NIMBY compaints to the airfield
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Paros, Greece
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NIMBY compaints to the airfield
I should have asked the CFI on the day, but everyone was very busy and I was running late, so here goes...
After returning from the local training area where we'd been practising steep turns, the a/g radio opererator told us there'd been a complaint of low flying from a 'well known' local in a nearby village. He'd supplied the reg. and description of the aircraft and had estimated our height at '800 to 1000ft'
. The 'complaint' had been neatly logged in a book kept under the desk, and my instructor and the CFI proceeded to have a laugh about what some people will do to cause trouble. Nothing more was said.
I know for a fact that we'd initially been flying at 3000ft AMSL (although, I admit lo losing a little altitude on some of the turns
) We never went below 2500 ft, and we were squarking mode C at all times, so no case to be answered, but it begs the question:- What happens to these 'informal complaints'? Is there a legal requirement for the airfield to keep a record? Are they passed on the the CAA? What about the local authorities (who dictate when we can fly and would no doubt love to close us down)?
I'm sure nothing will come of this, but I suppose it could cause trouble in a less clear cut situation. As P1, it's the instructor who has his name in the book, and he doesn't seem bothered, but it'd probably bother me a bit.
After returning from the local training area where we'd been practising steep turns, the a/g radio opererator told us there'd been a complaint of low flying from a 'well known' local in a nearby village. He'd supplied the reg. and description of the aircraft and had estimated our height at '800 to 1000ft'
. The 'complaint' had been neatly logged in a book kept under the desk, and my instructor and the CFI proceeded to have a laugh about what some people will do to cause trouble. Nothing more was said.I know for a fact that we'd initially been flying at 3000ft AMSL (although, I admit lo losing a little altitude on some of the turns
) We never went below 2500 ft, and we were squarking mode C at all times, so no case to be answered, but it begs the question:- What happens to these 'informal complaints'? Is there a legal requirement for the airfield to keep a record? Are they passed on the the CAA? What about the local authorities (who dictate when we can fly and would no doubt love to close us down)?I'm sure nothing will come of this, but I suppose it could cause trouble in a less clear cut situation. As P1, it's the instructor who has his name in the book, and he doesn't seem bothered, but it'd probably bother me a bit.
Every airfield, and a great many other places suffer these sort of people. Without wishing to put down the odd genuinely aggreived complainant, many of them seem to be professional complainers with nothing better to do. (In a previous life, we had a chap who lived next to our University boatyard, he used to record every coming and going and make regular complaints; there was a distinct sense of shaudenfreuder (Sp?) when we heard he'd been carted off to hospital with hypothermia after sitting out in his garden all night making note of all our comings and goings).
A first, or even second, complaint about noise or low flying should always be treated very seriously. Some people get well into double figures, and do become nothing but a nuisance, sounds like your complainant may well be one such, and your instructor recognises him as such. These blighters never really go away, but there are ways to deal with them, such as:-
- Make dealing with complaints a punishment duty for badly behaved airfield staff
- Ask for registration, colour, and description. If they have a reg, the actualities can be investigated - such as in this case. If not, look for other details that allow you to check the details (without wasting too much time) and explain why no rule was broken, or (better still) the aircraft was not based at your airfield.
- Never respond to complaints too quickly, it gives them a sense of power (and if, as occasionally happens, they had a genuine greivance, you need time to have checked all the facts anyway).
- On each occasion, make sure you're in a position to either demonstrate that nothing was done wrong, or that the culprit has been identified and dealt with.
- Never, ever, ever, give out a pilots details, try to be as impersonal as possible.
G
A first, or even second, complaint about noise or low flying should always be treated very seriously. Some people get well into double figures, and do become nothing but a nuisance, sounds like your complainant may well be one such, and your instructor recognises him as such. These blighters never really go away, but there are ways to deal with them, such as:-
- Make dealing with complaints a punishment duty for badly behaved airfield staff
- Ask for registration, colour, and description. If they have a reg, the actualities can be investigated - such as in this case. If not, look for other details that allow you to check the details (without wasting too much time) and explain why no rule was broken, or (better still) the aircraft was not based at your airfield.
