The graphic (website) version of this newsletter can be accessed at:
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter396.htm
=====================================================================
Quote of the Week
=====================================================================
Quote of the Week: "The runway extension and the capacity enhancement
program were proposed by the city of Philadelphia" FAA spokesman ****fting
responsibility for the coming massive new assault on communities impacted
by
Philadelphia Air****t expansion
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Aviation Conspiracy Newsletter
#396.........................................................................October
1, 2006 Past newsletters can be accessed at:
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm
The PASSUR air****t
flight
tracking system at many major U.S. air****ts
http://www.passur.com/sites.htm
(you must have Java installed to view it). If you want to get the
newsletter
sent to you every week, sign up to AviationWatch. Bill Mulcahy
rockaway@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Release Of "Final" Airspace Redesign Plan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As Bill Sees It: (Editorial) Final Airspace Redesign Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) To Be Released In January: Originally scheduled to be
released in November the FAA has now decided to release their obscene,
corrupt plan to "redesign" the airspace over New York, New Jersey,
Connecticut and Pennsylvania in January of 2007. If enough pressure is
brought against them, no doubt the cretins at the FAA will revise and push
the release date even further into the year. No matter, as we all know it
will still be the same phony do***ent reflecting political influence in
aircraft routing, not science or fairness. It did not surprise me to see
an
email from a New Jersey's noise (NJCANN) group that said the FAA recently
met with Westchester Air****t residents in New York's Senator Schumer's
office. "Chuck" Schumer has been involved with the FAA and their racist,
politicized aircraft routing of New York City area air****ts since he was a
congressman. I have sent the EPA and the FAA my objections to the Draft
EIS's planned increase of the flights over Rockaway that are diverted
away,
especially at night, from the community of Lawrence, Long Island. But, of
course, the corrupt FAA and EPA only listens to the Schumers, not to the
public.
Increased Collision Danger With FAA "Mini Jet" Approval? As if the skies
weren't crowded enough, in a story this week the FAA rats approved the
certification of a new type of small jet that will soon be assaulting our
eardrums. However bad the increased environmental impact will be the worst
danger may be from increased possibility of collisions with the mini jet
and
large passenger planes. With its maximum altitude of 41,000 feet I believe
this will in No one can tell me that pilots for these planes will have
the
same training or flying ability as those who fly passenger planes.
Certainly
there will be less oversight over the pilots by the FAA. Will the same
penalties for drinking and flying be enforced?
Noise Clip From The Boston News Story "The Sound And The Fury" I posted a
news story last week from Boston about how the complaints from residents
near Boston's Logan Air****t were increasing as the number of planes at
that
air****t increased. If your not getting enough noise, you can hear what
it's
like to live in the Logan Air****t flight pattern by clicking on:
http://graphics.boston.com/news/special/noise/airnoise.mp3
Read letter
below
to Sen. Kerry by residents who have decided enough is enough.
FAA Will Hold "Open Houses" For Victims Of The "Capacity Enhancement" For
Philadelphia Air****t: The FAA will hold public open houses next month on
its
long-range Capacity Enhancement Program (CEP) for the Philadelphia
International Air****t, but some residents seeking answers on the Airspace
Redesign Project and runway 17-35 extension may not find them. The FAA
said
the purpose of the meetings in Tini***, Philadelphia, Delaware and New
Jersey is to give the public an op****tunity to review previously presented
project material, review new detailed plans for each on-air****t
alternative
and to speak informally with FAA representatives and their consultant team
about the CEP project. No presentation will be given. Each session will
include project posters and a brief, continuous video presentation
provided
by the air****t, according to the FAA The new detailed plans of each
proposed
on-air****t alternative will include proposed airfield, terminal and
landside
changes, and proposed changes to the existing roadway system on and near
the
air****t. The results of the environmental impact analyses, such as noise,
air quality, wetlands, etc., are still being studied and are not available
at this time, the FAA said. "The runway extension and the capacity
enhancement program were proposed by the city of Philadelphia" as the
operator of the air****t, said FAA spokesman Jim Peters on Monday. "They
are
separate projects unrelated to the airspace redesign so all three require
separate environmental impact statements," he said. Editor's Note: It
looks
as if Philadelphia Air****t area communities are really going to get
blasted.
"Capacity enhancement" is FAAspeak for more planes and noise.
