A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Noise Nazis at it Again!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 27th 03, 04:30 AM
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Noise Nazis at it Again!

I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
property.

"
AVIATION COMMUNITY RESPONDS FAVORABLY TO AFSA ---
The American Free Skies Association (AFSA), a New England-based aviation
preservation organization, has received plenty of positive feedback from
throughout the aviation community since an article about its plight
appeared last week on the EAA website, in EAA's member newsletter e-HOT
LINE, and was picked up by several other outlets. Three Massachusetts
aerobatic pilots, each a member of International Aerobatic Club (IAC)
Chapter 35, and an aviation business owner operating out of Hanscom
Field (BED) in suburban Boston are defendants in legal cases that, if
successful, could have dire national ramifications for the freedom of
flight.
http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...freeskies.html
.................................................. ................"
  #2  
Old November 27th 03, 05:58 AM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news | I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
| in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
| aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
| property.
|

They argue that their property rights extend up into infinity and that the
pilots are trespassing. The lawsuit is purely harassment in an attempt to
intimidate pilots. I would be surprised if any court is even willing to hear
the case.


  #3  
Old November 27th 03, 07:59 AM
Richard Riley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:58:48 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

:
:"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
:news :| I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
:| in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
:| aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
:| property.
:|
:
:They argue that their property rights extend up into infinity and that the
ilots are trespassing. The lawsuit is purely harassment in an attempt to
:intimidate pilots. I would be surprised if any court is even willing to hear
:the case.
:

No stranger than the County of Los Angeles trying to get property tax
on satellites in orbit, because they belonged to a company with an
operation in LA. (Not the headquarters, mind you, just one plant.)
  #4  
Old November 27th 03, 01:53 PM
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Apparently one of the pilots is ready to fold up and leave the area - these guys don't have the cash to defend
themselves; rough estimates of $25,000 just to begin to fight.

--
Dan D.



..
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news | I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
| in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
| aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
| property.
|

They argue that their property rights extend up into infinity and that the
pilots are trespassing. The lawsuit is purely harassment in an attempt to
intimidate pilots. I would be surprised if any court is even willing to hear
the case.




  #5  
Old November 27th 03, 03:27 PM
rip
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sounds like it's time to start a defense fund.

Rip

Blueskies wrote:
Apparently one of the pilots is ready to fold up and leave the area - these guys don't have the cash to defend
themselves; rough estimates of $25,000 just to begin to fight.


  #6  
Old November 27th 03, 04:39 PM
Paul Lee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Shucks... Canada geese make an awfull noise every year around here when
they fly over - honk, honk, honk... Who do we sue for that? Canadian government?

Orval Fairbairn wrote in message .. .
I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
property.

"
AVIATION COMMUNITY RESPONDS FAVORABLY TO AFSA ---
The American Free Skies Association (AFSA), a New England-based aviation
preservation organization, has received plenty of positive feedback from
throughout the aviation community since an article about its plight
appeared last week on the EAA website, in EAA's member newsletter e-HOT
LINE, and was picked up by several other outlets. Three Massachusetts
aerobatic pilots, each a member of International Aerobatic Club (IAC)
Chapter 35, and an aviation business owner operating out of Hanscom
Field (BED) in suburban Boston are defendants in legal cases that, if
successful, could have dire national ramifications for the freedom of
flight.
http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...freeskies.html
.................................................. ..............."

  #7  
Old November 27th 03, 07:26 PM
RobertR237
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article
, Orval
Fairbairn writes:


I just got this one off the EAA Hotline. It seems that some noise Nazis
in MA are trying to do an end run around the Federal preemption of
aviation regulations by suing individual pilots who fly near their
property.


Never thought too much of the Noise Nazis, since the vast majority knew the
airport was there and built or moved into their homes knowing that. I might
just be reconsidering my stance as of late. Seems that IAH (Houston) just open
a third parallel runway and changed their flight pattern to handle the new
runway. I live over 20 miles from the airport and until now, nowhere near the
flight path. The new flight path for the new runway, which is now the longest
and main runway, is directly over our house. As much as I love flying and
aircraft, I am getting a bit tired of the sound of all those heavies going over
ever two minutes from 5:30am till midnight.

Just too much of a good thing!


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

  #8  
Old November 28th 03, 06:32 AM
Ben Sego
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Richard Riley wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:58:48 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

:
:"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
:news


snip
:They argue that their property rights extend up into infinity and that the
ilots are trespassing.

No chance. Isn't this settled law?
snip

No stranger than the County of Los Angeles trying to get property tax
on satellites in orbit, because they belonged to a company with an
operation in LA. (Not the headquarters, mind you, just one plant.)


One word, Richard: California.

Of course, the DC city government can occasionally give LA county a run
for its money on zaniness.

B.S.

  #9  
Old November 28th 03, 08:38 AM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Three Massachusetts
aerobatic pilots, each a member of International Aerobatic Club (IAC)
Chapter 35, and an aviation business owner operating out of Hanscom
Field (BED) in suburban Boston are defendants in legal cases


I bet the people of Bedford would be suprised they were part of a city 20 miles
away.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
  #10  
Old November 28th 03, 02:08 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ben Sego" wrote in message
...
Richard Riley wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:58:48 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

:
:"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in

message

:news ....

snip
:They argue that their property rights extend up into infinity and that

the
ilots are trespassing.

No chance. Isn't this settled law?


At common law, which has been superseded in many cases by statute, one's
real property rights extended upward infinitely. There is some question
whether FAA jurisdiction supersedes the common law.

In NC we have a case pending appeal in which a horse-trainer vet and wife
sued a local airport, calling it a nuisance which depreciated the value of
their property. Plaintiffs received judgment for $358,000, being the amount
appraisers testified the property had diminished in value. Much of the
vet's property is in the landing pattern. The airport was built after the
vet had established his farm and home.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stop the noise airads Aerobatics 131 July 2nd 04 01:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.