| Author | Post |
|---|
qcdad
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 30 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 10:10 pm |
|
DavidB wrote: qcdad wrote: Personally, I think that most of the Pegagus group are all a bunch of arrogant residents, except for RonS., and they think they are more valuable to QC than anyone else, so are coming across as elitest. You are showing a class distinction way of thinking.
I personally would like a count of how many planes in those hangars are owned by residents, and proof of who they belong to. Rumor has it that those who don't have a plane, are allowing others who do and do not live there, to park their plane there, in their place. Is that true and can you give guarantee to us that only residents are allowed to park their aircraft there? I feel, based on reading your comments, that credibility may be lacking and we'll just put one over on those idiots out there that piss us off cause they don't understand anyway. You guys just seem to have a way about you that likes to put people down if they don't understand or agree or study. Am I right? If not, then tell me why I am wrong for having those feelings.
I can't speak for anyone else, but its not a function of putting anyone down. Its a desire to put the data on the table and stop the dissemination of misconceptions and disinformation. I'm sorry, but once again, what does this have to do with the proposal? My bout with Bambi was because she was attacking my character and education. It had nothing to do with this topic and I regret going down that path as I'm sure I lost some face doing so. I have no problem when people ask questions about something they don't understand. I do have a problem with people who make statements and guesses about something they don't understand and defend those positions regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I got vocal because people were posting hogwash even though the factual information was already presented. The jet fuel thing alone was addressed numerous times, yet it was repeatedly misrepresented as a huge danger. You call it arrogance, I call it persistance.
You got vocal cause you were pissed off by people's questions that you thought they should already know the answers to. And you still insist on calling that hogwash. Persistance of your thoughts only are all that seems to matter. You're sick joke about your wife crashing, made me sad. Then I found out your were lying. Thats a bait to get a false reaction and pissed me off. That's why I did not respond as I had to bite my tongue. It's like yelling fire in a auditorium. Arrogance and inappropriateness on your part, yet we should be understanding? The boy who called wolf.
You constantly blame others for your mistakes or outbreaks. He made me do it. She made me do it. She rattled my cage. He she he them her. Everyone but you.
What difference does it make if its a resident's plane or not if the for aircraft count and noise are abided by?
I'm sorry, but once again, what does this have to do with the proposal?
Because I want to know and it should be a matter of record. It's about credibility, responsibility, accountability and truth. You want us to believe you right? Prove you are honest and straightforward and that you abide by your HOA stipulations, and are not above those restrictions.
My bout with Bambi was because she was attacking my character and education
Exactly what I am speaking about. Always blaming someone else. She is now a friend of mine, and I have gone thru her post over and over again and cannot find her attacking you on anything, or threatening you. Just advice and analogys. Please put that attack on here. Put the attack on your education on here too. I can't find anything about your education except you stating you're an engineer. You told her she needs to get a refund on her education. Now that's an attack. You attacked her big time dude, and for that reason and for other reasons about your character and statements on here, I won't believe anything out of your mouth.
I will depend on Ron and the demonstration in August. You are a liability. Why don't you let Ron handle it? I want your HOA to provide occupancy, ownership and stats of all planes on site please, to our town council. I bet you think that's hogwash too.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 10:10 pm |
|
I'm sorry, but once again, what does this have to do with the proposal? What difference does it make if its a resident's plane or not if the paramters for aircraft count and noise are abided by?
Actually David, it has quite a bit to do with the proposal. We were told at the P&Z meeting that the aircraft at Pegasus would belong to the Homeowners and Hanger owners only. If the rules aren't being abided by now, how can the surrounding community expect them to be followed in the future?
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 09:07 pm |
|
qcdad wrote: Personally, I think that most of the Pegagus group are all a bunch of arrogant residents, except for RonS., and they think they are more valuable to QC than anyone else, so are coming across as elitest. You are showing a class distinction way of thinking.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I got vocal because people were posting hogwash even though the factual information was already presented. The jet fuel thing alone was addressed numerous times, yet it was repeatedly misrepresented as a huge danger. You call it arrogance, I call it persistance.
I personally would like a count of how many planes in those hangars are owned by residents, and proof of who they belong to. Rumor has it that those who don't have a plane, are allowing others who do and do not live there, to park their plane there, in their place. Is that true and can you give guarantee to us that only residents are allowed to park their aircraft there? I feel, based on reading your comments, that credibility may be lacking and we'll just put one over on those idiots out there that piss us off cause they don't understand anyway. You guys just seem to have a way about you that likes to put people down if they don't understand or agree or study. Am I right? If not, then tell me why I am wrong for having those feelings.
I'm sorry, but once again, what does this have to do with the proposal? What difference does it make if its a resident's plane or not if the paramters for aircraft count and noise are abided by?
I can't speak for anyone else, but its not a function of putting anyone down. Its a desire to put the data on the table and stop the dissemination of misconceptions and disinformation. My bout with Bambi was because she was attacking my character and education. It had nothing to do with this topic and I regret going down that path as I'm sure I lost some face doing so. I have no problem when people ask questions about something they don't understand. I do have a problem with people who make statements and guesses about something they don't understand and defend those positions regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
|
gsbill
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:43 pm |
|
| I'm going to the sound and flight demo. Nothing like a first hand experience!
|
qcdad
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 30 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:24 pm |
|
Personally, I think that most of the Pegagus group are all a bunch of arrogant residents, except for RonS., and they think they are more valuable to QC than anyone else, so are coming across as elitest. You are showing a class distinction way of thinking. The common guy doesn't know half the stuff your talking about, yet you challenge us and have no patience with us. As far as I am concerned, anyone who lives in the flight path of Pegagus whether they live in QC or not, is effected and should have a say. QC's planning area goes into Pinal County and into Maricopa County. QC wants to have imput into what impacts them in those areas. Well, guess what? So do the other people who feel QC's decisions impact them where they live, which is outside of QC boundaries..
