The Goosing Of Greenwich

Congressional Commitment

2010-08-07T09:43:00.000-07:00

We recall the supportiveness of U.S. Rep. Chris Shays and his dynmaic staffer Chris catropa. When U.S. Rep. Jim Himes took office, he and staffer Amy Lappos lost little time in also coming to our side, holding several meetings on the topic and reportedly contacting several FAA-related entities. Most recently, he met with us last June, at 2 locations, in order to observe planes with us. However, the meeting I attended happened on a day that had rainy weather. Usually in such weather, planes go elsewhere or just sit on runways… Moreover, IIRC, The Iceland Volcano was having a flare-up around that time. Even so, we did spot a few low-flying planes.

Speaking of volcanos, we've had some unplanned but welcome “relief” from plane-noise, due to the Iceland Volcano. The economic slowdown in the Gulf of Mexico region may have contributed too. But 2-3 weeks ago, the noise returned, at higher levels than ever before! The planes seem to be flying a bit lower over Greenwich and Stamford than they flew before the Volcano & Gulf ordeals.

Most recently, I’ve contacted a Republican candidate for the U.S House of Representatives -- Dan Debicella, to ask what his stance on the FAA redesign is. He wrote to me that

"Hi Gila,

.... I actually sat down with a supporter yesterday who is advising me on FAA and aviation issues.

Living in Greenwich, the flight patterns are obviously an issue for you and if elected I will certainly do whatever I can to influence the FAA and their determinations regarding air traffic.

.....

I am committed to helping you and your neighbors on this."
.

An interestingly similar case

2010-08-07T07:27:00.000-07:00

Looks as though the noise-blight reaches as far as Oregon! And I thought Portland, Oregon, was such a "green" place...

http:///http:// www.oregonaviationrevealed.org

Related topics: christopher corich, hillsboro airport, land use board of appeals, miki barnes, oregon aviation revealed, port of portland, runway extension

Flight Delays: Fresh (Red) Herring!

2010-08-04T16:57:00.000-07:00

Recall my post from July 2009: "Flight Delays, a Big Red Herring?" I wrote that "...We allow for the possibility of [ground-traffic]delays when we set out for a meeting or an appointment. We know it's ridiculous to fix a precise to-the-minute time-estimate to a car trip: If we want to be sure to arrive on time, we have to leave early... We think nothing of ground-traffic delays. The time may have come to accept air-traffic delays, especially in light of the increased and increasing traffic-volume." That was following discussions from 2007 and some in 2008, whereby "flight delays" were citerd in several newspaper items as the FAA's justification for the Airspace Redesign.

This blog has debunked that whole myth: Over time, we've collected numerous instances of flight delays, the overwhelming majority of which are caused by weather. Can the FAA redesign the weather?

Here is a recent "sample:"

1. June 17, 2010, (Thurs.) 4:10 pm: Newark has (1 hour?) delays on arrivals, "they say wind is the problem."

2. June 23 (Wed.) 9 am and 12 pm news: A Virgin Airlines flight London to Newark was diverted to Bradley Airport "because of bad weather." Passengers were stranded from 8:20 pm till 1 am. They "yelled and screamed" but to no avail. A few passengers fainted.

There are rules regarding passengers "stranded on the tarmac," (I believe they limit the time passengers can be held on a plane) but they do not apply to international flights!

3. June 24, 2010, 9:38 pm WCBS880: "We still have airport delays, call your carrier." This was the day of the tornado in Bridgeport, CT.

4. June 25, 12 pm: A flight "taxiing" for takeoff from Atlanta was "turned around" because... a TURTLE was discovered on-board! The only pets allowed on planes are cats and dogs, in appropriate boxes. There are several versions as to what the fate of the turtle, named after a character in the film "Avatar," was. One is that passengers and cabin-attendants said to pout the turtle under a passenger-seat, but the crew refused. Another story is that the plane's crew told the turtles' owner/s to put the turtle in a trash-bin in the terminal, abut the airline claimed that "kids," (turtle's owners?) "chose to do that." The kids' family reported the incident to PETA.

5. July 13, (Tues.), a storm was approaching. 11 am: "all three airports are reporting delays because of the weather."
4 pm: 4 hours and 15 minutes delays.
5:30 pm: "Delays at the airports so keep calling [your carrier]"

6. July 19 (Monday): Sky darkened abruptly around 9 am, heavy rain with some wind tapered off to light rain and no wind.
10:00 am: Newark and LaGuardia "both reporting delays" because of the weather, "... I guess you can throw in JFK, too."
4:30 pm: "Up to 1-hour delays at the airports."
5:30 pm WOR710: Up to 1-hour delays at the airports.

7. July 23 (Friday). Weather -- Storm and tornado warning. overcast, which a friend told me was said to reach altitude of 44,500 feet.
"Accu-Weather" TV channel 7: "You want to check ahead at the airports..."

8. July 25, rain and overcast, power-outages in some regions, tornado suspected to have occurred in the Bronx.

9:08 pm WCBS880: "We are seeing delays at the area airports..."
The Greenwich area had milder weather than described, so planes were passing overhead every 3-4 minutes.

9. July 28 (Wed.): Weather was fine, but the U.S. President was visiting the tri-state area, many "frozen zones" reported due to security measures.

5:00 (and 5:30?) news: Newark has delays up to 1:10 hours.

10. July 29 8:50 am: "Airports [have] up to 1-hour delays, that's weather-related."

So... this "sample" picked up a delay roughly evenry 6 days. Note that unlike the delays in some of the "horror stories" used by some to justify the aAirspace re-design, weather delays can persis for well over 24 hours.

Of 10 "data-points," weather: score=8, turtle=Score 1, President? score 1.

Modi'in website update

2009-11-25T10:28:00.001-08:00

Available in English (this link) as well as Hebrew! The good people of Midi'in are struggling against the Infra-Structure Oligarchy of the region they live in.

See also posts from last summer about their protest-convoy.

Recent from Congressman Himes

2009-11-25T08:26:00.000-08:00

In a Nov. 19 letter, U.S Representative Jim Himes writes

"As you may be aware, in June, State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal argued before the U.S District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the FAA had not conducted an adequate analysis of the effects of the change in flight patterns on air quality and noise pollution over our district. I was disheartened by the Court's short-sighted decision to side with the FAA."

I was disheartened but not surprised. I'm not a legal professional but I believe the lawsuit is flawed because it does not address the actual harm (including loss of sleep) caused by the FAA. We in the Greenwich area are affected by an increasing number of planes flying lower and lower overhead later and later into the night.

Himes' letter continues:

"On Tuesday, November 17, Attorney General Blumenthal filed a brief with the United States Supreme Court requesting that this decision be overturned. At the core of the Attorney General's argument is Connecticut's 10th Amendment right to seek the elimination of federal policies harmful to its citizens. "
Good point about the 10th, but IMO there hasn't been nearly enough emphasis on the "harm" part.

"I continue to monitor this matter closely, and stand behind the Attorney General's challenge. This flawed and poorly-implemented redesign should not continue to move forward without an adequate analysis of the negative effects it will have on residents of southwestern Connecticut."

The redesign may be moving forward but meanwhile the FAA is causing some area residents to move out... Perhaps that is what some so-called developers want -- cover our entire region with hermetically sealed office-towers. Simply chase residents away since they're powerless anyway.