- Never respond to complaints too quickly, it gives them a sense of power (and if, as occasionally happens, they had a genuine greivance, you need time to have checked all the facts anyway).
- On each occasion, make sure you're in a position to either demonstrate that nothing was done wrong, or that the culprit has been identified and dealt with.
- Never, ever, ever, give out a pilots details, try to be as impersonal as possible.
G
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Near EICK,EIKY,EIWF
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This reminds me of a little article I read a while back in a magazine. I think it was The Netherlands or Belguim where the authorities had set up a hotline number for people to complain about low flying aircraft.
A local aviation enthusiast rang up to say that an aeroplane had just flown over his house, it did NOT disturb him and in fact he actually likes looking at aircraft flying by. He wanted his approval of the flight logged. Unfortunately, the operator said that they were not allowed log such calls, only complaints!!
Maybe there should be a campaign of locals and pilot friends/family to start ringing clubs to congratulate and thank them for flying over. Each of these cancels out a complaint.
Carlito
A local aviation enthusiast rang up to say that an aeroplane had just flown over his house, it did NOT disturb him and in fact he actually likes looking at aircraft flying by. He wanted his approval of the flight logged. Unfortunately, the operator said that they were not allowed log such calls, only complaints!!
Maybe there should be a campaign of locals and pilot friends/family to start ringing clubs to congratulate and thank them for flying over. Each of these cancels out a complaint.
Carlito
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carlito:
Good point and I completely agree with you. Mind though, you will find that most light aircraft in the Netherlands and Belgium will have silencers fitted to their exhaust and it makes life a lot more pleasant.
I think they even have an incentive of lower landing fees if you have a silencer! Now that I feel is giving an even more possitive twist to our NIMBY relationship.
A local aviation enthusiast rang up to say that an aeroplane had just flown over his house, it did NOT disturb him and in fact he actually likes looking at aircraft flying by. He wanted his approval of the flight logged.
I think they even have an incentive of lower landing fees if you have a silencer! Now that I feel is giving an even more possitive twist to our NIMBY relationship.
Whilst in this country we have some airfields which specifically ban the only class of aircraft which have to have a silencer fitted, and almost never fly a powered approach.
G
G
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Behind You
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming you had avoided congested areas and crowds, even at 800-1000' you are in the clear, whether or not he had your aircraft reg matters not.
This may well be urban myth but i'll tell it anyway. There was a farmer who became so pee'd off with aircraft flying low over his land that on the roof of a barn he wrote some abusive wording directed at the local raf fly boys.
This became well known with in this particular force and instead of detering aircraft from flying over this farmers land the barn became a checkpoint for first time solo pilots who on return to base had to recount what was written on said roof.
This may well be urban myth but i'll tell it anyway. There was a farmer who became so pee'd off with aircraft flying low over his land that on the roof of a barn he wrote some abusive wording directed at the local raf fly boys.
This became well known with in this particular force and instead of detering aircraft from flying over this farmers land the barn became a checkpoint for first time solo pilots who on return to base had to recount what was written on said roof.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Germany every airfield has it's complainers, and I mean EVERY airfield...they even complain of the glider winch because the parachute whistles when it falls!! Most airfields have reduced landing fees for planes with noise abatement equipment, and some can't even be flown to on Sundays and holidays if you don't have it!!
Most of the complainers are the same ones, over and over again.... they are often people who also complain about people that go past their house singing, they complain about the neighbors, etc. These people really seem to have nothing better to do.....they should get a life!!!
But it is difficult for the authorities because they must follow up on all complaints and TRY to be neutral. We, too, have complaint phonenumbers for most big aerodromes like Frankfurt....and now with planes for a fourth runway, they are being bombarded with calls! The non-complainers are, as always, a silent majority.
keep flying!
WestWind1950
P.S. Genghis the Engineer: it's spelled "Schadenfreude" and I know exactly what you mean!! 