I personally would like a count of how many planes in those hangars are owned by residents, and proof of who they belong to. Rumor has it that those who don't have a plane, are allowing others who do and do not live there, to park their plane there, in their place. Is that true and can you give guarantee to us that only residents are allowed to park their aircraft there? I feel, based on reading your comments, that credibility may be lacking and we'll just put one over on those idiots out there that piss us off cause they don't understand anyway. You guys just seem to have a way about you that likes to put people down if they don't understand or agree or study. Am I right? If not, then tell me why I am wrong for having those feelings.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 04:38 pm |
|
LOL, and I thought I was reaching with some of my arguments.
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 01:53 pm |
|
whew! ...that was like pulling teeth 
If the change only results in 1-10 new houses being built in Pegasus, why is it necessary?
Because in every development there is always the best home and the worst home!
Just like in a shopping center with an 'anchor' store that draws the crowds that wander over to the less known stores. Look in every Basha's, Frys, Albertsons corner. They are the anchors. But most of the small stores are busy too!
For a good comparison look at the 'rabbit warren' strip malls............not so busy huh? Cause they don't have an 'anchor'! It is the same in every housing development. Even with any cookie cutter development. There are always a couple models that are 'much bigger....or better'. But the majority are 'standard'. The concept of Jets and Helicopters (as I understand it) is not to fill a development with jets and helicopters but to entice those few people with the really big bucks that can afford jets and helicopters to buy one of those very few lots and build the 'Anchor' home. The one or two homes that are really breathtaking. Like the one in Steller with the huge hanger. There is a dynamic in every home purchase that also must be considered. It is called 'a spouse'. It can go either way. My spouse wanted a home in Snotsdale, I wanted to be around tractors (not cows and stupid sheep though!). The dynamic was resolved with a really nice home in Queen Creek.
(And take that statement alone..............that would have been an oxymoron just a few years ago)...
So here you got a really rich person with a jet and a helicopter and some real estate person drags the spouse through the 'rabbit warren' past the tamale truck through the dopey sheep ship and shows them a few houses but with a couple of those houses being real gems. The spouse (mind you I have attached no gender to spouse for the politically correct) might just overlook the 'gauntlet' they had to run to get into that corner of incorporated Queen Creek. Half the dynamic is already sold simply with the runway.........and a place to park the jet. Hopefully the real gems in the neighborhood will 'sell' the other half of the family dynamic. And even if the home-buyers are not aviation (BTW a large number of Pegasus homes are not aviation) you know darn well a 'spouse' is going to prefer a neighborhood filled with gems........
That is not to say some of the homes in Pegasus are not gems now, some are spectacular. But most of the people in those homes are not going anywhere. And the few spec houses built by over-extended 'gonna get rich quicks' that never considered 'tough times' really have taken the place of the 'worst house' in the neighborhood.
I'm not telling anyone how to vote........but I am saying the idea is not new. Elevate the stakes, welcome a few wealthy people and the whole neighborhood (and community) benefits.
But everyone has to do their part......including the Town of Queen Creek. THEY MUST streamline the building and building inspection process and dump the power hungry.
Block off the dirt shortcuts, curtail the quads and work on their overall reputation. SRP has to get their act together......someone HAS TO REALIZE 90% of the noise and gas fume air pollution can be eliminated by REQUIRING electric to be installed before the building begins.............and everyone will be happy ever after 
and:
Except for that dust and road issue in the rabbit warren south of TOQC - now there's an issue that needs a thread of its own!
youbetcha!
de
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 03:09 pm by Delta Echo
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 326 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 06:27 am |
|
tomogo wrote: ...If the change only results in 1-10 new houses being built in Pegasus, why is it necessary?
Funny thing about some of the things you guys are comparing the noise too are exactly the reasons I moved to QC to begin with. I like the sounds of farmers and livestock and tractors a whole hellofalot more than jets and helicopters flying overhead. For the less informed, there is a psycological factor to noise in addition to the pure physics of sound.
Local private or public airports are often an integral part of farm and ranch based communities. My experience comes from living in Fowler, Colorado, where a number of locals (farmers, ranchers, and others) joined together to form a flying club that owned a local dirt airstrip with hangars. Another fact is that people learning to fly are routed out to the country for lessons - I did many a circle around a water tank and followed many a dirt road and even practiced a soft field landing out in the country. And I've lived in many rural areas and never resented, in fact always appreciated and still stop to admire, the aircraft that overfly. I lived for a time,and some of my family still lives, off the end of a Williams Gate flight path - they for 20 years - and we always pause our conversations and pay respects when the big and noisy aircraft fly over - the fighter jets, the Apaches, the cargo planes. Psychologically, I love the sound of a loud Harley or an oncoming Apache, and not so much that of an ATV speeding down my street, or the bass thump of a lowrider. But they don't complain when I am dragging my pasture or when my husband is whaling on his drums in the afternoon - so we can all get along. Except for that dust and road issue in the rabbit warren south of TOQC - now there's an issue that needs a thread of its own!
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 04:49 am |
|
I would feel a lot better if those in favor of the issue would simply admit the fact that there is a noise impact. You can say, well its no worse than a busy street or barking dogs, or loud tractors. Everyone of you must admit aircraft noise is different. Its overhead with a direct line of sight to the listener.
I'll ask the question again since I still haven't gotten an answer.
