Gamps From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 469 posts, RR: 1 Posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3851 times:
San Jose City has reached agreement with FAA to allow planes to use San Jose airport at night as long as they do it quietly. For those who are not aware, Oracle Corp's CEO Larry Ellison Ellison successfully argued that his private Gulfstream V jet, which weighed more than 75,000 pounds, was quieter than many non-commercial aircraft that were exempt from the curfew.
Not sure if any airliner would be interested to operate any new flights at night.
Cheers
Source: San Jose Mercury News
Airport changes curfew policy
AIRCRAFT BAN TO BE BASED ON NOISE, NOT SIZE
By Rodney Foo
Mercury News
Airplanes now will be allowed to use San Jose airport at night as long as they do it relatively quietly, according to an agreement between the city and the Federal Aviation Administration.
Until now, airplanes were banned from the airport between 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. based on their size, not the amount of noise they make. The plan unveiled Wednesday means that residents will be protected from loud planes flying overhead late at night, and owners of certain kinds of large planes, like Oracle chief Larry Ellison's, will no longer need to seek curfew exemptions.
The plan was sparked by a court case brought by the jet-plane owner that transports the SaberCats arena football team. The owner claimed that the city's curfew is arbitrary and discriminatory, and a judge is scheduled to consider the matter in three weeks.
Under the new rules, planes that exceed an average of 89 decibels will not be allowed to land or takeoff at Mineta San Jose International Airport during curfew hours. Until now, aircraft that weighed more than 75,000 pounds -- no matter how quiet they were -- had been barred from using the airport. In determining the noise of a plane, the FAA measures at various distances and takes into consideration how long the noise lasts. Other sounds of roughly 89 decibels include a hand-held hair dryer or a power lawn mower.
The changes also allow the city to levy a $2,500 fine against violators, beefing up its power to enforce the curfew.
Mayor Ron Gonzales praised the new rules saying it ``protects the peace of neighborhoods'' and ``prevents the possible elimination of our curfew.''
Officials acknowledged that the new rules open the possibility that more commercial airlines could fly into San Jose during curfew hours. But that is unlikely because airlines would have to purchase multimillion-dollar planes that meet the noise limit, said airport director Ralph Tonseth and John Hesler, an environmental consultant hired by the airport.
To residents who live under the airport's flight approach, the existing program had become something of a sieve with a growing number of aircraft owners trying to obtain curfew exemptions, most notably billionaire Oracle chief Larry Ellison, who fought the curfew in federal court and won.
In the aftermath of Ellison's victory, Horta LLC, which flies the SaberCats on its Boeing 727, sought an exemption. Horta is connected to the team's owner, the Fry family of Fry's Electronics.
Horta contends its plane falls within the Stage 3 category. City officials contend the Horta plane is still too loud.
In response to Horta's request, the city council passed a moratorium on exemptions in April 2002 that is still in place. Horta took its case to federal court. Judge Jeremy Fogel in June warned the city it must make a decision on Horta's request by a Oct. 27 hearing or risk seeing the curfew ruled invalid.
The city council is scheduled to adopt the new curfew rules at its Oct. 21 meeting.
The impending court date was ``very critical'' in hastening discussions, Gonzales said. ``I think its very important. We took his decision very seriously.''
The effect of the new rules on Horta's case isn't clear, said Horta's attorney, James Chadwick.
``We'll know more when we see the city's actual text of the proposed ordinance,'' he said.
Chadwick also questioned whether the FAA's written approval of the city's plan represented its final decision.
``If it's not the final order,'' the FAA ``could revise it,'' Chadwick said.
For those affected by the noise, the changes were welcome.
``Well, certainly the complaints have always been about the noise, not how big the plane was, so I think it's progress,'' said Chip Evans, who helped organize a grass-roots organization that unsuccessfully opposed the expansion of the airport.
Changing the criteria to noise instead of weight not only rescues residents from noise but also makes the regulations easier to understand, Gonzales said.
``I am just thrilled with this agreement with the FAA,'' said Councilman Ken Yeager, who includes the neighborhoods beneath the airport approach. ``I just really, really see this as a huge step not just for us but for other communities across the U.S.'' that are coping with airport noise.
The new regulations allow roughly 10 aircraft that already have exemptions to continue flying during curfews.
Theiler From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 633 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3751 times:
"The changes also allow the city to levy a $2,500 fine against violators, beefing up its power to enforce the curfew."
Good luck with this.. I would be shocked to see this stand up, seeing as how civil aviation is governed by the FAA.. A federal agency. You will find all kinds of pilots who break the noise reg. in order to assure safe take off/climb out... besides, who the heck is San Jose to tell them how to fly an aeroplane
Gamps From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 469 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3718 times:
Well, I live in the neighbourhood near airport and once we had a flier asking us to report any noisy takeoff/landing during curfew hours. We were also asked to note down the time and then goto sjc.org -> Community Services -> Flight Tracking and then see which flightid was there.
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3410 posts, RR: 50 Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3657 times:
Good luck with this.. I would be shocked to see this stand up, seeing as how civil aviation is governed by the FAA.. A federal agency.
According to the article: {according to an agreement between the city and the Federal Aviation Administration} the FAA has already agreed to the new program. It appears to be patterned after SNA's noise program which has withstood multiple legal attacks for many years remaining intact throughout.
You will find all kinds of pilots who break the noise reg. in order to assure safe take off/climb out...
There are probably exemptions for emergencies (i.e. SNA).
...besides, who the heck is San Jose to tell them how to fly an aeroplane
The owner/operator of the airport.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7696 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3551 times:
I think the reason why SJC is changing its policy is the fact they very well know with the coming of ICAO Stage IV noise limits in 2006, airliners that meet Stage IV will be very quiet indeed even with the MTOW over 75,000 lbs.
Indeed, the Gulfstream V and Bombardier Global Express probably already meet Stage IV criteria as of today. I believe that the IAE V2500-powered A320's JetBlue (B6) flies are already Stage IV compliant, which means B6 could get the authority for late-night takeoffs from SJC for possible direct flights to LGB or JFK.
Dc863 From Denmark, joined Jun 1999, 1554 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3511 times:
Boy imagine the furor if you flew a Trident or RR Conway powered 707 out one night. Or for that matter flew a 727-100 on approach using 40 degrees flap.