Most of the complainers are the same ones, over and over again.... they are often people who also complain about people that go past their house singing, they complain about the neighbors, etc. These people really seem to have nothing better to do.....they should get a life!!!
But it is difficult for the authorities because they must follow up on all complaints and TRY to be neutral. We, too, have complaint phonenumbers for most big aerodromes like Frankfurt....and now with planes for a fourth runway, they are being bombarded with calls! The non-complainers are, as always, a silent majority.
keep flying!
WestWind1950
P.S. Genghis the Engineer: it's spelled "Schadenfreude"
and I know exactly what you mean!!
One tactic is to ask a noise complainer:
"Do you wish to make a formal complaint. If you do, you must disclose to any potential future purchaser of your property that you have had occasion to make complaints about aircraft noise in the past. This may have a negative effect on the value of your property and non-disclosure may constitute an offence. Do you still wish to make a formal complaint?"
Re. the Tchermans moaning about ac noise, some years ago the locals near Wildenrath learned that the Harriers were going to Gutersloh, to be replaced by the F4. They decided to mount a campaign - and wrote to the mayor of the nearby Dutch town just over the border to enlist his support. Came the reply "We accept the need for NATO military aircraft to operate at Wildenrath. Noisy as the Harrier and F4 are, we prefer the sound of either to the sound of the Stuka"...........
....and on the roof of that Viet Taff farmer's barn, it said "Pi$$ off Biggles"!
"Do you wish to make a formal complaint. If you do, you must disclose to any potential future purchaser of your property that you have had occasion to make complaints about aircraft noise in the past. This may have a negative effect on the value of your property and non-disclosure may constitute an offence. Do you still wish to make a formal complaint?"
Re. the Tchermans moaning about ac noise, some years ago the locals near Wildenrath learned that the Harriers were going to Gutersloh, to be replaced by the F4. They decided to mount a campaign - and wrote to the mayor of the nearby Dutch town just over the border to enlist his support. Came the reply "We accept the need for NATO military aircraft to operate at Wildenrath. Noisy as the Harrier and F4 are, we prefer the sound of either to the sound of the Stuka"...........
....and on the roof of that Viet Taff farmer's barn, it said "Pi$$ off Biggles"!
Beagle - I like your style!
At the aerodrome where I often fly from they decided (several years ago) to build a housing estate just off the end of the westerly runway - despite the fact that the aerodrome operator objected at the public enquiry.
It has now become the local custom to initiate the climbing turn after take off at circa 200 ft to help keep the natives happy. I am not so sure that this complies with Rule 5 since one should be taking off and landing in accordance with "normal" aviation practice and there is nothing listed in the AIP about "special" procedures. When the ambient temperatures get higher and aircraft performance is decreased we have to make the turn at 100 ft!
As an instructor I am not at all happy with low time pilots using this procedure and find myself caught in a dilemma. Do we stick to normal aviation practice and turn at 500 ft and upset the locals or fly a risky climbing turn after every take off and compromise safety? Perhaps we should just stop using this runway for departure?
We had a noise complaint from a local after I had sent a student solo on circuits - I could here him overflying down the phone line as I chatted to the complainant! I managed to calm him down and even invite him to come over for a chat and even a ride in one of our aircraft!
However, the problem remains as to what we do with these people and the effect they are having on flight safety. Of course, we should all operate our aircraft to avoid noise nuisance where possible but I get worried when safety is being compromised.
At the aerodrome where I often fly from they decided (several years ago) to build a housing estate just off the end of the westerly runway - despite the fact that the aerodrome operator objected at the public enquiry.
It has now become the local custom to initiate the climbing turn after take off at circa 200 ft to help keep the natives happy. I am not so sure that this complies with Rule 5 since one should be taking off and landing in accordance with "normal" aviation practice and there is nothing listed in the AIP about "special" procedures. When the ambient temperatures get higher and aircraft performance is decreased we have to make the turn at 100 ft!
As an instructor I am not at all happy with low time pilots using this procedure and find myself caught in a dilemma. Do we stick to normal aviation practice and turn at 500 ft and upset the locals or fly a risky climbing turn after every take off and compromise safety? Perhaps we should just stop using this runway for departure?