If the change only results in 1-10 new houses being built in Pegasus, why is it necessary?
Funny thing about some of the things you guys are comparing the noise too are exactly the reasons I moved to QC to begin with. I like the sounds of farmers and livestock and tractors a whole hellofalot more than jets and helicopters flying overhead. For the less informed, there is a psycological factor to noise in addition to the pure physics of sound.
And for the folks questioning my logic have you even read what I said.
I have stated I support the existence of Pegasus in its current state and would even support adding stage 4 VLJ's. I really have no concern whatsoever about the storage of jet fuel. Afterall, its really nothing more than kerosene.
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 05:07 am by tomogo
|
bobthebuilder
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 11th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 496 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 04:46 am |
|
For what it's worth, you can waltz right onto the flight line at Chandler Airport anytime you want. Even in the middle of the night. It's not like the place is locked.
Personally, I think people make a bit too much of a big deal out of the whole terrorism and security stuff. Maybe some of it makes sense for large airports but for the little ones, it's really not a big deal.
And I think some of you are making a bigger deal out of the "noise" issue than you need to be. If you want to be consistant and complain about nuisances, maybe Queen Creek should outlaw noisy tractors and those nasty dust clouds they make all year round while driving in the bare dirt.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 04:10 am |
|
Delta Echo...once again you have absolutely zero facts correct.
I live in a developed subdivison with PAVED ROADS, underground utilities and homes that rival those in Pegasus. At least two homes appraised for over $1,000,000. I'm sure they're probably worth 1/2 to 3/4 that in the current market, but I don't live in a manufactured home on a dirt road. Even if I did, that shouldn't change the value of my opinion. In case you didn't realize it, there is a large area of Maricopa county that falls under the Queen Creek general plan, including my neighborhood. I often get notices for planning an zoning changes as they impact my property and as such have a voice at least at the meetings to express my concerns.
Whatever, I don't even know why I'm arguing with you anyway. Go play on the runway at Gateway for awhile, since you don't seem to think its an issue.
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 04:12 am by tomogo
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 01:22 am |
|
TOMOGO wrote: "I do not live in the town limits of Queen Creek, I live in the unicorporated area of Maricopa County just North of SanTan and West of Ellsworth about 1/2 mile from the Pegasus airstrip. One of the most frustrating things for people living on the borderline of the town limits is we don't get to vote for any of the folks making the decisions that affect us directly." emphasis on: "we don't get to vote"
That was your choice Tomogo....and that is EXACTLY why I do live in the incorporated area of Queen Creek. So I may voice my opinion and vote!
But when it comes to raising tons and tons of dust on your dirt roads and your lack of any reasonable zoning rules or your failure to abide by any logical building codes you would be the first to jump up and down screaming "WE are unincorporated....leave us alone"!....well now it's our turn.. LEAVE US alone! but first read the heading on this post "QUEEN CREEK PUBLIC ISSUES..... not San Tan public issues, not Sac -a -pa Toony public issues but QUEEN CREEK public issues........a place YOU CHOSE not to belong to..............................case closed!
DE!
BTW...Regarding the "community benefit" that you seem so worried about...the SE valley of the Phoenix area has the WORST air quality of any place in the entire USA!....and the poor air quality KILLS people.....and the major contributor to that poor air is unincorporated areas with dirt roads from 1901......pave your darn streets and stop worrying about somethings that don't even concern you!
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 02:54 am by Delta Echo
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 11:49 pm |
|
Unfortunately for the internet, I probably come off as much more emotional about this issue than I really am.
Short and sweet, the issue is really the trade off of added noise vs. community benefit. Sorry, but I don't see how selling 1 or 2 or even 10 more houses in Pegasus offers any community benefit.
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 11:08 pm |
|
tomogo wrote: Let me spell out the scenario. A decent sized stage 3 Cessna Citation or any other number of aircraft close to the max size limit is coming in for approach. I figure approach speed over the airfield for a higher performance aircraft is probably in the 120+ knt range. As the pilot is set to land, Billy Bob Beer Drinken evil non aviator Orchard Ranchette trespasser comes tearing onto the runway in his quad. (just trying to paint the picture as it appears folks in Pegasus might view this) The concientious aviator sees the incursion onto the airport and goes to full power to get back up in the air, in the process he clips the quad which causes the aircraft to also catch the wall at the end of the runway causing extensive structural damage. But he makes it over the wall and starts pulling power up and away...whew he made it...except now he realizes his high tech quiet fan jet engines have pulled in a bunch debris from the quad riders body parts, aircraft parts that came off his beautiful new jet, and debris from the wall. He's loosing altitude and the aircraft pitches to the right. He's lost control and he's going down...and with a full tank of fuel. Right into my house.
Oh my God, thank you. That was freakin' hliarious!
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:56 pm |
|
Starleen, I have no fear of airplanes or their operation. I have really little concern for the proper operation of Jets or helicopters from a safety perspective, key word here is proper. I didn't even start the thread regarding security at Pegasus, I merely was responding to the issue. If you believe an airplane is nothing more than a tractor with wings, then you my dear are unbelievably uneducated with regard to the specialized nature of aircraft operations. There are reasons aircraft operations are so tightly regulated and it has little to do with politics and everything to do with safety.
Find me one pilot that feels unauthorized incursions onto an operational runway does not constitute a signficant saftey concern and I'll show you a pilot who probably doesn't fly anymore.
Perhaps you need to read what I wrote a bit more carefully. My "extreme" example was used to respond to Davids misunderstanding of an earlier statement of mine. I have stated I support the existence of Pegasus in its current state and would even support adding stage 4 VLJ's. I really have no concern whatsoever about the storage of jet fuel. Afterall, its really nothing more than kerosene.