"As always, if you have comments or concerns you would like to communicate to me regarding the FAA redesign, please email me at himes.noisewatch@mail.house.gov. Thank you for your continued efforts.

sincerely (signature)"
.

Radio Mention of Airplane Noise

2009-11-25T08:00:00.000-08:00

.
On the morning of Nov. 17, I was listening to WNPR (88.5FM) program "Where We Live." There was a discussion of the recent "rankings" of Connecticut towns by Connecticut Magazine.

It seems that Greenwich usually tops the magazine's (yearly) list, but this year it's second to Fairfield. That resulted in frequent mentions of Greenwich during the program. That gave me a chance to call it and... talk about Greenwich... meaning, the airplane noise, the the destructive impact of the FAA redesign on the Greenwich area.

The program's call-screener was extremely nice, very professional and competent. My question to the program's guest was -- why airplane noise was not one of the magazine's "ranking" criteria.

It sounded to me that the editor knows about the noise-problem, and would like to use more environmental factors in his magazine's rating-system. In any case, our cause got a wee bit of fresh "air time."

Recall that the noise had been mentioned some months ago on WSTC1400. To my knowledge, WSTC doesn't archive past programs on the Web. Where We Live might.

Interestingly, at a later point in the Where We Live program, one of the participants described a town that 'looked good' on paper, but, when some people moved there based on rankings they'd read, they were faced with the rude reality of a plane flying over them every 15 minutes! So the editor said -- do your "due diligence" before moving.

I couldn't help think: 15 minutes??? Here in Greenwich, there are many many days where a plane passes low overhead every 2-3 minutes, for hours on end!

But even the "every 15 minutes" mention shows more people are becoming aware of the noise-pollution, and, probably, are becoming less fearful of speaking out about it.
.

Some updates

2009-10-11T12:03:00.003-07:00

Two short noise logs have been added to

New data has been added to our 'sister-website,
http://AirplaneNoiseOverConnecticut.blogspot.com/

They are not long but illustrate the frequency of noisy over-flights experience in the Greenwich area.

Noise Over Easton

2009-08-20T07:37:00.001-07:00

See several updates at

http://AirplaneNoiseOverConnecticut.blogspot.com/

Norwalk/Greenwich/Wilton Overflight Logs/Samples

2009-08-03T07:33:00.000-07:00

New data has been added to our 'sister-website,
http://AirplaneNoiseOverConnecticut.blogspot.com/

These data are samples which typify the noise heard in our region every day and for many hours during the day.

More data are coming soon.

"Modi'in" Note

2009-08-02T13:24:00.000-07:00

Several nearby towns, as well as many Israeli blogs, have the word "Modi'in" in them: There's "Modi'in Illit," meaning Modi'in Heights, which may or may not be near the Modi'in this blog is talking about. Modi'in is also a Hewbrew noun! So don't get too carried away...

Modi'in News

2009-08-02T12:34:00.000-07:00

Translated from an article that was Modi'in's "muni.il" website, dated July 22, 2009:

Next Friday, A Protest Convoy to B.G Airport!
A protest convoy of residents of Modi'in will depart next Friday, July 24, from the municipality parking lot, destination Ben Gurion Airport and the offices of the Airports Authority and the Civilian Aviation Authority.

The convoy is part of the residents' struggle against an airplane landing-approach/landing-path above the town. It will be led by the mayor Haim Bibas and other members of the city council. The requisite permits have been issued.

For many long months, the [Modi'in] municipality has conducted a long and difficult struggle against all the aviation entities in Israel, in an attempt to alter the landing-approach currently over the town.

Recall that about a month and a half ago, the high court of justice ruled in favor of 60 additional days of talks between the municipality's team of experts and representatives of the Airports Authority and the Civilian Aviation Authority.

Same Modiin URL, July 29, 2009:

350 Vehicles in Protest-Convoy Against Flight Paths
Over 350 vehicles set out last Friday on a long protest-convoy to B.G Airport, to hold a demonstration against the plan to route a landing-path of airplanes over the town of Modiin.

The convoy was organized by the headquarters of the town-residents' struggle, "Clear Skies Over Modiin," The protest was organized in cooperation with the Modiin municipality. The convoy was led by the mayor, Haim Bibas. The residents arrived in great numbers to have their voices heard against the intention to the sky over Modi’in into a path for landing planes.

In the morning hours, the convoy prepared for the journey in the parking-lot across the street from the municipality building. With police escort, and exemplary orderliness, the demonstrators headed out in a gently-paced travel toward the airport, with signs, [one of the pictures shows signs posted on the cars] and with car-headlights on and some horn-blowing.

At the airport, the convoy stopped in front of the offices of the Airport Authority. In a large demonstration, many signs were held aloft by the Modi’in residents, in a plea to cancel the plan of turning Modi’in into a flight-landing approach-path.

Mayor Haim Bibas thanked the many participants and said: "First, I wish to tell you that I love you and am proud of all of you. We are reaching a critical juncture in our months-long struggle. The presence of 350 vehicles and many town inhabitants is an important aspect of the struggle.

When I see the hundreds of residents who have come here, when I see the high level of caring and involvement, I know that nobody can ignore the residents of Modiin.

The Airport and Civilian Aviation Authorities have a responsibility to find a solution which will make it possible for planes to use the airport safely, but which will not take place over our the residents' homes but instead will be routed over the township's uninhabited areas.

We will continue to work on all levels and with all the means at our disposal against all the professional entities in the state of israel, in order to find other alternatives, including reserving the option to take legal action. For nearly a year, we have managed to prevent the plan's implementation and we are not willing to give up."

Koby Mohr, the director-general of the Airport Authority, came down to speak to the demonstrators. He told the residents that the municipality had proposed several alternatives which are being considered seriously by the civilian aviation Authority which approves the flight-routes.

MORE info can be found in the blogs listed below. It is provided in hope that CT residents and others who suffer from airplane noise nuisance will find it instructive!

This one has beautiful pictured of the convoy and the demionstrations! The signs are great! One of them says: "We don't want planes. We want quality of life." Another says We want skies clear of planes." A third says "Koby Mohr, RESIGN!" Similar to certain blogs in the U.S calling for the FAA director to resign!...

And a big white sign has a "takeoff on" (no pun intended) an old children's song about a plane, which says something like "aeroplane, aeroplane, come down to us from the sky..." and bring us whatever goodies the song talks about... well, the big white signs has 4 lines which rhyme perfectly in Hebrew, saying: Come down to us, airplane, Bring upon us, with joy and happiness, Your noise, smoke, and stench, And we shall live in Hell."

Another sign says simply "Modi'in Wants Safety."

http://eplanesmodiin.blogspot.com/.html/

Clear Skies for Modiin:
http://eplanesmodiin.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html/

http://eplanesmodiin.blogspot.com/2009/07/operation-clear-skies-is-underway.html/

July 15 entry in Modi’in’s blog,

http://h179336wp.setupmyblog.com/?p=210.html/

Sunday, July 12, 2009 log/"sample"

2009-07-16T08:36:00.001-07:00

While Sunday, July 5, and Monday, July 6, 2009, brought much more plane-noise overhead, I was too tied up with other matters to be able to log those numerous overhead flights. This "sample" from a non-holiday Sunday is typical.

