" wrote in message
...
[...]
Well, the inevitable happened and people built some new subdivisions
off the departure end of 24. It's now almost solid homes for about a
mile and a half and they are the big expensive ones. There is a bit
more traffic in the mornings lately so they are now complaining about
the changes in the traffic and the noise.

New twist? New for the airport, maybe. Same old, same old for airports
generally.

Your situation is a great example of why airports should be very aggressive
about dealing with development happening around them, and especially
development happening on the extended runway centerline.

Other airports have successfully challenged developments, either resulting
in ensuring that a path under the centerline is clear, or restricting the
distance within which the development encroaches on the airport, or
requiring that the property titles for the newly developed area carry a
notation describing the presence of the airport and restricting the property
owner's rights with respect to actions against the airport. I especially
like the last option, and in some cases all of the techniques are applied.

Pete

Peter Dunihowrote:
Your situation is a great example of why airports should be very
aggressive
about dealing with development happening around them, and especially
development happening on the extended runway centerline.

Other airports have successfully challenged developments, either resulting
in ensuring that a path under the centerline is clear, or restricting the
distance within which the development encroaches on the airport....snip

An example of this is Chino airport here in Southern California. It's in San
Bernardino County, surrounded by dairy farms. Or at least, it is for now.
All the dairy farms are being bought out by developers. Driving through
Chino and Norco, you go through farmland punctuated more and more frequently
by big tracts of lot filling houses (all they seem to be building around
here these days). I've heard that the airport bought up the farmland
immediately off the approach ends of the runways to stave off the inevitable
complaints of the homeowners who would be there maybe 10 years down the
line. The city seems to appreciate the airport, fortunately, since it has
quite a few businesses and organizations on the grounds, including Fighter
Rebuilders and the Planes of Fame air museum to name two. It's definitely a
cool place - I recommend checking it out when in the LA area.

Here's hoping Chino and others stick around for many years to come.


-Tony Goetz

I've heard that the airport bought up the farmland
immediately off the approach ends of the runways to stave off the inevitable
complaints of the homeowners who would be there maybe 10 years down the
line. The city seems to appreciate the airport...

They should develop that land as houses with hangars and taxiways so
people who love aviation would live near the airport and could keep
their planes right there.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Tony Goetz wrote on 11/07/05 22:00:

Here's hoping Chino and others stick around for many years to come.


Amen to that. The restaurant there is also pretty good.

-Joe

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 21:34:17 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
Well, the inevitable happened and people built some new subdivisions
off the departure end of 24. It's now almost solid homes for about a
mile and a half and they are the big expensive ones. There is a bit
more traffic in the mornings lately so they are now complaining about
the changes in the traffic and the noise.

New twist? New for the airport, maybe. Same old, same old for airports
generally.

My reference to "new twist" was because the last time this issue came
up they used to opposite complaint. Before they thought it was a
bunch of hobbyists using the airport and very little business. Now
they are complaining there are too many business flights and the
airport should be for local pilots. :-))


Your situation is a great example of why airports should be very aggressive
about dealing with development happening around them, and especially
development happening on the extended runway centerline.

Other airports have successfully challenged developments, either resulting
in ensuring that a path under the centerline is clear, or restricting the
distance within which the development encroaches on the airport, or
requiring that the property titles for the newly developed area carry a

I think that's why the guy has his shorts in a bunch. He's afraid
that if he complains about noise it'll be recorded on his property
deed and if he want's to sell he will have to disclose the noise
problem. So instead of filing a complaint, he writes a letter to the
editor of the local news paper. That and although in the city, I
think he's a good mile and a half to two miles off the end of the
runway.

We have several SR-22s and those suckers are loud. I was surprised
that they make more noise than most of the Bonanzas and 210s.
We're on the centerline for GPS-06 which is straight in and I know
when they go over without even going outside. Depending on what mode
they are only 400 or 500 AGL when they go over this guy's house when
inbound. Of course they aren't running full power either.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
notation describing the presence of the airport and restricting the property
owner's rights with respect to actions against the airport. I especially
like the last option, and in some cases all of the techniques are applied.

Pete

"Roger" wrote

We have several SR-22s and those suckers are loud. I was surprised
that they make more noise than most of the Bonanzas and 210s.

That is the very first I have heard anyone say that about SR-22's. Is it
all prop noise, or is there a good share of engine noise that could be
helped with a bit of muffler? Inconsiderate pilots carrying too many RPM.s
too far out?