Did you know Skyranch in Cave Creek doesn't allow helicopters? Its built out with a waiting list for hangar space. They allow small stage 3 jets, although I'd venture to guess few operate from there. So can someone please tell me why at this time Pegasus needs this change?
Perhaps Pegasus needs a new marketing staff and needs to figure out how to get all of those investor lots into the hands of people that actually want to live there.
Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 11:06 pm by tomogo
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 326 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:48 pm |
|
| Tomogo, I find it hard to believe that someone who has worked in aerospace for 15 years can have such an attitude about an airpark like Pegasus. Perhaps you have very little experience with general aviation. Perhaps your childhood love of airplanes has carried into adulthood such that you still see them as magical beings with minds of their own. They are machinery built and operated by humans. Like tractors with wings, only their operation and maintenance is highly regulated at many levels, including Federal. They are not inherently dangerous or evil. There is only so much we can do to regulate safety in our daily lives. Unless we stay under the bed, (and even then you gotta watch out for those dust mites!) we all face and manage risk each day and dodge many things that are out of our control. I think the concerns voiced here are going way over the top.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:34 pm |
|
Ride a quad onto either of those airfields and watch how fast you end up in cuffs being taken to jail by Sheriff Joe. Go on...I dare ya.  Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:34 pm by tomogo
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:14 pm |
|
Tomongo wrote:
Today and even next week, just about anyone can waltz right onto the Pegasus airfield
security?......... you mean security like here at Chandler Hanger Cafe'? Where hundreds of kids and adults waltz right in and wander around waiting for breakfast?
or here at Williams Gateway where near anybody can walk out the door and past military fighter jets........which (by the way) ARE NOT permitted at Pegasus....
(darn  )
DE
Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:29 pm by Delta Echo
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:02 pm |
|
Again, what does this have to do with the current proposal? NOTHING. Your 'guarantee' is based on your opinion, not fact. I would fight tooth and nail to keep commercial operations out of Pegasus.
This goes right back to the motive for the change. Which is to fill Pegasus with owners. If it doesn't have any impact on build out, which your own data shows it won't, what will the next request be?
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 09:43 pm |
|
David, the security issue is a simple one. Today and even next week, just about anyone can waltz right onto the Pegasus airfield in a vehicle, on foot, in a quad, on a horse or wheel chair for that matter. I brought up malicious teenagers and drunken adults in reference to the suggestion that simply closing the gates to Pegasus will resolve the issue. I think we can both agree that having any unauthorized persons on the airstrip is not a good thing. In fact it presents a safety issue to both the pilots and surrounding community. In my opinion, the way the issue is resolved is to have due diligence, proper and abundant signage and proactive monitoring of the airstrip to ensure unauthorized people are not on the airfield. Perhaps a 24 hour security detail is necessary or at least a community watch program.
As far as the comment about my house...you're the one who stated someone could drive through my living room. My response was to state even if someone drives through my living room with a freakin semi truck, they are not going to be colliding with an aircraft in the process. GET IT? Unauthorized vehicular traffic on an airfield is an accident waiting to happen. My house sitting at the end of a cul-de-sac isn't. Have you ever seen the mess a 10,000lb jet makes when it hits a neighborhood, or even a 2,500lb Cessna for that matter.? Me neither, except for pictures and I sure as heck don't want to see one now.
Let me spell out the scenario. A decent sized stage 3 Cessna Citation or any other number of aircraft close to the max size limit is coming in for approach. I figure approach speed over the airfield for a higher performance aircraft is probably in the 120+ knt range. As the pilot is set to land, Billy Bob Beer Drinken evil non aviator Orchard Ranchette trespasser comes tearing onto the runway in his quad. (just trying to paint the picture as it appears folks in Pegasus might view this) The concientious aviator sees the incursion onto the airport and goes to full power to get back up in the air, in the process he clips the quad which causes the aircraft to also catch the wall at the end of the runway causing extensive structural damage. But he makes it over the wall and starts pulling power up and away...whew he made it...except now he realizes his high tech quiet fan jet engines have pulled in a bunch debris from the quad riders body parts, aircraft parts that came off his beautiful new jet, and debris from the wall. He's loosing altitude and the aircraft pitches to the right. He's lost control and he's going down...and with a full tank of fuel. Right into my house.
Yes I'm making fun of a potentially real and dangerous situation. Will it happen, probably not. Can it happen just like I layed it out...absolutely, and it doesn't take a jet or helicopter to have an accident.
The security issue really has little bearing on approving or disapproving the request for jets and helicopters. I didn't even bring it up until DE started whining about the quad guy trespassing. The issue only highlights the difficulty in enforcing the rules, even critical rules such as incursion onto the airfield. If the folks at Pegasus don't see the problem here, I think you need to open up your eyes and ears to what your neighbors are saying. Quite honestly, I was very suprised to see the airpark wide open, with no controlling fence around the perimeter of the airfield itself. I would have thought in this day and age, even private airport access would be tightly controlled.
Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 09:58 pm by tomogo
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 09:22 pm |
|
tomogo wrote:
I think you're reaching a bit here. What prevents some 'malicious teenager or even a drunken or inconcsiderate adult' from driving through your living room?
I don't operate aircraft out of my living room, and even if someone did drive through my house, I'm fairly certain it would neither completely destroy my house nor cause death or damage to the rest of the neighborhood.
You made this comment in reference to a potential runway incursion. Now, the malicious teenager or drunk is flying a plane into your house? I'm confused.