New York City: FAA Approves Plan To Build New Improved Control Tower At
LaGuardia: A new state-of-the art control tower is in the future for
LaGuardia Air****t. The Federal Aviation Administration has approved $62
million to build the new tower, which proponents say will ease congestion
and delays at LaGuardia. Senator Charles Schumer, along with
Representatives
Nita Lowey and Joseph Crowley, had been pressing for the new tower. They
say
there are many safety concerns with the current one, which is 42 years
old.
The new air traffic control tower will come equipped with a high tech
approach instrument that allows planes to land in rough weather. It could
take up to three years to get it built. Editor's Note:
http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=10&aid=62998
Editor's Note:
"Easing congestion and delays" is FAAspeak for more planes and noise.
Senator Schumer, when he represented Queens, NYC as a congressman
****trayed
himself as a an advocate for the protection Queen's residents against the
air****t's expansion. However, since he has become a senator, he makes no
bones about how is staunch advocate of aviation expansionism, except for
politically connected communities which get special protection from
overflights.
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aviation News Stories This Week
Senator Kerry,
Please help us get some sleep and some legal control over aircraft
noise. Federal law on aircraft noise amounts to nothing but a series of
exemptions from EPA noise regulations. The Stage 3 class includes
hushkitted planes, which regularly emit 85 decibels of howling and
roaring, and are in fact Stage 2. Hushkitted planes are banned from
most Eurpopean air****ts but they regulary fly into Logan at 2AM, 3AM,
etc. The JFK School of Government re****t at the South Shore Jet
Pollution Council site details how the "dirty dozen" of
late-night-flying cargo companies are using a higher percentage of
these cut-rate noisemakers every year. DHL can't fly these planes in
their home country (Germany) but they're free to here.
In return for Stage 3, the Air****t Noise Control and Abatement bill
shackles communities and makes them submit to constant torture by sleep
deprivation and the drastically life-shortening physiological damage
that goes with this level of noise. A 65 dB average is a "goal", but
this is what you get right next to the runway. How about moving all our
federal representatives and FAA and Mass****t people next to the runway
and asking how they like this standard?
To my knowledge, the only actual legal requirement of federal aviation
noise law (that is, something with penalties and the force of law) is a
quick once-over for aircraft over 75,000 pounds as they come off the
assembly line. Any aircraft under this 37 and a half ton limit doesn't
even get this cursory once-over. Thus helicopters can wake us up all
night long just to make non-emergency patient transfers (admitted to by
Boston Medflight) or to fly back to base at 500' at 3 AM, as directed
by the FAA personnel in the tower. (Anything _under_ 1500 feet is fine
with them.) This is bone-jarring noise. Low frequency noise of this
magnitude cannot be shut out.
These are cynical, brutally corrupt, despicable, criminal, farcicle
laws, determined solely by industry bribery, the like of which we have
not seen since the U. S. Senate kept slavery going in this country for
30 some years after it was outlawed throughout the British Empire and
most of the rest of the world. Make a move now to end this modern-day
slavery to cor****ate fascists.
-- Chris Young
Aircraft Noise Action Committee
http://groups.
yahoo.com/ group/PlaneTalk
Alliance for a Healthy Habitat
http://groups.
yahoo.com/ group/HealthyHab itat/
HealthyHabitat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
yahoogroups. com
The sound and the fury
More flights above, more complaints below
By Christina Pazzanese, Globe Correspondent | September 17, 2006
For many, it often seems to happen just after dozing off at night, or
before dawn when it's not quite time to get up. What starts at a low
rumble quickly becomes a deafening roar as a plane going in or out of
Logan Air****t flies overhead.
And the noise, thundering down from above at windowpane-rattling
levels, is annoying increasing numbers of residents around the city.
``It's definitely gotten worse. It's been very frustrating for us,"
says John Stewart , a member of the Community Advisory Committee, a
panel of representatives from nearby neighborhoods and towns that has
been fighting Logan noise issues since 1978.
The number of complaints to a noise hotline run by the Massachusetts
****t Authority, which oversees Logan International, is up.
From January through July, the hotline logged 2,036 calls, compared
with 1,695 for all of 2005. In the same period, complaints from
Cambridge more than doubled, from fewer than 100 last year to more than
200. Complaints were also up markedly in South Boston as well as in
nearby communities traditionally plagued by jet noise, such as Everett
and Nahant.
Next week , representatives from both the Federal Aviation
Administration and Mass****t are scheduled to sit down with members of
the advisory committee .
There's a lot at stake, and more on the way. Flight activity at Logan
is expected to be up 33 percent from 2004 levels by the year 2020,
according to Mass****t's estimates, with nighttime operations (from 10
p.m. to 7 a.m.) by commercial aircraft expected to climb by 51 percent,
or about 60 new flights per night.