I am not one to be anti aviation (in the least!!!), but I say that at times,
we are our own worst enemies, in regard to watching our noise.

Certain planes do seem to have more of a problem, for sure. At OSH every
year, I cringe at the T-6's blasting out of there, like there is not another
person in miles, and that everyone loves to hear their props. I love the
sound of power, but there is a point at which one has to think about what
they are doing, IMHO.
--
Jim in NC

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 02:11:58 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote

We have several SR-22s and those suckers are loud. I was surprised
that they make more noise than most of the Bonanzas and 210s.

That is the very first I have heard anyone say that about SR-22's. Is it
all prop noise, or is there a good share of engine noise that could be
helped with a bit of muffler? Inconsiderate pilots carrying too many RPM.s
too far out?

Surprisingly, unlike the 210 or Bo, the SR22 makes most of the noise
with the exhaust. They are large diameter free flow pipes and with an
IO-550 on the other end make a rather distinctive sound quite
different than that of supersonic prop tips of the T-6 and Bo with a
2-blade prop.

I am not one to be anti aviation (in the least!!!), but I say that at times,
we are our own worst enemies, in regard to watching our noise.


With the Bo and 210 you only have to drop the RPM down to cruise,
which I do as soon as I'm high enough to have a selection of
"just-in-case" sites at hand.

Certain planes do seem to have more of a problem, for sure. At OSH every
year, I cringe at the T-6's blasting out of there, like there is not another
person in miles, and that everyone loves to hear their props. I love the
sound of power, but there is a point at which one has to think about what
they are doing, IMHO.

I've threatened to get some guys to bring in their T-6s and Vultee
Vibrators to do some early morning pattern work. The FBO durn near
had a case of appoplexy :-)) I wasn't serious, but he's a tad
sensitive about that. OTOH if I had the money I'd be flying either a
T28, or Skyraider out of there. :-)) Man, that skyraider is one BIG
airplane. That huge engine has a low note that just about shakes the
ground. So, if you hear of a Skyraider noise problem at 3BS you'll
know I won the lottery.

The problem with the T-6 is that long, 2-blade prop. The tips go
supersonic just past the cruise setting.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Hi Roger;

This is a cycle that has occurred and often repeats itself at many small
airports. Unless it's dealt with aggressively up front, it can become an
airport killer. I've seen this happen at several airports during my career
and the way it happened in all cases was consistent.

The airport exists.

The developers come and build without a winning challenge from the airport,
usually because the airport can't afford the challenge.

Upscale houses are built and usually sold to professional and business
people involved directly in the local area.

The complaints start rolling in to the local politicians.

The math is simple. Just count the votes the people complaining control vs
the vote controlled by the local airport.

Add to this the fact that in many cases the land the airport sits on is a
prime target for more developers, and you have the perfect equation for an
airport's demise!!
Dudley



"Roger" wrote in message
...
Well, here we go again although so far there is just the one nut.

A few years back there was an organized effort to close Midland
Barstow (3BS). Of course the argument was noise even though we were
here first. As the noise issue was not working they tried to fire up
the residents by complaining about the airport subsidy for a bunch of
hobbyists, or amateur pilots. Turned out that a study showed the
airport brings in about $10 million dollars into the area each year.
They weren't satisfied with that so they paid to have their own study
done. It did say the first study was wrong. I came up with
considerably *more* than ten million. :-)) When they found out how
many millions of dollars it'd cost to close the airport and dispose of
the land the effort died.

However, trying to be good neighbors the departure was changed to
straight out with the preferred runway being 06/24 as there was
nothing off the end of 24 outbound except a few houses and a lot of
trees. Departing 06 takes you out over the north end of a mall and a
few businesses.

Well, the inevitable happened and people built some new subdivisions
off the departure end of 24. It's now almost solid homes for about a
mile and a half and they are the big expensive ones. There is a bit
more traffic in the mornings lately so they are now complaining about
the changes in the traffic and the noise.

Oh yah! This group is complaining there are too many business
flights and we should keep the airport for the local pilots to use.

There is also the argument against lengthening the runways, but try
and convince them that if a plane starts its take off roll a 1000 feet
farther away it'll be much higher and quieter when it goes over their
home off the end of the runway. They're worried about jets, but most
of today's smaller jets are far quieter than most of our high
performance singles and twins.

One other thing, now that we have GPS they are in line with the
straight in approach for 06, so inbound will only be about 500 feet
above them. I don't think they have figured that one out yet.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com