You seem like a reasonable person, but this statment is complete speculation and absurd:
"And like I said in several posts below, I'm honestly concerned about what follows this request. I'm sure there may not be any plans for future expansion to commercial operations, but if growth in Pegasus is still stagnant in a few years, I guarentee we will be having the next discussion whether to allow either commercial operations such as charter flights or even opening Pegasus up for public access. "
Again, what does this have to do with the current proposal? NOTHING. Your 'guarantee' is based on your opinion, not fact. I would fight tooth and nail to keep commercial operations out of Pegasus.
Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 09:27 pm by DavidB
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 06:58 pm |
|
Ahh...back to civil discourse on the issue.
But to hit a quad on approach with a helicopter the quad driver would have to be 20 feet tall.
I'm fully aware of how rotorcraft operate. We can split hairs over how high a helicopter will operate over the airfield while transistioning from forward flight to a hover to final decent. My point was that they do fly over the runway both on takeoff and approach without ascending and decending absolutely vertical. Never mind the quad rider, a rider on a horse would sit high enough to lose his head to a tail rotor strike if he was stupid enough to be in the wrong place.
Seriously though.
I think you're reaching a bit here. What prevents some 'malicious teenager or even a drunken or inconcsiderate adult' from driving through your living room?
I don't operate aircraft out of my living room, and even if someone did drive through my house, I'm fairly certain it would neither completely destroy my house nor cause death or damage to the rest of the neighborhood.
In all honesty, I'm trying to weigh the benefits not only to the TOQC, but also the surrounding communities and even Pegasus versus the negative impact.
From the data presented by Pegasus, its apparent that at best, 10% of the owners of hangars and homes will own and operate a helicopter or jet. Quite honestly, I'm reaching with the 10% and it'll probably be closer to 3%. Even at 10% your only talking about 20 or so new home or hangar owners. Considering Pegasus barely has 35 occupied homes now, I honestly believe you'll be lucky to get 1 or 2 new residents. I honestly can't see how this change will help build out the community.
On the other hand, we know unequivicolly that Jets and Helicopters have a different noise footprint than piston engined fixed wing aircraft. The same data being used to tout how quiet these aircraft are, also reinforces the fact that many of the VLJ's are actually much louder than the quieter examples of single engined piston aircraft. While its true that some VLJ's can be quieter than the louder multi-engined piston aircraft, its also true that most single engined piston aircraft are quieter than all of the VLJ's. Helicopters in general are noiser than both VLJ's and piston aircraft. I haven't even started to research turboprop aircraft yet, but having seen a few in operation, they can be just as loud as a small jet. So what we end up with, regardless of whether or not the airpark exceeds 65 DNL, is a noise impact to the surrounding community. Why should the surrounding neighbors be subjected to any impact so that a handful of aviators can have the convenience of parking their jets and helicopters at their house, especially when Williams is just a few miles away? I know its a NIMBY attitude, but to come back to the dragstrip argument, it would be real interesting to see how Pegasus residents would react if Pinal County zoned the area just south of Empire as a dragstrip. I'm sure you'd be saying NIMBY too, regardless of whether or not the dragstrip exceeded 65DNL.
If you weigh the positives and negatives. I just don't see the benefit to the town as a whole. And like I said in several posts below, I'm honestly concerned about what follows this request. I'm sure there may not be any plans for future expansion to commercial operations, but if growth in Pegasus is still stagnant in a few years, I guarentee we will be having the next discussion whether to allow either commercial operations such as charter flights or even opening Pegasus up for public access.
For the record, I love the concept of an airpark. While not a pilot, I've worked in aerospace for 15 years and have loved aircraft since I was a small child. I sat in an Army Huey being run up with my dad when he was in the military. I've flown in Jet Rangers, MD500's, Eurocopters and sat in an Apache being run-up. I've flown in multiple types of fixed wing aircraft. I love to watch the business jets take off from Falcon field. I've also seen VLJ's operate out of Falcon and Teterboro airport in New Jersey. I'm very aware of how loud and also how quiet various aircraft can be. I fully understand and appreciate the passion pilots have for their aircraft and the pilot community. I'm not against Pegasus existing by any means. I believe its a unique and vital part of the Queen Creek experience. I do however feel that growth of operations within Pegasus to include jets and helicopters negatively impacts the rural environment of Queen Creek. I already stated multiple times I would not be in opposition to this change if it were written to only allow Stage 4 VLJs, no turboprop and no helicopters. If the change is truly to allow the newer technologies into the airpark, then by allowing Stage 4 VLJ's we'd be meeting that objective.
Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 08:26 pm by tomogo
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 04:42 pm |
|
FYI regarding the airstrip security. If you look at the general plan for Pegasus, the entire runway/taxiway/ hanger area will be surrounded with a six foot concrete block wall. The walls around the hangers are complete now and the electronic inner gate leading to the hanger area will be finished when SRP gets off it's butt. Each aviation home, as it is completed, is responsible for a 6 foot wall if it abuts the taxiway. Each home must have a locked gate leading into or out of that area. Queen Creek inspectors (unlike in the unincorporated areas) inspect those walls with a vengeance. (A Township permit and engineering plans are required to build that wall). At each end of the runway view fences and heavy landscaping are planned. Landscaping designed to keep quads and horses away. The end fence is designed to view the runway but stop vehicles. It is all spelled out in the master plan published by Pegasus at the requirement of Arizona State development rules. The sooner the development builds out the sooner those walls will be complete.
If you check the FAA website you will find runway incursion with a horse, quad, or even a motorcycle is non-existent. The primary vehicle/aircraft conflict comes with airport service vehicles. The walls were designed by Queen Creek to prevent dust from blowing in and animals and children from getting out. QC had to twist and turn to get away from the 'horse view fence' concept but all your concerns had been well covered many years ago. There are no records for drunken adults wandering around in blind circles though. But all the pilots I know will never wander around on a taxiway.......pool yes, taxiway no.
