The buzzing airplane sound and an altitude of 400' over your house may not bother you but it does bother the OP.
Keeping out the idiots...of the air...
- Thread starter Maine_Polack
- Start date
- Views: 41928
The buzzing airplane sound and an altitude of 400' over your house may not bother you but it does bother the OP.
Ridgewalker
Platinum Member
I am way late to this dance but did you consider taking up the hobby of shooting sporting clays. 
It's a blast and you need a big open area to shoot in.
It's a blast and you need a big open area to shoot in.
Scooby074
Super Member
But in this case the OP is SOL. And unless its deliberate, and he can PROVE the pilots intentions to disturb him, theres not a think he can do about it besides learn to live with it or move, or hope the pilot can change his approach. Sorry, thats just how it is. The pilot has rights to enjoy his hobbies too.
mtncharlie
New member
I think I would check and see if the pilot had ever actually got permission from the FAA to build the runway, he would have had to get waivers from any existing property owners whose residences were in his flight path. Now, I agree that people who build around an existing airport and then cry "foul" should not have any rights concerning the noise, but the gentleman who had been there 30 years before the pilot SHOULD have some rights to cry "foul".
MC
Scooby074
Super Member
I think it was determined earlier in the thread that the runway is on a list of approved runways.
OP
Maine_Polack
Gold Member
The above is true.
Scooby074
ersonally i think hes over reacting. Ive lived 3 mi off the end of a busy small airport, plus my mother lives less than 1/2 mile from this same airport. Planes are well under 400' going over moms. Noise, while present, isnt that big of a deal and lasts for at the most 20 seconds. Quote from Maine Polack, post no. 58:
"The "75 feet high" is certainly subjective. Suffice it to say that he flies very, very low. Low enough so that I feel I could throw an 1 1/2" rock and hit the plane."
I know I can't throw a rock that high. Where did the 400" come from?
Scooby074
Super Member
The above is true.
Scooby074
Quote from Maine Polack, post no. 58:
"The "75 feet high" is certainly subjective. Suffice it to say that he flies very, very low. Low enough so that I feel I could throw an 1 1/2" rock and hit the plane."
I know I can't throw a rock that high. Where did the 400" come from?
im trying to relate to your situation. What ive experienced is well under 400ft. If i was to guess id say 200? But im not 100% sure. What my experience lacks in closeness, it makes up in volume of traffic. Likely we experience many more flights per day. 10 + is not uncommon. And typically, the noise only lasts for under a minute. Is it worth the stress for less than one minute of noise?
I feel for your situation if the pilot is going out of his way to annoy you. And i think that your within your rights to complain to the FAA. From the sounds of things, the FAA investigated and said there was no issue, so its up to you to prove there is.
Ive seen similar situations to this, and its usually one person who is blowing it out of proportion. Its all relative. Whats annoying to you, may not annoy the majority of others, like myself.
Most pilots i know, and i know a few, are some of the most boring, non-confrontational , by the book types i know (with the exception of the Ag and skydiving guys... there a little nuts
). It goes with the territory. If your not by the books, then bad things can happen, and somebody may not be here tomorrow.Brad_Blazer
Veteran Member
Apparently you missed post #108.
The FAA stepped in and arbitrated a resolution. The OP's story was born out in the pilots established "past practice". What a sad sad story that a large fraction of posters saw fit, and continue to, attack his integrity.
Al,
Thanks for posting an interesting read and congratulations on achieving some resolution.
Brad
Last edited:
wow, I sure am glad I don't live next to someone with an attitude like this. I hear some cyclist exclaim there right to ride down a busy thoroughfare in a large city. Is there claim legit, well according to the 4' wide strip the city painted for them it is but is it the safest thing to do? Not really. Neither is flying low over someone's residence no matter how many FAA reg you throw at it. Every heard of the saying being "dead right"? Unbelievable.
Scooby074
Super Member
i SAID IT BEFORE AND ILL SAY IT AGAIN. Were only hearing one side of the story. Much like the dealer bashing threads that are usually closed for the same reason.
I also said that if there is actual harassment, as in REPEATED low level overflights for NO OTHER REASON than to annoy, then im supportive of the OP 100%. If its normal use of the airstrip then the OP either has to tolerate it or move.. or hope that the pilot can respect his wishes and find another safe way to land.
The FAA intervention in post 108 was more a feel good thing. If it works makes the OP satisfied, then it succeeded, didnt it? If the pilot was doing anything too out of line (ie harassment or flying too low) than there would have been more severe consequences.
Heres an example i can relate:
A farmer spreads manure in his fields.
Neighbor doesnt like the smell.
Neighbor complains.
Which person....the neighbor's or the farmer's rights come first?
I also said that if there is actual harassment, as in REPEATED low level overflights for NO OTHER REASON than to annoy, then im supportive of the OP 100%. If its normal use of the airstrip then the OP either has to tolerate it or move.. or hope that the pilot can respect his wishes and find another safe way to land.
The FAA intervention in post 108 was more a feel good thing. If it works makes the OP satisfied, then it succeeded, didnt it? If the pilot was doing anything too out of line (ie harassment or flying too low) than there would have been more severe consequences.
Heres an example i can relate:
A farmer spreads manure in his fields.
Neighbor doesnt like the smell.
Neighbor complains.
Which person....the neighbor's or the farmer's rights come first?