At peak travel times, about 6:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. and then from 3:30
p.m. to 7 p.m., 120 planes per hour go in and out of Logan on any given
day, says Ralph Dormitzer, the advisory committee's cochairman.
The traffic especially affects people living within a 5-mile radius of
Logan, though residents as far away as Cohasset are also subjected to
noise under the current flight paths, he says.
South Enders are upset, says Dormitzer, because they thought, after the
FAA was directed by the courts in 1996 to send planes departing from
the oft-used Runway 27 away from their neighborhood, that there would
be less noise. But that hasn't happened, he says.
Those in East Boston and Winthrop bear the brunt of engine noise as
planes rev up for takeoff, he says. But others are affected, too.
Citing 6 a.m. flights taking off and the ``constant noise" overhead,
Stewart, the advisory committee's rep from the South End, says planes
using Runway 27 are often as low as 1,500 to 2,000 feet when they cross
the South End. The flight paths from the runway affect nearly 100,000
residents in parts of South Boston, the South End, Roxbury, Jamaica
Plain, and sometimes Brookline, he says.
``What we're trying to do is to get the FAA to do what they're supposed
to do and stop making excuses for why they're not doing it," says
Stewart. The FAA hasn't done much to meet the 1996 court directive, and
offers little explanation for not doing so , he says.
As for Mass****t, says Stewart, ``They don't have any incentive to do
anything. Their concern is to get their capacity and profitability up."
`When we can, we will'
``Runway use decisions are made by the FAA based on wind and weather
conditions," says Mass****t spokesman Richard Walsh ,
As for the FAA following the recommendations of the court decision,
says Jim Peters , its spokesman for the New England region, ``When we
can, we will." Peters noted, however, the decision ``allows for
flexibility" when weather or winds don't cooperate. A consultant who
did a two-year study on how well planes using Runway 27 have complied
with the court order will discuss his findings at the Sept. 27 meeting,
says Peters.
``The really furious complaints are from the South End and
Winthrop/East Boston right now," says Dormitzer, whose committee
represents 29 communities and acts as the official citizens voice on
air****t issues.
Last month , nearly 75 residents in East Boston promised to fight a
plan to create a 9,300-foot-long taxiway at Logan. Critics says the
plan would only serve to add more air****t traffic, increasing noise and
air pollution. Mass****t officials say the taxiway would improve safety
by adding more space between planes as they move to and from runways,
and reduce travel delays.
A new runway now being built, as well as the controversial taxiway
plan, are only going to make things worse, according to Mary Ellen
Welch, a longtime air****t noise activist from East Boston.
One of the original ``Maverick Street Mothers" who protested air****t
expansion in 1968 by sitting in the street and blocking trucks, Welch
says residents believe the new runway will likely be paired with R
unway 27, driving up air traffic and noise in areas already hardest
hit. The taxiway will spread more noise of idling planes from Orient
Heights to Jeffries Point, she says.
``The noise in the Heights is terrible . . . All of the close-in
communities will get whacked," says Welch.
First with the quiet line
To address such frustration, Logan has a full-time noise abatement
office that sorts through complaints and researches and responds to
queries. Mass****t's noise complaint hotline was the first of its kind
nationally, operating for nearly 30 years, says Walsh.
``We take noise abatement very seriously," he says.
Schools and homeowners in neighborhoods frequently subjected to
excessive noise are eligible to have their windows and doors
sound-insulated by Mass****t. Nearly 90 percent of those eligible in
Revere participate, about 85 percent in East Boston and Winthrop do,
while only 50 percent in South Boston take advantage, the re****t says.
In 2004, 791 homes were insulated.
Mass****t also tries to accommodate those who complain that a runway
affecting their neighborhood gets too much use, by ****fting takeoff and
landing patterns, provided it doesn't affect safety.
``If we can help it, we should limit the number of times we're on a
runway so we're not constantly impacting one community," says Flavio
Leo , manager of Mass****t's noise abatement office.
Most complaints from citizens, he said, come from those who ``live
under a flight path. Folks are annoyed by our flight noise," but
aircraft, he said, are where they should be. ``It's just part of having
a busy air****t near downtown."
Very near downtown. A 2004 survey done by the advisory committee found
that of air****ts around the world, Logan ranked first for its proximity
to the city center -- 3 kilometers, or just under 2 miles. The next
closest cities were Orlando, Fla., and Warsaw, Poland, at 10 kilometers
from their downtowns.
