Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This issue has been really bad over here in New Hyde Park for the past 7 years. I remember back in the late 90's/early 00's and it was quiet. Was so ****ing nice. Nowadays it's constant; every 30 seconds ad Nasueum.
When will planes be able to take off vertically rather than on a flight path using large fan turbines? This aerospace technology is really lazy considering it's already 2013. Where are the vertical, hovering planes like in Star Wars? If we had that kind of technology we wouldn't be having this problem. You can just take off immediately to a certain altitude and just fly over all the houses and then immediately land at your designated location.
When will we ever get this kind of tech? Who knows. But all I know is that these new flight patterns need to go. This noise pollution is brutal, let alone in a somewhat nice community I live in where it's residential rather than urban.
Pentrazemine, The problem will not go away unless people start protesting in large numbers. The FAA & Port Authority clain people are not complaining about aircraft noise in Nassau County. Get as many of your neighbors as you can to attend the following Community meeting:
The Town of Hempstead will be hosting a community meeting to discuss the aircraft issue. Representatives from the FAA & PA are expected to attend. This is an opportunity for you and your neighbors to express your concerns. For further information contact Kendall Lampkin at (516) 812-3562
MONDAY, JULY 22, 2013 at 7:30 PM
TOWN HALL PAVILION,
TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD,
ONE WASHINGTON STREET, HEMPSTEAD NY
This issue has been really bad over here in New Hyde Park for the past 7 years. I remember back in the late 90's/early 00's and it was quiet. Was so ****ing nice. Nowadays it's constant; every 30 seconds ad Nasueum.
When will planes be able to take off vertically rather than on a flight path using large fan turbines? This aerospace technology is really lazy considering it's already 2013. Where are the vertical, hovering planes like in Star Wars? If we had that kind of technology we wouldn't be having this problem. You can just take off immediately to a certain altitude and just fly over all the houses and then immediately land at your designated location.
When will we ever get this kind of tech? Who knows. But all I know is that these new flight patterns need to go. This noise pollution is brutal, let alone in a somewhat nice community I live in where it's residential rather than urban.
I feel your pain, I really do.
I too have family in NHP on South 9 and Jericho.......a backyard bar-b-q, war zone, every 30 seconds.
If you watch the planes overhead they are headed to land at JFK, but JFK is practically on the water so to have planes come from the ocean go over Merrick, other neighborhoods also circle to New Hyde pk, head to land JFK is ridiculous, they should land straight from the ocean not over residential neighborhoods. That would sole that whole problem. I dont understand, why come from the ocen to have to circle around residential neighborhoods when the planes can come straight from the ocean and land...
Long Island was once the cradle of aviation, now like a baby cradle, it is the cradle of whiners. These airplanes were flying over your areas long before you were there. Lindbergh took off from Roosevelt field and the first mail run operated from Belmont Park. (http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...918/POL2G5.htm - broken link) Aviation has a long and storied history in Long Island and has been critical to the economy.
These planes can not just apprach the airport with a tailwind over water, it is not that easy, the first concern is safety and then efficiency. What if the winds are favoring runway approaches over land? Should they compromise safety and try to land with a tailwind? ATC needs to maximize the use of the airspace and utilize all runways at these airports from an efficiency and safety viewpoint. Utilizing only one approach can lead to extensive delays for arrival aircraft which leads to holding patterns and diversions when planes run out of fuel. . Is this the way we want to operate our air system? Wasting time and fuel? Appeasing the whiners and other nimbys are low priority when the safety for thousands of passengers and crew are at stake. Planes landing with a tailwind and others running low on fuel while waiting for one runway operations trump the needs of nimbys. Here a few of the many procedures used for arrival operations into JFK, maybe you can see if your house is under the arrival or approach.
So can anyone answer when we're going to get planes that take off/land vertically rather than thru flight paths/long takeoffs? That right there would solve this problem.
So can anyone answer when we're going to get planes that take off/land vertically rather than thru flight paths/long takeoffs? That right there would solve this problem.
These planes can not just apprach the airport with a tailwind over water, it is not that easy, the first concern is safety and then efficiency. What if the winds are favoring runway approaches over land? Should they compromise safety and try to land with a tailwind? ATC needs to maximize the use of the airspace and utilize all runways at these airports from an efficiency and safety viewpoint. Utilizing only one approach can lead to extensive delays for arrival aircraft which leads to holding patterns and diversions when planes run out of fuel. . Is this the way we want to operate our air system? Wasting time and fuel? Appeasing the whiners and other nimbys are low priority when the safety for thousands of passengers and crew are at stake. Planes landing with a tailwind and others running low on fuel while waiting for one runway operations trump the needs of nimbys. Here a few of the many procedures used for arrival operations into JFK, maybe you can see if your house is under the arrival or approach.[/quote]
The problem is that many many times TRACON & JFK tower are ignoring wind conditions for the sake of "operational efficiency" We have also documented many cases in which pilots are questioning runway selections due to wind conditions. In fact recently a pilot was hear arguing with ATC regarding landing at JFK 22L despite adverse wind conditions. The pilot remarked " I'd like to land into the wind for once"
If you watch the planes overhead they are headed to land at JFK, but JFK is practically on the water so to have planes come from the ocean go over Merrick, other neighborhoods also circle to New Hyde pk, head to land JFK is ridiculous, they should land straight from the ocean not over residential neighborhoods. That would sole that whole problem. I dont understand, why come from the ocen to have to circle around residential neighborhoods when the planes can come straight from the ocean and land...
Quote:
Originally Posted by crv1010
This has nothing to do with the FAA's so called next-gen. Next-Gen will not be fully operational for many years. This is simply a case of the FAA's Eastern Region Managers deciding for "operationally efficiency" purposes to shift a significant number of arrivals into JFK 22L.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crv1010
The problem is that many many times TRACON & JFK tower are ignoring wind conditions for the sake of "operational efficiency"
I see the amateur flight engineers are still going Quick FYI: the "operational efficiency" you keep mentioning, as if it's some minor concern, trumps your complaints about planes passing over your house by a huge margin.
City-Data: NIMBYism wasn't enough, so we created NIMASism (Not In My AirSpace)
RE:I see the amateur flight engineers are still going Quick FYI: the "operational efficiency" you keep mentioning, as if it's some minor concern, trumps your complaints about planes passing over your house by a huge margin.
I be interested in reading what you consider is a fair percentage of arrival air traffic that one set of communities should be forced to accept........ considering that there are 8 different landing options at JFK.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Quick FYI: the "operational efficiency" you keep mentioning, as if it's some minor concern, trumps your complaints about planes passing over your house by a huge margin.