"J" denotes jet, "sm" denotes a medium or small plane, not a large jet. "NE" means the plane was seen heading Northeast, "S" means South, and likewise for other headings. "dns" means I did not see the plane, which sounded as though it was hidden behind trees, but am very certain I did hear a plane and not the echo of some loud ground-vehicle. If a question-mark appears after the heading, it means I'm pretty sure that's where I heard a plane heading, but did not see it.

Weather: There was a bit of haze overhead but as the hour wore on sky cleared.

19:07 (meaning 7:07 pm) J, S.
10:08 sm, loud, S?
19:10 J, S.
19:12 J, S?
19:15 J, NE/E.
19:16 J, S.
19:18 J, NE.
19:19 J, S.
19:20 sm, E.
19:21 smallish jet, W/NW, very low.
19:22 J, S? could have been same plane as in previous entry. Too much noise filling the sky to tell for sure.
19:23 sm, dns
19:25 J, S.
19:25 sm, N.
19:26 sm, W.
19:26 sm, S.
19:30 sm, E.
19:32 sm, W? loud but hidden behind trees.
19:32 J, NE.
19:34 N? NW? loud.
19:35 J, NE.
19:38 J, S.
19:42 J, NE
19:44 sm, dns
19:45 sm, NW, low.
19:49 J, descending whine, NW
19:49 J, NE.
19:51 J, descending whine, dns.
19:52 sm, W? NW?
19:53 J, NE.

LATER NOTE: This data has been copied to

http://www.NoiseOverConnecticut.blogspot.com/.html/

and to

http://www.AirplaneNoiseOverConnecticut.blogspot.com/.html/

Current plan is -- have one of these URL's (I'll pick one of the two soon)
devoted mostly to aitcraft-noise logs from area residents, have this URL devoted mostly to stories and issues.

Flight Delays: The Big Red Herring?

2009-07-16T08:30:00.000-07:00

NOTE ON FLIGHT DELAYS:
In our "modern" age we are accustomed to ground-traffic delays. We allow for the possibility of delays when we set out for a meeting or an appointment. We know it's ridiculous to fix a precise to-the-minute time-estimate to a car trip: If we want to be sure to arrive on time, we have to leave early. Metro North's trains have schedules they usually conform to, but those trains, too, often run 5-10 minutes late.

We think nothing of ground-traffic delays. The time may have come to accept air-traffic delays, especially in light of the increased and increasing traffic-volume.

THE FAA AND FLIGHT-DELAYS
The main excuse the FAA has used to justify its so-called Airspace Redesign has been -- flight delays. Around the time the FAA began phasing in its "redesign," radio broadcasts were full of "horror stories" about flight delays: A woman named (IIRC) Sandy (or Cindy) Hanna was heard on the radio telling of being locked inside an airplane because of a 12-hour delay. She claimed that passengers were not allowed to leave the plane in order to, i.e, relax and wait inside the terminal and (after the plane's rest-rooms had been used, er, to capacity) relieve themselves, BUT, the one or more dogs on the flight were taken on walks intended for the same bodily errands. Come to think of it, I had a very similar experience back in 1987: The plane that was supposed to take me from Chicago to my Michigan hometown was stuck at O'Hare Airport for 4 hours because of vicious weather. In those days, most people didn't have cell-phones. So I couldn't let my boyfriend (now husband) know I'd be very late. He was on his way to my apartment, but I wasn't worried -- he had a key. One thing we both disregarded was -- my place had a burglar-alarm! Fortunately the police officer who showed up at the apartment accepted my boyfriend’s explanation. While all that was going on, I was sitting inside the plane many miles away, reading, and therefore, not minding the delay at all.

The point it -- delays are caused by weather, and I don't see any design or redesign changing that.

Radio stations report on ground-traffic delays nearly every day. Some stations also report airport-traffic delays, also as a matter of course. When I'm near a radio, I make note of these delays. below, you'll see a sample of when I recorded. Just about every time there are air-traffic delays, they ar cause by weather.

Radio stations are identified below by their call-letters and frequency, which is A.M unless otherwise noted, so that "a.m" and "p.m" refer to time of day. "Weather" refers to weather observed in connecticut, about 20 miles from LaGuardia Airport, so it's just "an approximation" of weather conditions at the airport at the time.

DELAYS-SAMPLE:

Keeping score:
Jul. 12: WEATHER: 7. COMPUTERS: 1. TRAFFIC-VOLUME: 0.
On Aug. 3 this score was updated to:

WEATHER: 11. COMPUTERS: 1. Unruly Passenger/s: 1. TRAFFIC-VOLUME: 0

DATA:

Tue. May 5, 2009, WOR710, 11 a.m: "... and of course airport delays due to low visibility [alluding to fog?] weather was: For past 2 days, almost continuous overcast, on and off drizzle.

Thursday May 14 WOR710 7 p.m: 3-hour delays at airports, "call ahead." Weather: Some brief "rain showers," not much rain overall. Sky overcast all day, some wind, not severe but definitely noticeable -- trees, not just tree-tops -- were swaying.

Wednesday May 27 WOR710, 7 a.m: 1-hour delays at LaGaurdia "due to low visibility/fog. Weather: There was some drizzle yesterday but not today. Today -- overcast but no rain.
WOR710, 2 p.m and later: 90 minutes (Newark?) to 3-hour (LaGuardia?) delays "due to fog." Later in the day, 3-hour delays were reported, it was made clear the delays were caused by fog (no pun intended!)

Thursday May 28, 8 a.m, 8:30 a.m, 9: a.m, 10:00 a.m: 2-hour arrival and departure delays at LaGuardia (and other airports?) "due to fog" and "because of fog." (Aside: There were also 2-hour delays on the George Washington Bridge).

Thursday June 4, 5:30 a.m: "Expect airport delays today due to the weather. Weather: Rain. It had rained the previous night, thought not much. "Showers" were forecast.

8:00 a.m: WOR710: "90 minute arrival delays at LaGuardia."

June 9, 11 a.m: 3-4 hour departure-delays at JFK. Some planes scheduled to depart at certain times had not yet reached JFK. WCBS880: "Usually LaGuardia is the worst [as far as delays] now it's the best," with 90-minute delays.

Weather: Strong lightening and thunder storms the previous night/early thins morning. (My house shook from the thunder!) By 11 a.m WCBS880 reported a "mix of sun and clouds" in New York City, forecast: "could be another shower coming in from Pennsylvania."

2 p.m, WSTC1400: 2 1/2 hour departure-delays at JFK and Newark, 90 minute delays at LaGuardia. "Bradley [airport] on or close to schedule." Weather: by now rain had pretty much stopped, 64 degrees F. "Showers" and "thunderstorms" forecast for the evening.

June 18 5:30 p.m WOR710: "Up to 3 hour delays at the airports." Weather: Rain since early morning, stopped briefly around 6 p.m, then resumed. At times gentle, other times heavy. Dark clouds all day.

7:00 p.m: 2-hour delays at JFK. 3-hour departure delays, 90 minute arrival delays Newark.

July 2, WABC770 1 p.m: United Airlines' computer is "back on line" after having malfunctioned in Chicago and caused "nationwide problems." [including, most likely, flight delays].