We had a noise complaint from a local after I had sent a student solo on circuits - I could here him overflying down the phone line as I chatted to the complainant! I managed to calm him down and even invite him to come over for a chat and even a ride in one of our aircraft!
However, the problem remains as to what we do with these people and the effect they are having on flight safety. Of course, we should all operate our aircraft to avoid noise nuisance where possible but I get worried when safety is being compromised.
Tinker, it's absolutely true, I've seen the photos. What the disgruntled farmer actually wrote on his roof was "P*** Off Biggles".
Incidentally, one of Brian Cosgrove's less well known books is a guide to airfield planning, published by the BMAA. He recounts a story of a noise complainer, who got the local TV company involved. In his back garden (next to said airstrip) he was complaining during an interview about the noise of landing aircraft in particular. During the course of the interview, and visible on camera behind him, 4 microlights landed, to which he remained completely oblivious.
Not disimilar to Beagle's style, I saw a masterful bit of handling of a phoned noise complaint once. I only heard one side of the conversation (by a QFI) which went something like this:-
"Hello I understand you have a complaint about an aeroplane"
"So it was flying low over your house, could you tell me the registration"
"It was too high to read the registration, okay, was it Blue by any chance"
"I thought it might be, not one of ours - we've had trouble with this chap ourselves. No idea who he is, but not based at our airfield - all our pilots are briefed not to fly over local houses, and we haven't anything based here with a blue wing".
G
Incidentally, one of Brian Cosgrove's less well known books is a guide to airfield planning, published by the BMAA. He recounts a story of a noise complainer, who got the local TV company involved. In his back garden (next to said airstrip) he was complaining during an interview about the noise of landing aircraft in particular. During the course of the interview, and visible on camera behind him, 4 microlights landed, to which he remained completely oblivious.
Not disimilar to Beagle's style, I saw a masterful bit of handling of a phoned noise complaint once. I only heard one side of the conversation (by a QFI) which went something like this:-
"Hello I understand you have a complaint about an aeroplane"
"So it was flying low over your house, could you tell me the registration"
"It was too high to read the registration, okay, was it Blue by any chance"
"I thought it might be, not one of ours - we've had trouble with this chap ourselves. No idea who he is, but not based at our airfield - all our pilots are briefed not to fly over local houses, and we haven't anything based here with a blue wing".
G
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Paros, Greece
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks everyone. I like your idea BEagle about it affecting the value of his house.
This guy is obviously one of the 'professionals' people mention. He knew exactly which club to phone (two others also practice in the same area), he described the aircraft as 'a piper' and described the manouvers as 'steep turns', so he's obvioulsy not a firt timer at this. Obviously has his binoculars to hand as well - we were only there for a few minutes.
I concede that hearing an aircraft engine going to full power, looking up, and seeing it nearly standing on one wing COULD be a bit disconcerting if you weren't used to it.
The problem with this particular area is that it's quite hard not to be above somebodys house. No major towns but lots of clusters of two or three cottages/farmhouses etc. spread everywhere between the fields. I know the steep turn isn't aerobatic and therefore there's no requirement to be clear of habitation, but I would always try to be if possible.
Does anyone know the answer to the original question? Has the airfield any formal requirement to keep records of these complains and do they have to pass them on to anybody?
Thanks.
This guy is obviously one of the 'professionals' people mention. He knew exactly which club to phone (two others also practice in the same area), he described the aircraft as 'a piper' and described the manouvers as 'steep turns', so he's obvioulsy not a firt timer at this. Obviously has his binoculars to hand as well - we were only there for a few minutes.
I concede that hearing an aircraft engine going to full power, looking up, and seeing it nearly standing on one wing COULD be a bit disconcerting if you weren't used to it.
The problem with this particular area is that it's quite hard not to be above somebodys house. No major towns but lots of clusters of two or three cottages/farmhouses etc. spread everywhere between the fields. I know the steep turn isn't aerobatic and therefore there's no requirement to be clear of habitation, but I would always try to be if possible.