The facts speak loudly
In general, more planes are in the air creating more noise for longer
hours, according to Mass****t's most recent environmental status and
planning re****t.
The re****t, which covered data through 2004, said that 80 additional
flights went in and out of Logan each day, from 1,027 in 2003 to 1,107
in 2004.
It also re****ted:
Overall, commercial air traffic was up 7.7 percent in 2004, but below
historic highs reached in 2001 prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The number of people exposed to airplane noise exceeding the federal
limit of 65 decibels also jumped sharply, from 7,183 in 2003 to 10,720
in 2004 . The majority of those affected were in East Boston.
Nighttime flights were up 22 percent, from 95 per night in 2003 to 116
per night in 2004. The majority (89 percent) of night flights occurred
before midnight or after 5 a.m. Nighttime operations accounted for 11.7
percent of all traffic at Logan.
The number of people who will be exposed to noise above 65 decibels is
expected to dip slightly by 2020, from 10,720 to 9,234, though noise
levels in Revere are expected to go up, while Boston and Winthrop
should see -- or hear -- a decline. Those likely to be exposed to noise
in the 70- to 75-decibel range are also expected to increase, though
the increases will occur in locations already sound-insulated.
Spreading out the noise
Generally, few flights except cargo carriers depart after midnight
because there's little demand for it, says Walsh, not because of noise
restrictions. Late-night commercial arrivals are often the result of
delayed flights during the day, as well as some ``red-eyes" coming from
the West Coast, says Walsh.
Many angry complaints about nighttime plane noise are fueled by a
common misperception, says Walsh. Unlike many communities that restrict
the hours that lawnmowers or jackhammers can be operated, Logan Air****t
is open all night, every night. ``There's no curfew" for most flights
taking off or landing, says Walsh.
``There's no excuse for those. It's absurdity," says Dormitzer. ``They
could take action to limit some of that, but they don't really do it.
It's a shame; that's an action they could take that would make a big
difference."
Behind the scenes, there have been efforts to try to tackle the noise
problem and deal with an expected spike in Logan air****t traffic over
the next decade and beyond.
The first phase of a joint effort between the FAA, Mass****t, and the
Community Advisory Committee, which began in late 2003, was recently
completed.
The $3.2 million noise study came up with 13 new flight routes, mostly
over water, that would reduce the amount of time planes fly over homes
along the shoreline; spread flight paths across a wider area from
Marblehead to Duxbury; and direct planes to fly at higher altitudes
near the city, says Dormitzer, who worked on the plan. The routes have
already been approved by the FAA, he says.
``I'm cautiously optimistic," says Dormitzer, citing projections that
the new routes would improve noise exposure in many communities without
creating new problems in others.
The full advisory committee was expected to start reviewing the routes
last week and weigh in by mid-November. The approved routes are to be
finalized and submitted to the FAA by January.
Phase 2 of the study, which begins this fall, will look at ways to
implement the new routes, says Dormitzer.
Though Stewart isn't hopeful that any of the routes developed in Phase
1 will help the South End, he's holding out a ``slight ray of hope"
that a solution, such as directing planes over the Back Bay and the
Charles River, can be reached in Phase 2.
In the next six months, Mass****t will launch a redesigned version of
its website, including a more sophisticated update of Air****tMonitor,
an animated flight-tracking system that shows Logan plane activity.
The new monitor will show what airlines are flying overhead in real
time, what size the jets are, whether they're departing or arriving --
information that would enable residents, at least in theory, to
pinpoint the exact plane that woke them up at a precise time.
Users also will be able to do research, download re****ts, and file
noise complaints armed with more information that will help Mass****t
investigate and re****t to the FAA whether the offending noise was a
result of pilot error, says Walsh.
In addition, more sensitive microphones will be installed at Mass****t's
30 monitoring stations around the city to better measure noise caused
by planes.
Dormitzer and Stewart say while these attempts are laudable, the
problem is that the noise abatement office has no operational authority
to restrict flights or penalize pilots.
``The FAA ignores them," says Dormitzer.
``It's good data, nice people, but nothing ever happens. It makes no
difference."
Christina Pazzanese can be reached at cpazzanese@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
com
© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
__._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new
topic Messages | Links | Members AviationWatch is a service provided
by
the ALLIANCE OF RESIDENTS CONCERNING O'HARE. AReCO is an organization
dedicated to protecting the health, safety and welfare of individuals and
communities that are affected by the air trans****t industry.
For more information see: http://www.areco.org
|