Update August 3:

July 20, Monday, WOR710, 11 am: “At the airports you have delays because of the weather.

Weather in CT: Persistent rain, but not downpour, since very early in the morning, but no wind. By noon the rain had stopped, while WABC reported “light drizzle” in N.Y City.

Monday Jul. 27, WIN1010, 9:30 pm: “airport delays because of the weather.” Weather: Storms (and lightening?) near LaGuardia reported on various radio stations. “Showers” forecast for later that night.

Wed. Jul. 29, WOR710 5:30 pm: “airport delays of about 4 hours.”
Weather: Rain since noon, not heavy but some radio stations were reporting flooding or chance of flooding elsewhere in the Tri-States region. I also heard earlier mention of “tornado-watch” in 1-2 NY or NJ counties.

Jul. 31, 5 pm, WOR710 and earlier on another station: 3 hour delays at airports.
Weather: Rain, flood-warning in some places, tornados were mentioned.

Aug. 1, 2009, WSTC1400 9:00 am” LaGuardia Airport has “many hours delay,” and one of its terminals evacuated, because a passenger claimed to have a bomb. In the following day/s, details were all over the newspapers so I won’t elaborate.
.

Flight Delays: old data, point still holds

2009-07-16T08:26:00.000-07:00

Weather Delays -- Recent radio gleanings
Recall that in the last year or so, we heard or read that the airspace re-design was created mainly to reduce "delays."

For example:
1.) A Dec. 8, 2007 e-mail from Robert Belzer of NJCAAN carried a copy of a Philadelphia Daily News article by William Bender. Its second paragraph said:"The FAA says it's just sticking to its original timeline for redesigning the airspace over New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia metropolitan area to reduce flight delays."

2.) A letter from Congressman Shays to me dated June 5, 2008 states: "I also know the FAA has consistently stated the only way it can reduce congestion and travel delays is by redesigning the (NY/NJ/PHIL) airspace."

3.) USA Today posted an article that is very much in favor of the redesign and against the then-emerging lawsuits. It was posted on August 4, 2008. With the title "Our view on crowded skies: Air travel delays mount as local interests prevail," it begins with

"Air travelers, who suffered through historic delays last year, are off to another sizzling summer of gridlock, thanks mostly to the spinoff effects of congestion in New York, which causes 75% of the nation's delays. This is nothing new. It just goes on and on...because, as with many other problems, local opposition can easily block the national interest..."

So naturally, I began to take an interest in just what was causing the delays so many entities were complaining about! Some New York radio stations announce airport delays in their "Traffic and Weather" segments. Of course, I can't hear all of the airport-traffic radio items, but I do make notes of those I do hear, albeit sometimes in a hurry. A few times I posted my results on my (now defunct) AOL blog, and am now sharing the ones I heard recently.

In what follows, radio stations will be identified by their call-letters followed by their AM frequency, so as to avoid confusing frequency with the am/pm differentiation. All of the following were heard on AM stations, so my writing "am" refers to time of day.

I still want to improve my recording of the weather, but I'm pretty sure that if the delays were not attributed to the weather, I would have noted that.

Jan. 9, 2009: WOR710, 6 pm news: "... a couple of hours delay at the airports so call ahead."

I don't recall delays being explicitly attributed to the weather, but there had been some snow that day, and there were forecasts of wings "gusting up to" 40 mph.

Jan 15: WCBS880, at 9:38 pm: 2 hours delay at liberty Airport "due to weather." Weather was: About 2" of snow in the morning, snowing in Connecticut stopped at around noon.

Jan. 28, WNLK1400, 11:25 am: Some airport delays due to weather. Weather was: 3" of snow, which stopped around 9 am and turned to rain.
WABC770 also reported delays at around 1:30 pm same day.

March 2: (probably very early in the morning): Reports that "600 flights" were "canceled at major airports" because of a big snow-storm.

"1010WIN" ("ten ten WIN") station reported more than 900 flights being canceled.

Around 11:20 am there was a lull in the snow storm, 1010 announced "30 minute delays" at LaGuardia. By 12:10 pm, there were reports of 2 hour delays at JFK and 3 hour delays at LaGuardia.

About 3 days earlier, I heard mention of "2 hour delays at airports." The weather was OK, so that may have been an honest-to-goodness congestion delay.

March 11: WOR710, 8:50 am: LaGuardia 40 minute delays, "due to low visibility." (IIRC there was some rain and fog)

WNLK1400, Around 12 am (midnight) March 12: Report that passengers on a Delta flight were "kept for 10 hours" without food.

Friday April 3, Various reports of 2-hour "arrival delays" at LaGuardia, later reports of 4-hour delays. IIRC because of fog. There was some rain and thunder that day.

April 21 WOR710 around 7:30 am: Airport delays due to "low visibility." Weather was: Strong rain storm the previous night, fog in the morning.

So here are 8 instances of delays I recorded in the last few months, I'm sure there were many more but I simply wasn't near a radio -- only one of which may have been caused by "regular" congestion and not caused by weather conditions.

This sample is typical of many I've written down during the last year or two: Delays are almost invariably caused by weather. I remember one delay last year being caused by "software glitch."

"Unclickable" URL's

2009-07-01T15:55:00.000-07:00

Occasionally I am not able to post a URL here and also make is "clickable." But one thing you can do is -- highlight the URL as it appears on the screen. Press Control-C to "copy, then place the cursor on your screen's or ISP's "address bar," erase what's there, if anything, click to place your cursor there, and press control-V (paste). Once the URL is there in the address-bar, it ought to open when you click "go" or hit "enter.

Good Stuff !!!

2009-06-24T07:33:00.001-07:00

I once came upon an airplane-related website,

http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm

If you click

http://www.pages.prodigy.net/rocakaway/

that should give an index of many 'newsletters."

I admired the website's spirit, and its striking graphics -- a creature that's half plane half snake, stayed in my mind. I think that was before the airplane noise started rattling Fairfield County. When the noise started in 2007, I looked for the website, but did not find it. I thought it was probably gone.

Last week, when searching the net, I found the site again! I printed and read its pages.

It has a very different perspective than what I've seen so far on the internet. Since it's been around since before the lawsuits and Shays and Himes' involvement with the issues, the site does not view "politicians" as potential allies. Also, I'm not sure how often it's updated.

But the different perspective is refreshing! I believe it's worth a click and a look. Here are some excerpts I chose, then you can decide if to click or not.

"...It looks as if the [redesign] is starting to get some real heat when the state of Connecticut, not just a group of towns, joined in the lawsuit this week. This is a good beginning. Now what has to happen is more states start lawsuits and eventually ... form a coalition to bring one massive lawsuit against the FAA scheme. This lawsuit will be fought against by [New York] politicians..."

"State of Connecticut Sues the FAA!!! NEW CANAAN -- opponent of the plan to move air traffic over Fairfield County spoke yesterday about alternatives, like directing the planes over Long Island Sound and promoting train travel.

State representatives from Fairfield County and U.S Rep. Christopher Shays... spoke against the Federal Aviation Administration at a rally held by the New Canaan Environmental group... Speakers accused the FAA of neglecting the environment and area residents.... State rep. Antonietta "Toni" Boucher, R-Wilton, called for an increase of mass transit and promoted rail travel, which would decrease dependency on air travel for longer trips, she said. "the skies have started to emulate what has happened to the roads, especially in Connecticut," she said.