Does anyone know the answer to the original question? Has the airfield any formal requirement to keep records of these complains and do they have to pass them on to anybody?
Thanks.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: West Sussex UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Valid complaints
Doesn't anyone think complaints are sometimes justified?
I have made one myself, a PA28 from Goodwood doing PFL's and passing over my street at 300'. As far as I know a PFL is not a valid reason to bust the 500' rule. I called the flying club and told them about it, in the hope that they would have a quiet word so the crew would try to avoid doing the same again and causing upset to the non-air minded.
I have made one myself, a PA28 from Goodwood doing PFL's and passing over my street at 300'. As far as I know a PFL is not a valid reason to bust the 500' rule. I called the flying club and told them about it, in the hope that they would have a quiet word so the crew would try to avoid doing the same again and causing upset to the non-air minded.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bucks
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
macky42 - you're absolutely right to remind us that a proportion of complaints are valid. It does not help our own cause to assume that every complainant is an unreasonable NIMBY and therefore to ignore the issue.
During one of the many changes to our local circuit pattern to try to avoid a noise-sensitive complainant, the circuit went over a local village. I happened to be sitting outside in a pub garden on the day of the change, and the noise of aircraft on the climbout was dreadful. The circuit has been changed a least twice again since then.
As it happens, we live under base leg for the usual runway at our local field, and don't really have a problem (apart from with some twins). But then the aircraft are on reduced power, and their noise is often drowned out by road noise anyway. So while it would be unreasonable for someone in our position to complain, I accept that some others are perfectly justified.
During one of the many changes to our local circuit pattern to try to avoid a noise-sensitive complainant, the circuit went over a local village. I happened to be sitting outside in a pub garden on the day of the change, and the noise of aircraft on the climbout was dreadful. The circuit has been changed a least twice again since then.
As it happens, we live under base leg for the usual runway at our local field, and don't really have a problem (apart from with some twins). But then the aircraft are on reduced power, and their noise is often drowned out by road noise anyway. So while it would be unreasonable for someone in our position to complain, I accept that some others are perfectly justified.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Greystones, Ireland (but born a Kerryman!)
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Macky,
It's not that the complaints might or might not be valid that's so annoying - it's the way that they are pursued. For example, a plane buzzed a house in our estate a few days ago, wing-waggling and doing steep turns over (presumably) the new SPL's house. Low enough that he was below the 1500' AGL limit for built-up areas (irish regs) and low enough for me to not only read the reg but see the pilot's head distinctly. Now I personally enjoyed it and have no intention of submitting a complaint, past the "lucky sod, wish I was doing that" one, but if I did, it wouldn't be a complaint but a quiet word in the ear of the CFI - not a formal complaint to the local authorities. That is something you only do for a serious chronic problem. Otherwise you're talking about trying to get an airfield shut down to stop one pilot from buzzing your house - and to succeed there, you'd have to shut down each and every airfield in the country, and all private strips, and all big grass fields! A quiet word to the CFI from someone who has a valid worry leads to a slightly louder word in the ear of the relevant pilot (or instructor) and that is far more effective IMO. And if the worry is ill-informed and invalid, well, who better than the CFI to dispell worry and extend an invitation to visit the airfield and maybe learn to fly themselves?
It's not that the complaints might or might not be valid that's so annoying - it's the way that they are pursued. For example, a plane buzzed a house in our estate a few days ago, wing-waggling and doing steep turns over (presumably) the new SPL's house. Low enough that he was below the 1500' AGL limit for built-up areas (irish regs) and low enough for me to not only read the reg but see the pilot's head distinctly. Now I personally enjoyed it and have no intention of submitting a complaint, past the "lucky sod, wish I was doing that" one, but if I did, it wouldn't be a complaint but a quiet word in the ear of the CFI - not a formal complaint to the local authorities. That is something you only do for a serious chronic problem. Otherwise you're talking about trying to get an airfield shut down to stop one pilot from buzzing your house - and to succeed there, you'd have to shut down each and every airfield in the country, and all private strips, and all big grass fields! A quiet word to the CFI from someone who has a valid worry leads to a slightly louder word in the ear of the relevant pilot (or instructor) and that is far more effective IMO. And if the worry is ill-informed and invalid, well, who better than the CFI to dispell worry and extend an invitation to visit the airfield and maybe learn to fly themselves?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting one a few weeks ago. I'd visited a local airfield (2 miles from my house) which is normally a gliding site on a flyaway from Perth. It's in EDI zone and the normal process is for VFR <2k, having to toggle between EDI App and the gliding site to negotiate clearances, etc.