I am not a developer, I do not own a lot in Pegasus. I am a retired pilot that has a love of QC and a very high respect for any aviator. And I am truly concerned that QC is going to head downhill very quickly......(Just look at the ugly Bellaro 'Sheep Farm' ramshackle operation already).....and the 500 dump truck loads of cow poop dumped on the farm on Empire..........where houses were planned a year ago
And helicopters do land at zero speed (at least the ones that would be allowed in Pegasus)....approach with speed yes, land no. But to hit a quad on approach with a helicopter the quad driver would have to be 20 feet tall.
DE
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 04:34 pm |
|
tomogo wrote: My point about the quad on the airstrip reflects the lack of CONTROL and SECURITY on the airfield. And DUE TO THE HIGHER SPEEDS OF THE AIRCRAFT proposed to be landing and taking off, there is less reaction time to avoid an accident. If something does happen and the plane manages to make it over the fence then it becomes my concern. What makes you think closing the gates would stop some resident of Pegasus itself from wandering out onto the airstrip? A child or malicious teenager or even a drunken or inconsiderate adult could do exactly the same thing. And as I understand it, according to yourself, others besides residents of Pegasus will have access to the facility. Look I know you can't police the airstrip 100% of the time, all the time. But the quad incident demonstrates some of the danger. I'm not familiar with other private airstrips and how access is controlled. But at least for now, I know Pegasus is unsecure.
I think you're reaching a bit here. What prevents some 'malicious teenager or even a drunken or inconcsiderate adult' from driving through your living room? Anybody who is foolish enough to ride a quad on an active runway might be doing us a service by being run over. lol. No, seriously no private airstrip that I'm aware of has 24 hr security. Its not practical or necessary and really has no bearing on this proposal.
Now turning Pegasus into a dragstrip...that's the first change proposal in awhile that I could fully support.
Ouch.
|
Ron S.
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 04:28 pm |
|
In Response to the question about the noise demo; yes it will be a public meeting so the public is welcome. It is scheduled for 8:00 AM on Saturday, August 9, 2008 at the Pegasus Hangars.
Regarding landing speeds for helicopters. All helicopters can land at zero speed. That is why you see the majority with skids for landing gear instead of wheels. Wheels are provided for ground handling and on larger helicopters so they can move around on the ground without creating a wind storm. The normal approach for a helicopter is never vertical because that is unsafe. You approach at a comfortable angle decreasing your airspeed to arrive over the landing zone at a hover altitude with zero forward speed. An approach to the ground can be made the same way but without the hover.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 03:14 pm |
|
DE, since you appear to use such sound logic and reason in your rebuttals. *sarcasm intended*
In general, jets and turboprop fixed wing aircraft have higher takeoff and landing speeds than light single engined fixed wing. DO SOME RESEARCH! While its absolutely true that some of the VLJ's such as the wonderful Eclispe 500 have fairly low stall speeds, others like a Cessna Citation are quite a bit higher than say a Cessna 172. To say all fixed wing land and takeoff at the same speed is simply not true. Helicopters do not land at ZERO speed. They use approach patterns just like fixed wing. While its possible to take off and land perfectly vertically, its not a very safe or efficient method of operating a rotorcraft.
My point about the quad on the airstrip reflects the lack of CONTROL and SECURITY on the airfield. And DUE TO THE HIGHER SPEEDS OF THE AIRCRAFT proposed to be landing and taking off, there is less reaction time to avoid an accident. If something does happen and the plane manages to make it over the fence then it becomes my concern. What makes you think closing the gates would stop some resident of Pegasus itself from wandering out onto the airstrip? A child or malicious teenager or even a drunken or inconsiderate adult could do exactly the same thing. And as I understand it, according to yourself, others besides residents of Pegasus will have access to the facility. Look I know you can't police the airstrip 100% of the time, all the time. But the quad incident demonstrates some of the danger. I'm not familiar with other private airstrips and how access is controlled. But at least for now, I know Pegasus is unsecure.
I do not live in the town limits of Queen Creek, I live in the unicorporated area of Maricopa County just North of SanTan and West of Ellsworth about 1/2 mile from the Pegasus airstrip. One of the most frustrating things for people living on the borderline of the town limits is we don't get to vote for any of the folks making the decisions that affect us directly. However, since I am in the area impacted by the change, I did receive a notice inviting me to attend the Planning and Zoning Commision meeting. I don't know if you live in Pegasus or not. However, something tells me you own investment property there and your attitude reflects some of the condecending, arrogant comments I heard from Pegasus land owners at the planning meeting. I apologize to the majority of good people that own property or reside in Pegasus, but I'm simply stating an observation. Perhaps those in the surrounding communities should just "Thank God that Pegasus is there"...to quote one of your residents.
Now turning Pegasus into a dragstrip...that's the first change proposal in awhile that I could fully support.
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 02:10 pm |
|
DE, regardless of why or how the man on the quad entered Pegasus, the fact that there are current flight operations at the airfield and Adding higher performance aircraft to that type of environment will only elevate the safety concerns more.
Very strange comments, indeed ??
someone can ride their quad right down the airstrip is a concern to me.
Why would it be a concern to you?.........................besides, no matter how 'high performance' almost all a/c in type land around the same speed now....and helicopters land at ZERO speed.......so regardless, that silly observation has just been deflated by at least 50 %.
And when the gates are complete that argument is completely cured................right?