I have heard it said that perhaps air traffic should be managed more along the lines of managing cars: Just as cars are confined by law to travel on roads and cannot travel over fields and any other terrain at will, there should be "highways" of sorts on the ground -- tracts of land which planes can fly over at low heights but which are deemed unfit for human habitation because of the noise and fumes. That's not exactly what the website says but it is what several people have said.
Promoting rail travel is IMO a good idea. train noise is confined to near the rail, and the noise and ground-shaking that used to accompany train travel have been reduced considerably over the years. The travel itself is healthier: We've heard stories about blood-clots forming in passenger's legs as a result of sitting still in cramped seats. We heard plenty about the foul air which airline passengers willingly breathe. On trains, you can eat well, you can move around, watch movies, look out the window, sometimes even open a little window and even if not, the air is probably much less putrid than on planes.

A May 2007 item has one very interesting point or issue. It may not be useful to us but we should at least know about it:

"It's Time For A change In 1990 Anti-Airport Curfew Law!!! I'm always learning new things about the insidiousness of the Aviation Cabal (aviation industry, politicians and the FAA). I remember hearing a while back something about there being a federal law against local communities and airports putting a curfew on their own airports, especially at night... I never investigated it further... last week... I found [that] apparently there is such a rule in the 1990 Aircraft Noise and capacity Act. I think it is outrageous that the federal government has taken away local control by communities over their own airports. Voluntary curfews are a joke. I have been looking at the Aircraft Noise And Capacity Act and found it full of confusing legalese obviously designed to sneak a no curfew rule past unsuspecting congress and communities... I will not rest until local communities once again get control over their won airports!"

The website quotes a "RECOMMENDATIONS -- Not later than July 1, 1991, the secretary shall transmit to Congress recommendations on - (1) the need for change in the standards and procedures which govern the rights of State and local governments (including airport authorities) to restrict aircraft operations for the purpose of limiting aircraft noise. (2) the need for change in the standards and procedures which govern law suits by persons adversely affected by aircraft noise..."

Note "standards" for lawsuits -- that may have been the undoing of Mr. Blumenthal last may.

For those of us living in the Riverside area, this may be of some interest: Last week the local papers reported on a big meeting at Town Hall, concerning a proposal to erect a cell-phone "tower" next to the Mianus (elementary?) School. The town's planning and zoning commission listened to the public's concerns, but let people know that the placement of cell towers is "strictly controlled" by the state's "Siting Council," thanks to an F.C.C "ruling" (part of a so-called "Telecommunications Act?) which "stripped local communities" of any control of the matter. Another example of stripping communities of control of their local surroundings!

Back to the website --

"In particular, a 1990 federal law requires airports seeking to restrict air space for noise reasons to follow a lengthy set of rules."

This paragraph mentions New Canaan and Greenwich; "New Canaan is pursuing a three-part plan to oppose the FAA... First, a consultant, Williams Aviation, has been retained to critique and raise objections to the technical aspects of the FAA's plan. ... third, the town is organizing political opposition to the FAA's plan... According to the New canaan FAA Advisory Committee, in order to increase the number of arrivals into Newark Airport the FAA's plan pushes LaGaurdia arrivals eastward over Fairfield County. In effect, Ridgefield, New Canaan, Darien and Stamford will experience a substantial increase in air traffic that didn't exist before so that the capacity at Newark Airport can increase, the committee reported.

State Rep. John Hetherington, a member of the committee, said the FAA, instead of selecting the most aggressive, intrusive alternative, should make modifications to the existing airspace... Remarkably, the impact of airplane noise on the people living in fairfield County was not a consideration in their design work... Of the four alternatives considered by the FAA, they selected the one that causes the largest noise increase in Fairfield County."

And finally, something that tells us that "the cat is out of the sack" as far as the need to get realtors involved: According to the New Canaan FAA Advisory Committee, "6. Fairfield County property values will decrease under the new plan. Despite the FAA's statement that there is no link between increasing airplane noise and decreasing property values in a community, we do not agree with that assertion. Any Realtor can tell you that increasing airplane noise will reduce property values[emphasis mine]."

Finally, "The Committee also calls our elected representatives in Washington, DC to withhold funding for the FAA Integrated Airspace Alternative, to prevent implementation of the proposed changes and to require the FAA to examine alternatives that are less intrusive and damaging to Fairfield County."

Signatory Committee members are: Jim Beall, resident,
Kit Devereaux, New Canaan Town Council
Paul Giusti, Chairman, New Canaan selectman
Guy Brossy, resident, private pilot
John Hetherington, CT State representative.

(end of excerpts from http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm

website.

Another interesting website, also from 2007, deals more with the area near Reagan National Airport. http://www.palisadesdc.org/airplanenoise.htm.

Bird strikes:

2009-06-20T11:00:00.000-07:00

Part (I.)
Bird strikes were in the news last January after Flight 1549 landed on the Hudson. In January and now more recently in June of 2009, there’s been talk on the radio of killing all geese "living" near airports. (I heard Mayor Bloomberg talking about the geese Friday June 19 on WOR710 radio station, I didn’t catch all of the interview). I know of no comment from PETA, the animals-rights organization which fights against cruelty to animals.

This is from a New York Magazine (Feb, 9, 2009, starting p. 30) article titled: "My Aircraft, Why Sully [the captain of flight 1549] may be the last of his kind." Underline for emphasis is mine, square brackets are mine.

The article begins with "Modern piloting is based on routines. hundreds of man-hours have been poured into analyzing every possible eventuality..." anyway, at the time of the incident,

"The skies were clear and calm... Sully saw the birds a second before they hit -- at 3:27 P.M., a huge flock of them. His first impulse was to duck. He heard them connect - thump! Then he smelled them. There was no mistaking it. Every pilot with enough flight hours has smelled burning birds. There's usually not much more to a bird strike than that -- maybe a little hiccup in the hum of the engines before the plane keeps on climbing. [then why the impulse "to duck?" What, precisely, does the writer mean by this?] But this was different. This time, the craft lurched, then there was silence. Sully had probably experienced something like that long ago, as a trainee, when his instructor leaned over, shoved the throttle into idle to mimic the loss of engine power, and asked: Okay, now what?" but this wasn't a lesson."

Toward the end of the article, we read that "David Sontag, a 74- year-old screen writer turned professor, was flying home ... on Flight 1549... From the back of the plane, in seat 23F, he had heard the bang a minute into the flight. From his window he could see flames coming out of one engine. The next five minutes were a blur of fear: the impact, the evacuation, waiting on the wing to be rescued.... Sontag believes Sully did one crucial thing that day that prevented a widespread panic: he didn't announce 'Brace for impact' until it was absolutely necessary. 'My feeling is he waited that long to keep people from freaking out,' Sontag says."head down

The article also laments (with considerable elaborations I won't quote) that "40 years and 19,663 flight hours ago, commercial-airline pilots were like gods. It was the age of Chuck Yeager and Pan Am....Where the piloting ranks were once made up of former Air Force jocks, many of them combat veterans, they are now filled mainly with civilians for whom flying is less an adventure than a job. 'Twenty years ago, we were a step below astronauts' says one former pilot. 'Now we're a step above bus drivers. And the bus drivers have a better pension.'...Sully has been in the business long enough to witness firsthand the domestication of the airline pilot.... The airlines liked miliary pilots, in part, 'because the government had done all the work for them,' says Don Skiados, who has worked closely with pilots for 40 years..."