On departure, I was asked by EDI to climb out, but remain within the airfield boundary at <2k. It was not possible to remain within the boundary, but at 500 ft on the climbout, I turned back to the airfield and orbited there, climbing to 1800' QFE. In doing so, I flew over the (*NEW - less than 3 yrs old!*) house of someone who I now know to be a NIMBY (despite the fact that the airfield has been there since WW2 and powered aircraft movements are normally less than 3 per day). He is around 400m in a virtual straight line off the end of the main runway. He subsequently complained about me - as far as I'm concerned, I was complying with an ATC instruction (and Rule 5 applied anyway), plus there is no 'formal' instruction to visiting pilots to avoid this particular housing estate.
IMHO, having to initiate any avoidance turns <500 ft AAL endangers the safety of the aircraft and as captain, that is my primary concern. I will comply as far as possible with local noise abatement procedures, but primary responsibility is to aviate; secondary concern is to navigate!!
On departure, I was asked by EDI to climb out, but remain within the airfield boundary at <2k. It was not possible to remain within the boundary, but at 500 ft on the climbout, I turned back to the airfield and orbited there, climbing to 1800' QFE. In doing so, I flew over the (*NEW - less than 3 yrs old!*) house of someone who I now know to be a NIMBY (despite the fact that the airfield has been there since WW2 and powered aircraft movements are normally less than 3 per day). He is around 400m in a virtual straight line off the end of the main runway. He subsequently complained about me - as far as I'm concerned, I was complying with an ATC instruction (and Rule 5 applied anyway), plus there is no 'formal' instruction to visiting pilots to avoid this particular housing estate.
IMHO, having to initiate any avoidance turns <500 ft AAL endangers the safety of the aircraft and as captain, that is my primary concern. I will comply as far as possible with local noise abatement procedures, but primary responsibility is to aviate; secondary concern is to navigate!!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few years, I was in the flying school, one Saturday morning at about 8.30am. The Ops staff were busy & all the phones were ringing, so I answered one, just to help out.
Irate Lady: "I wish to complain about the noise from a low flying helicopter"
Me: "Please hang on a moment, while I check if it could be one of ours"
I check the movements board.
Me: "Well the only one of our helicopters that is likely to be in your area today, is one that is leaving here at 10.00am, to give pleasure flights at xxxxx Country Show, but at the moment, I can see that it is still on the ground here"
Irate Lady: "Yes that's the one. I have seen the posters for the show, so I am phoning up to complain, in advance"
Irate Lady: "I wish to complain about the noise from a low flying helicopter"
Me: "Please hang on a moment, while I check if it could be one of ours"
I check the movements board.
Me: "Well the only one of our helicopters that is likely to be in your area today, is one that is leaving here at 10.00am, to give pleasure flights at xxxxx Country Show, but at the moment, I can see that it is still on the ground here"
Irate Lady: "Yes that's the one. I have seen the posters for the show, so I am phoning up to complain, in advance"
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL. Quality.
The only complaint I have about local traffic (mostly Sywell stuff) is that they don't do aeros near enough to my village, the spoilsports keep it too far West. Still, they'd be risking the occasional sudden meeting with an F-15 or Tornado if they went much further to the South-East, so I can understand their reticence.
The only complaint I have about local traffic (mostly Sywell stuff) is that they don't do aeros near enough to my village, the spoilsports keep it too far West. Still, they'd be risking the occasional sudden meeting with an F-15 or Tornado if they went much further to the South-East, so I can understand their reticence.