Also, I don't live in Orchard Ranchettes, I live on the Northwest side of Ellsworth. Unlike you appear to be, I'm concerned about all of my neighbors, not just myself
So is it possible you don't even live in Queen Creek then? Or Maricopa County even....not that that matters but I seem to recall a few municipal meetings where residents of that corner of the world told the QC council to 'stay out of their business'......
but anyhow, you say I appear to 'just be concerned about myself' because I did some research and I challenged you (or anyone for that matter) to refute that research? I never said I was for or against the proposal. The only thing I am against is confusing any serious issue with biased unsubstantiated non-related drivel....ie: "waiting for planes to crash and flying so low you can catch them in a net and quad racing"...............
HEY...That's a thought! (racing that is).......if Pegasus fades away lets turn the air strip into a DRAGSTRIP!.......we could call it the Bellaro Sheep Farm and Raceway.
(get the point ?)
DE
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 12:58 am |
|
Please refer to the post of Ron S from Fri Jul 18th, 2008 09:30 pm in this thread. All the details are contained within.
|
gsbill
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 12:45 am |
|
| When is the sound demo and is and is it open to the public?
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 12:34 am |
|
tomogo wrote: David, do you know what specific types of aircraft will be demonstrated on the 9th? I'd like to know so that I can do a little upfront investigation for comparison.
I'm sorry, I do not. I think the helicopter is an R22, but you would need to direct this to Ron S as he is the one putting it together.
David
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 12:09 am |
|
My dear friends and neighbors, again, based on Stellar and other airparks we are looking at possibly 5 personal jets and 5 personal helicopters 10 years from now. Also, these aircraft have a lower dB noise signature that what is already here. I just fail to see the cause for alarm.
Best Regards
Mike Spanos
Exactly my point Mike...If you're only going to sell 10 more lots or hanger condos over the next 10 years...why make the change? Unless someone has aspirations for future changes too?
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 10:31 pm |
|
David, do you know what specific types of aircraft will be demonstrated on the 9th? I'd like to know so that I can do a little upfront investigation for comparison.
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 10:12 pm |
|
tomogo wrote: In the current market its difficult to get comps correct anyway, as the market value of a home is very hard to determine. While comps indicate my home should sell for one value, other homes that comp out higher, are actually short selling for much less. In my opinion, any home pricing data collected over the last 3-4 years in the valley is very suspect and only a snapshot of a wildly fluctuating housing market. I'm not trying to refute your claim as much as qualify it.
I absolutely agree with this. It has been one hell of a ride in real estate. I'm holding on with white knuckles like the rest of you. But this is not a spec or investment for my wife and I, it is our home. Property values are a major concern for everyone, but my outlook on it is much longer term. We're in it for the long haul and want the best for both the community and the town. I beleive that this proposal can be a win-win for everyone involved, and I believe in the TOQC. So much so, in fact, that I just purchased another home in QC for my disabled mother that will close in a month. That home is in the direct departure path of runway 8, so I'm putting my money, and my mother, where my mouth is.
I think the demonstration on the 9th should help people decide in their mind one way or another. I'm hoping that people will have an open mind about it.
Best Regards,
David
Last edited on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 10:12 pm by DavidB
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 06:11 pm |
|
Thanks for the response Dave. From the perspective of the residents of Pegasus, I can fully understand their desire to support the change. Not only are they aviation enthusiasts who have chosen to live on an airstrip, and its associated noise impacts, but they do have some personal gain in seeing Pegasus built up. I'd like to see Pegasus built up too. I'd love to see my own neighborhood built out.
Like I've said before, my fear of this change has as much to do with future operations as it does this request. Growth is inevitible so lets make the smart decisions that benefit all of the community, not just a percieved few. Stellar is a fairly well established public access airfield. In order to compare apples to apples in the case of Pegasus, how about a study showing comps of Queen Creek Ranchettes versus Orchard Ranchette? In the current market its difficult to get comps correct anyway, as the market value of a home is very hard to determine. While comps indicate my home should sell for one value, other homes that comp out higher, are actually short selling for much less. In my opinion, any home pricing data collected over the last 3-4 years in the valley is very suspect and only a snapshot of a wildly fluctuating housing market. I'm not trying to refute your claim as much as qualify it.
|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 333 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 05:59 pm |
|
tomogo wrote: While I'm sure some percentage of lots are owned by people wanting to build their dream home someday, I would also venture to guess that a greater number of lots are owned by investors and speculators who felt the airpark lots would be worth a premium in the future. Now that those folks are being burned by the downturn in the real estate market, they're reaching for anything to use as a marketing device to sell those lots.
This is a guess. I don't have that data either, but to assume that this is the sole motive for this request is inaccurate. This is being supported by every person I have spoken to who owns an existing home in Pegasus. Why does everyone keep stating its the speculators, not the residents, who want this stipulation removed? We voted for it in our community before it was even submitted to P&Z.
Also, with regard to "increasing" home values in Orchard Ranch and the surrounding communities. While it is true that most Airpark properties are valued higher than non-Airpark properties, I would be real interested in knowing if surrounding community values actually increase. The assumption here is that comps could be used from Pegasus when selling a house in Orchard Ranch. The reality is that the aviation community is a very small niche market that does not appeal nearly as broadly to folks as the Orchard Ranch concept does. Orchard Ranch is a nice family, rural, equestrian community with large irrigated lots...something that is rare in this valley and even more rare when the development trend is cookie cutter track home developments with zero property line housing. I personally believe the locale of Pegaus negatively impacts potential sales in the immediate surrounding communities, as opposed to increasing value.
Mike Spanos was kind enough to spend a lot of time looking up comps in the areas surrounding Stellar Airpark in order to respond to this point. These homes are not in the park, but directly in the flight paths of it. Granted, its only 1 example, but it sure seems to me that it has helped that area of Chandler with regard to home values. It is posted on this forum.