"Points to Ponder:"

1.) After the Flight 1549 event, there was much talk about eradicating geese. Was the flight used as a pretext for extending the FAA's jurisdiction on the ground? Here, we read that bird strikes are very routine: "There's usually not much more to a bird strike than that," meaning the smell, "maybe a hiccup..." However, this time, we read about "flames coming out of one engine." One passenger could see only out of one window, so we don't know whether or not flames came out of the plane's other engine. In any case, one wonders: A presumably routine thing, the bird strike with "a little hiccup," suddenly caused a major failure -- not only stalling of 2 engines, but also a fire in at least one.

2.) The article raphsodizes about past and present pilots, and only says things to the effect that pilots ain't what they used to be. They've been "domesticated." The article does not say it, but this is probably due to increased number (and lesser average training time and quality) of pilots.

The article asks nothing about ground-maintenance people. Has there been a decline in their status (god-like or otherwise) due to increase in numbers?

And, is the FAA re-design meant to accommodate further "domestication?" Is "domestication" a code-word for "dumbing down?"

3.) Note the lowest of low opinion of passengers. The quote comes from a fellow passenger who may be a bit too full of himself and perhaps full of screen-plays with god-like pilots. Be that as it may, its excusable in someone who had just survived what Mr. Sontag survived. The writer's use of the quote is not excusable. It shows contempt toward passengers and toward the public.

I think everybody who ever experienced an occasion in which "timing is everything" knows that when you tell someone to brace for something, and the "something" does not come immediately, well, it's human nature to relax a bit, inhale, "sneak a peak," try and "get comfortable," and the like. All of these involve becoming un-braced! It's a teeny bit like blowing out candles on a birthday cake: You don't tell your friends to "Prepare to blow!" and keep them in that state of preparedness. It's One-Two-THREE! Since you can't quite go 1-2-3 in an emergency landing situation, you do the closest thing to 1-2-3, which is what Sully did.

To be fair, there was a report in a People Magazine article (Feb. 23, 2009) titled "The Right Stuff" to the effect that the plane filled with water "after a passenger opened the tail door." Was it indeed a passenger and not a crew member? And was the passenger probably told to open the door by someone claiming to know about planes? It seems that every aviation-related event brings out numerous people who claim to have been pilots or to have a pilot's license. In any case, stories I heard after the Sept. 11 attacks and its resulting evacuations, make it very hard for me to believe in the ease at which the public panics.

Part (II.)

A Jan. 30, 2009 post on Quiet Rockland’s website
http://ejectsturgell.blogspot.com/

says:

“Other News:

Quiet Rockland Feeds Information On “The Goose Coverup” To Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, And Geraldo Rivera – And Fox Runs The Story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,483344,00.html

It Was Foreknown Defective-Engine Failure, And Not Geese, That Crashed U.S. Airways Flight #1549 Airbus Into The Icy Hudson River On January 15, 2009.
Quiet Rockland Was The First To Break This Story Publicly.
I wanted to update you on recent developments in the State of Connecticut's challenge against the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) proposed airspace redesign over southwestern Connecticut. “
Excerpts from the text on that link:
Interview

WHERE IS HERO US AIRWAYS PILOT CAPT. SULLENBERGER?
• Monday, January 26, 2009

This is a rush transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," January 23, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: Continuing now with FOX News anchor Geraldo Rivera. Last week, the biggest hero in America was Captain Chesley Sullenberger, who successfully crash-landed a US Air jetliner on the Hudson River. Nobody was killed, an amazing achievement. But where is Captain Sullenberger? So what's going on? Why isn't he out there?
GERALDO RIVERA, HOST, "GERALDO AT LARGE": I don't know why he hasn't spoken up until now, but I do know that tomorrow in his {Danville, California] hometown…
O’: Parade.
…
R: ...he will get a hero's welcome.
O’: There's a parade.
R: And he should.
O': Right, right.
R: It's the most, as I said, the most incredible feat of aviation skill that has ever happened since at least Charles Lindbergh flew the Atlantic solo nonstop or Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier. This guy is a magnificent hero.
The bigger question as we see the emergency float being deployed there — and that's incredible video — the bigger question is: Why did those engines stall? Was it just the bird strike?
O': Bird strike, yeah.
R: A random bird strike? I hold in my hand what's called an Airworthiness Directive. All right, this [December 31, 2008 ] Directive … reads: "This Airworthiness Directive results from an Airbus A-321 airplane powered by a..." and it goes on to designate the engine, the turbo fan engines experiencing high pressure compressor stalls during climb out after takeoff. In other words, airplanes with that Airbus with the engines that that airplane had were suffering stalls…. during climb-out after takeoff. So now you have December 31, 2008, Airworthiness Directive, every Airbus of that sort has to be inspected, OK. That's December 31, 2008.
What happens next? January 13, 2009, Tuesday, … guess what? The same aircraft experiences compressor stalls. The engine stalls…. That is the same aircraft, this is Tuesday, that on Thursday Chesley Sullenberger…
O': Not the same plane…
R: The fuselage number is N106US….
R: ...pure coincidence that that same aircraft that on Tuesday, two days before…
O': Stalled.
…
Content and Programming Copyright 2009 FOX News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC, which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, LLC'S and CQ Transcriptions, LLC's copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation

Must Read New URL

2009-06-19T17:30:00.000-07:00

http://www.indictsturgell.blogspot.com/2009/06/injustice-searchable-transcript-of.html/

See especially Heading (about half way down: "County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef Keeps His Year 2007 Promise To The People Of Rockland: Will Challenge D.C Circuit On Airspace Redesign."

Followed by heqading: Connecticut A.G. Blumenthal Rejects Junk "Justice,."

and later (very important to read!) "Injustice: Searchable Transcript Of The Monday May 11, 2009 Hearing Before The D.C. Circuit, In The Case Of "Rockland County v. FAA."

Hands Across The Water/We Are Not Alone...

2009-06-14T12:59:00.000-07:00

Translator's Note:
An Israeli friend gave me a (printed) copy of an Airplane Noise news item from the "ynet.co.il" website belonging to a leading Israeli newspaper.

The URL was
http://www.ynet.co.il/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/Cda/ArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3728117

Regrettably, the serial-number at the end of this is incomplete or out-of-date: I have not been able to find the actual "Y-Net" post on the Internet just 6 days after it was written on June 8. I did find other articles about the same issue.

The translation to English is mine. I spelled the names as best as I could, at present I do not know if any of them can be found by searching the Net.

The town of Modin or Modi’in,(pronounced Modi'een) is not far from the historical site of where the Maccabee revolt against the Greek/Hellenic ruler Antiochus IV took place in... 167 B.C!

