SMO bans Jets

[bailey3083]

If the City of Santa Monica wins this, it could spell big problems for what we do. One of the prime advantages of corporate and general aviation is the ability to bypass congested airline airports and deliver passengers much closer to their destinations and with fewer delays. If a municipality is allowed to override the FAA on airport or airspace access, it opens Pandora's Box on future restrictions. Next thing you know, we've got a crazy quilt of city, county, state, AND federal regulations on where we fly and that spells major trouble for the industry.

I HATE noise whiners more than most (and my house is three miles off the end of a runway centerline at a top 10 airline airport) and that's all this is about: noise. The whole "safety" thing is just a stalking horse. The FAA had better bring out the big guns on this one.

Lets not forget how Daily shut down Meigs without the FAA doing squat about it. There is also the case of Lost Nation up in CLE. If they succeed I would not hold my breath for the FAA to do anything more then bitch.

 

[gutshotdraw]

True enough. The jerkoff in Chicago should have been sued personally in Federal Court by the FAA. The fact that he got away with that one has led to this one and if Santa Monica wins, the speed down the slippery slope will accelerate by a factor of 10.

 

[G100driver]

Part of me says good riddance. Airport was a pain, but the logical part says the FED needs to fight this.

Kinda of ironic though isn't it ... asking to Federal Governments help when dealing with an issue of local control. But hey, if the fed pays the bills.

 

[EatSleepFly]

There is also the case of Lost Nation up in CLE.

What happened to LNN?! I used to fly in and out of there occasionally back in my flight instructing days.

 

[ultrarunner]

If you start reading into it, I believe you will find that the runway doesn't even meet the FAA's guidelines for the size of aircraft using it. Yet the FAA is fighting this.

I mean, c'mon, you've got the FAA telling the city to buy up houses, kick out the owners, and tear down the houses to get more room. Good grief!

You can't have it both ways.

 

[johnsonrod]

If you start reading into it, I believe you will find that the runway doesn't even meet the FAA's guidelines for the size of aircraft using it. Yet the FAA is fighting this.

I mean, c'mon, you've got the FAA telling the city to buy up houses, kick out the owners, and tear down the houses to get more room. Good grief!

You can't have it both ways.

The folks at Avantair have got to be excited... This can only help their business.

 

[imacdog]

The folks at Avantair have got to be excited... This can only help their business.

Perhaps but there are plenty of jets that don't fit the C or D category.

 

[RNObased]

The folks at Avantair have got to be excited... This can only help their business.

Ok, johnson. Why would the people at AVantair be excited??? Do you have any idea what a Piggio (sp?)does to the noise sensors at SMO??? They want those there even less then then some jets. I remember when a guy I know was flying one of the first Piggio on the west coast and went in there. After he left, he got a phone call followed by a letter saying don't come back.

 

[blueridge71]

Kinda of ironic though isn't it ... asking to Federal Governments help when dealing with an issue of local control. But hey, if the fed pays the bills.

Not really. Federal law pre-empts state and local law. The Feds regulate aviation.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

Feds regulate aviation, but cannot regulate the existence of an airport. If the City wants to close SMO for all airplanes and build a Nancy Pelosi museum on the site, then there ain't a damned thing that the Feds could do about it.

The ironic thing is that while they target jets, it'll probably be a Cirrus/Bonanza/C210 with a low altitude engine failure that makes headlines there.

 

[RNObased]

Feds regulate aviation, but cannot regulate the existence of an airport. If the City wants to close SMO for all airplanes and build a Nancy Pelosi museum on the site, then there ain't a damned thing that the Feds could do about it.

That isn't quite correct. If they have taken federal monies then they can't just close the airport. Now if they pay that money back etc, then yes they can do what they want.

 

[blueridge71]

Feds regulate aviation, but cannot regulate the existence of an airport. If the City wants to close SMO for all airplanes and build a Nancy Pelosi museum on the site, then there ain't a damned thing that the Feds could do about it.

I don't think that is correct. When federal funds are accepted for an airport, the airport authority is obligated to follow federal guidelines. Of course, so was Meigs and the feds didn't hold them to it.

 

[doylehargraves]

The airport is so "unsafe" that all those people paid top dollar for those houses in its path. What a bunch of losers.

 

[myrealnameis]

The folks at Avantair have got to be excited... This can only help their business.

Excited, no we self banned ourselves years ago. I think we were tired of the complaints. No help or harm to us one way or the other.

 

[ultrarunner]

Feds regulate aviation, but cannot regulate the existence of an airport. If the City wants to close SMO for all airplanes and build a Nancy Pelosi museum on the site, then there ain't a damned thing that the Feds could do about it.

You got that right ED. And Mayor Daley showed us all how quickly it can happen!