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 05:58 pm |
|
DE, regardless of why or how the man on the quad entered Pegasus, the fact that there are current flight operations at the airfield and someone can ride their quad right down the airstrip is a concern to me. Adding higher performance aircraft to that type of environment will only elevate the safety concerns more.
Also, I don't live in Orchard Ranchettes, I live on the Northwest side of Ellsworth. Unlike you appear to be, I'm concerned about all of my neighbors, not just myself.
My comments about the tumbleweeds was less a slam on the current state of yards in Pegasus, and more on the enforcement abilities of an HOA. If it helps any, my own neighborhood has exactly the same problem, non-resident land owners that do not keep up their properties.Last edited on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 08:11 pm by tomogo
|
tomogo
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 05:44 pm |
|
That is the main reason 90% of the civil G/A fleet is comprised of aircraft made between 1948 and 1978. And they are very, very quiet!
Which is exactly the reason why airparks like Pegasus exist with restrictions limiting operations to these types of aircraft.
All of your tax calculations are still true regardless of whether or not Pegasus allows jets and helicopters. When a change of this type is requested, I always look at the motive. If this were a case where existing home and hangar owners in Pegasus were wanting to upgrade their aircraft to the latest and greatest technology, then by all means I would feel the request were more sincere. Even if the development had not sold out all of its properties, and had a list of potential helicopter and jet aircraft owners waiting to purchase property to build, I would also feel the motive behind the request was more sincere. But here is what I've learned about this request:
1. The land in Pegasus has all been sold. So land sales were not an issue with the original restrictions.
2. The person leading this change request does not even live in Pegasus, and owns several of the vacant properties in the development.
3. There is no evidence to suggest adding VLJs, Turboprops and Helicopters will increase the number of homes being built in Pegasus, now or in the future.
4. There is no benefit to the town of Queen Creek or surrounding residents from this change, other than the idea that it will help stimulate the build up of lots in Pegasus.
One thing mentioned at the town meeting was that the new aircraft type would be restricted to 10% of the total aircraft types allowed to reside at the airpark. If this is true, I don't see how this change will have any overall impact to either the development of Pegasus or the tax base of Queen Creek. From my perspective, Pegaus was hit harder than some areas by speculators. While I'm sure some percentage of lots are owned by people wanting to build their dream home someday, I would also venture to guess that a greater number of lots are owned by investors and speculators who felt the airpark lots would be worth a premium in the future. Now that those folks are being burned by the downturn in the real estate market, they're reaching for anything to use as a marketing device to sell those lots.
Also, with regard to "increasing" home values in Orchard Ranch and the surrounding communities. While it is true that most Airpark properties are valued higher than non-Airpark properties, I would be real interested in knowing if surrounding community values actually increase. The assumption here is that comps could be used from Pegasus when selling a house in Orchard Ranch. The reality is that the aviation community is a very small niche market that does not appeal nearly as broadly to folks as the Orchard Ranch concept does. Orchard Ranch is a nice family, rural, equestrian community with large irrigated lots...something that is rare in this valley and even more rare when the development trend is cookie cutter track home developments with zero property line housing. I personally believe the locale of Pegaus negatively impacts potential sales in the immediate surrounding communities, as opposed to increasing value.
Just a few more "facts" about noise.
At the planning and zoning meeting I pointed out that a 10dBA increase in noise level equates to doubling the percieved noise level or loudness. What I didn't point out is that the actual physics associated with the measurement of noise is that the energy level associated with the noise actually doubles every 3dB. In actuallity when going from a quiet rural neighborhood with an ambient of about 30-40dBA to a VLJ on landing (approximatly 70-80dBA) the difference in energy level between the two is best case (40-70dbA) 1024 x higer and worst case (30-81dBA) 131,072 x higher. Those darn exponents just really mess things up dont they.
Most acoustic engineers are taught that the percieved noise doubles every 10dBA, and we are told just as we were in the meeting that a normal conversation is 60dBA, so these aircraft are as quiet as a normal conversation.
Let me put something into perspective. What would it be like to talk to someone at a normal conversation level, when there were two people talking at normal conversation levels right next to you? Get the idea. Also, imagine the difference between listening to a Mozart piano sonata at say 58dB and someone scratching their nails over chalkboard at 58dB. Which is more annoying?
By quantifying noise simply by its dBA measurement or DNL in our case, a significant factor of noise annoyance is missed. A helicopter eminates noise at different frequencies than a jet which is also different than a piston engined prop plane. Sky Harbor doesn't exceed its 65DNL requirement to my knowledge. However, what do you think its like to be sitting in Sun Devil stadium when a 737 flies over? Its annoying and its loud.
For everyone's sake, lets get all of our facts on the table and assess the real impact to the community and not simply buy into a nice marketing pitch presented by the folks in favor of this change.
|
Delta Echo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 21st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 11 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 04:33 pm |
|
Also, the gentleman who brought up the quad incident in Pegasus reinforced the point that security at the airfield is non-existent. Anyone can roll in on their quad, bicycle, etc and waltz right down the airstrip at any given time without being challenged. This should be a serious safety and security concern of all residents of Pegasus and Queen Creek. BTW, will the Flight Association be as adept at enforcing the rules as the HOA appears to be with regards to landscaping, yards, weeds etc? Apparently, the tumbleweeds seem to have more say at HOA meetings than the folks living in Pegasus.
While I am waiting for my pool vac to suck out the dust from Tuscon, let me address that very unfair paragraph above. Of course it has nothing to do with helico | | |