I believe this article has value and relevance to those suffering from the FAA redesign's noise in Fairfield County, U.S.A., for the following reasons:
First, in previous discussions, I mentioned hearing from engineer friends that when the U.S (or any other, I suppose) gov't undertakes a project, it precedes its actual implementation by test-runs, dry-runs, all manner of trial runs. That is probably what we've experienced since the summer of 2007. I suggested that probably the FAA was "being accurate without being truthful" in claiming (or allegedly claiming) that its NY/NJ/PA (sometimes referred to as the NY/NJ/Phila redesign has not yet been implemented. That could be so, but if that's the case, then what we've been subjected to since the summer or fall of 2007 must be the redesign's trial-runs.

Indeed, note that the article says that "Officials confirmed that during the trials of the new approach-path, there were "irregularities" as far as height of fly-overs." And note also that the Mayor of the town that's described in this story, Modi’in, is quoted as saying that

" ...if the approach-path over Modi’in is opened, 190 planes will pass over Modin each week..."

That is identical to the situation in Fairfield County: While discussions speak of what the redesign's effects "will" or "would" be, the actual noise we're hearing suggests rather strongly that the "will" should be changed to "is." The article describes a situation that's probably identical to ours: Amidst all the "will"s, trial-runs are already making noise and causing a major nuisance, so the "foretaste" of the "upcoming" redesign is already "here."

Second, although Israel is a different country and is thousands of miles from the U.S, it has cooperated very closely with the U.S on numerous matters.

I gather that any country hose planes land in the U.S or which wants U.S planes to land on its airports, has to abide by safety and procedural standards that are, basically, those of the F.A.A.

I may be wrong on this, but I heard once or twice that some U.S combat planes are "stationed" in a military base in Israel. In any case, the Israeli Air Force has relied heavily on planes made in the U.S. for over 40 years. So one could say, in a manner of speaking, that in the air, the U.S. and Israel are practically the same "entity."

Which could imply rather convincingly that the goings-on described in this article are not wholly and totally unrelated to what the FAA wants to do in Fairfield County.

Perhaps the Israeli town of Modi’in is experiencing the same reality we are to experience in the not-too-distant future?

As far as I know, all websites discussing the matter are in Hebrew. That may change, so FWIW, 2 of them are:

http://www.modiin.muni.il/ModiinWebSite/ChannelArticleNews.aspx?PageID=2_295&id=614
and

http://www.modiin.muni.il/ModiinWebSite/ChannelArticleNews.aspx?PageID=2_295&id=626

(Clickable Modi'in URL at
http://www.modiin.muni.il/ )

says that implementation has been postponed for 60 days to allow time to discuss solutions.

************************************

Words inside square [ ] brackets are mine.

Security Imperatives: The Planes Will Descend Over Modi’in
An eastern flight-path for approaching to Ben Gurion Airport [BGA] passes over the houses of Modi’in. The Airport Authority and the Civil Aviation Administration claims that security is their first priority and there is no alternative. The residents are troubled not only by the noise of 190 planes scheduled each week but also by planes which "scrape the roofs of the houses. This week [week of June 8, 2009] the confrontation in Israel's High Court of Justice [HCJ, in Hebrew it's called "Bagatz."] will continue.

By Zvi Lavi

One day, three months ago, planes began descending over Modi’in houses on their way to BGA. The inhabitants, who did not know what was going on,, were frightened not just by the noise but also by how low the planes were flying. "They nearly scraped the roofs of multi-story buildings," said Eyal Kimche, a local resident, today (Monday).

An investigation found that the source of concern is a flight-path which enables planes to approach BGA from the east. Since then, the municipality and the Airport Authorities are involved in a deep dispute over it. Modi’in's municipality and residents are asking to shift the flight-path to run over uninhabited areas. But the Authorities claim that the current approach-path is a security imperative and the anxiety of the residents is exaggerated. The Municipality appealed to the High Court, seeking an injunction against the inauguration of the new flight-path last April. A mediation-attempt by the Israeli parliament failed, and this week the confrontation will continue in the High Court.

Airport Authority: The New Path is a Must

Kobi Mohr, Director general of the Airports Authority, disclosed to the parliament that the plan for the new approach-path was borne following a "near accident" that occurred in February of 2007, when an El Al (Israel Airlines) plane nearly collided with an Iberia Airlines plane.

By contrast with the western flight-path, where instrument-flying is possible, landing via the eastern path is done "manually," [this probably means VFR] and is therefore vulnerable to human-error. Investigation of the near-collision pointed to the need to construct a system for electronic landing for the eastern path as well.

Mohr explained that "The approach from the east, for planes approaching BGA from the west entails circling in a wide arc, part of which passes over the Palestinian Territories. This is where the Defense Authorities intervened, and imposed on us limitations which compelled us to reduce the radius of the arc, and route the flight-path over Modi’in at low altitude."

"With these imperatives, from the point of view of flight security, there is no alternative route. We studied alternative approach-routes including the one proposed by Modi’in -- to move the path over open land -- and we found these alternatives aren't good for security. In any case, the approaches over Modin will go one for two years, until BGA runway will be extended to facilitate approaching from the north.

Modi’in: And What of the Residents' Safety?
These claims are not accepted in Modi’in. The mayor, Haim Bibas, said he learned of the new approach-path last summer, by sheer coincidence: A document was leaked to one of the town residents. "They [aviation authorities?] were surprised that we knew about it, but they did not listen to us, even after we begged and pleaded that they move the approach-path at least as far as the open land on the town's outskirts. They said the matter is settled and all they care about is the safety of the flights. But isn't the safety of 70,000 residents, 1/3 of whom are children, not important?

Bibas claims that if the approach-path over Modi’in is opened [implemented?], 190 planes will pas over Modi’in each week, 40 during the Sabbath and 150 at other times. "We insist on moving the path to outside of the populated areas, or going back to the original path over the Palestinian Territories which was used before the Defense/security imperatives were dictated. For us it's not a matter of honor or ego, for us it's a matter of life and death."

Officials confirmed that during the trials of the new approach-path, there were "irregularities" as far as height of fly-overs.

Bibas is troubled by these "irregularities," and claims that [during the trials] "three planes vanished from the Control-Towers' RADAR screens. In one case, a plane flew right in between two apartment-buildings. We were told it was a 'finger-error' but never got an explanation as to just what that means." He emphasizes that the residents did not object when planed flew over-head at heights of approximately 2,000 meters. [That's about 6,000 feet] "The flights at heights of near zero are the ones that scare us," he said.

Mohr said that the Civil Aviation Administration had checked and approved the planning and implementation of the new approach-route, and concurs that there is no viable alternative. "Any delay in the implementation of the new approach-path entails the risk that caused the near-collision 2 years ago. Continuing to land planes using the pilots' vision is the most dangerous, in contrast with landing planes using electronic instruments."

"A Monster Outside the Living Room"

Kimche is still concerned. "These monsters have passed right outside my living-room window. WE
sensed that even a slight deviation will cause a massive catastrophe. I fear we will have to evacuate is the flights continue along the same route at the same height. For us this is a question of life and death."

Members of the Parliament confessed they have no means of deciding who is right and who is wrong. Likud Party member Danny Danon asked the Aviation Administration: "If a defense installation's N-Fly-Zone were situated where Modin is now, would you still insist on this new approach-route? Well, are children less important and sensitive than Defense installations?"

Parliament member Yisrael Hassonn (Likud) claims that the imperative which prevent flying over the palestinian territories is inconsistent with agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. According to those agreements, the Palestinian airspace is part of the Israeli air space.

Parliament member Ofir Ekonis (Likud) [The chairman of a committee [dealing with the issue?] called upon the Civil Aviation Administration to re-examine, together with the Modin municipality, alternatives to the new approach-path. The committee recommended having an independent group of experts examine the flight-safety issue.

For information about the "Clear Skies" effort, see

http://h179336wp.setupmyblog.com/?p=210
/ )

Organizing against the noise

2009-06-13T10:54:00.000-07:00

The Connecticut State Attorney can be found on the Web of course. Last I checked, the mailing address was: Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06106

Telephone: (860) 808-5318. Addresses keep changing, so double-check at
http://www.ct.gov/ag/cwp/view.asp?Q=441562&A=3673

The website of the Alliance for Sensible Airspace planning, at http://www.sensibleairspace.org/

has maps showing the new LaGuardia flight-path over our towns.

And of course don't forget to visit the excellent website directed by Heather Wolf, at
http://www.OurAirspace.org/

The Goose is Back?

2009-06-12T12:25:00.000-07:00

Welll... looks like the Goose is back! :-)

In the late summer of 2007, residents of the very quiet, old, well-run and well-cared-for towns of Greenwich (including Cos Cob, Riverside, Old Greenwich) Connecticut, and of Pound Ridge, New York, and many other similar towns, noticed a marked increase in the number of airplanes flying over our residences. We noticed an increase in planes' noise due to markedly decreased flight-altitudes. A typical "evening rush-hour" consisted on planes flying over us every 2-3 minutes. Often they were flying so low that we could see their headlights blazing. I could discern their red-green lights even when wearing weaker-prescription glasses!

These new over-flights were not limited to "rush hours." Planes had begun flying low overhead well past midnight, often also at 2 or 4 a.m. Daytime hours also became filled with airplane noise. Some people sensed a change in the air -- we used to have crisp clean air on most days, but now it seemed just a bit more polluted. But the main issue was the noise.

It soon became known that the F.A.A., the Federal Aviation Administration, was implementing its new so-called "New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace Re-design."

On Sept. 12, 2007, a meeting was held in the Greenwich Town Hall. Its purported purpose was to have a group of people who formed some sort of aviation "advisory committee" recommend to the town of Greenwich whether or not to sue the FAA over the noise. Some leading Greenwich politicians seemed reluctant to sue. I recall that on Sept 17, Jim Lash, then First-Selectman, e-mailed me and said that it actually may be in my interest to not oppose the redesign, because when it is fully implemented, planes currently flying over Greenwich will fly over different towns. A few days later, I received an e-mail from a woman who had attended a meeting in the town of Rye Brook, New York. Apparently, the residents of Rye brook were told that one the redesign took full effect, planes currently making noise over their houses will be flying over... Greenwich!

I feel greatly indebted to Greenwich Selectman Peter Crumbine, for his supportiveness in those early days and for telling others about my blog.

I know of 1-2 attempts to try and convince the populace that the planes had been there all along. In fact, I recall John Inserra, the kindly man who serves as the Noise Abatement officer at Westchester County Airport, suggesting that to me, however good naturedly... A newspaper article quoted an FAA representative saying the same thing: The planes had "been there all along," nothing had, as yet, changed in their flight-paths. "It's only that" people became aware of the planes when they heard about the impending redesign, and became more sensitive to the noise because of that.

While I realized that could have been so in some cases, I also doubted whether so many officials from so many towns in Connecticut would have taken the trouble to sue the FAA just because I, whom they had never met or even heard of... had become more sensitive to planes' noise! :-) very soon thereafter, Stamford, the largest town in the area, joined the lawsuit. I never heard a thing from or about Jim Lash after that time... Around the same time, Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut State Attorney, declared his full support of the towns that were suing the FAA. Soon after that, the State of Connecticut filed its own lawsuit against the FAA and its redesign.

At some point, U.S representative Chris Shays joined our cause, organizing several meetings and declaring he is with us "one hundred percent." He assigned a "case worker" to the issue, Chris Catropa. Catropa organized several dozen residents to keep "logs" of plane overflights. Currently Shays' successor, Jim Himes, is supporting our cause.

The area towns formed an "alliance" for "Sensible Airspace." At one of their meetings, they displayed a beautifully designed sign with the words "Noise Destroys." They proposed to make copies of the signs and have people display them as yard-signs.

Unfortunately nothing seems to have come of that idea; Members of the Alliance suggested that we speak to our neighbors to make them aware of the lawsuits. But I'm sure many of us know by now that people often don't want to admit they are bothered by the noise. Making such an admission "advertises to the world" two things which people usually don't like to advertize about themselves: One -- the value of their home had just taken a nose-dive, two, they could be considered "health-risks" by, i.e, their insurance companies, since the planes' nocturnal over-flights may well be depriving them of sleep.

For whatever reasons, I found people I spoke to reluctant to join the groups we have, by now, formed in order to combat the re-design. Coverage in local newspapers and other media (especially around Greenwich?) has been scant and perfunctory, and certainly not at all sympathetic. Perhaps because so many real-estate firms and home-improvement entities advertize, or "have a presence" in, for example, the Greenwich Post and the WNLK1400/WSTC1350 radio station/s.

And speaking of real estate firms, "developers" and the like, at no time did I learn of any local entity that had expressed its opinion in favor of the redesign. However, it's not hard to imagine that some "entities" would like to see the redesign not only go into effect but help to chase at least some residents out of their homes: A book I saw last year, about real-estate appraising, often invokes something it calls "highest and best use" of a given piece of real-estate. Both Greenwich and Stamford have a lot of office-space. I'm sure some entities would like to see even more of the beautiful properties around here converted to office use! Office buildings are easier to sound-proof, and indeed according to a website called "quality sound" which sells sound-proofing services, the FAA has shelled out billions of dollars for soundproofing of homes near airports -- a bonanza of jobs for various contractors! Building more office-towers in Greenwich would be an even bigger bonanza. I don't know anyone who thinks along those lines but as a friend said to me last year, "there are people who think like that."

In 2007 and 2008, we heard or read often that the main reason for the FAA's redesign is to decrease the number of "passenger-hours" of flight-delays which, presumably, are caused by "congestion." However, in the nearly 2 years that have passed since that time, I and others have recorded numerous instances of flight delays that did indeed take place, that were indeed long, but... were not caused by "congestion," (whatever the unpredicted congestion was caused by...) they were simply caused by inclement weather! Said weather being fully noticeable around the Tri-State area. As far as I know, humans are not able to re-design the day-to-day weather. Occasionally there would be a delay caused by i.e a software "glitch" or a major power-outage. I recorded only one instance of hearing about flight-delays that seemed to be just that -- delays, for unspecified reason but not because of weather.

For a number of months during 2008, I ran a blog, as part of "AOL Journals," about the airplane noise issues. In Oct. 2008 AOL announced that it was doing away with its "journals" so would people please move their blogs to somewhere else. The advice given by AOL about transferring the blog was useless, and my blog was "down" for many months. I hope that I have found a way to renew it here. I hope to add to it a few of my old posts as well as, of course, new posts.