Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Maintaining Obsticle Limitation Surfaces  
User currently offlineRendezvous From New Zealand, joined May 2001, 543 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

In one of my final papers for my aviation degree I'm taking airport planning. The question has come up, what can the airport do to keep the obsticle limitation areas free from obstructions? I had a think about it, and I couldn't really come up with too many answers apart from the obvious of owning the land around the airport.

Any ideas?

3 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineDeltamike172 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1635 times:

Well, perhaps sometime I, or someone else, will go in depth in regard to the aviation law side of things. There have been many lawsuits and precendent set that allows the various governments to enact land use zoning laws. These laws are based on Dept. of Transportation standards set that require certain distances from an airport to remain clear of certain obstacles that are certain hieghts. Basically, once an airport has claimed residency in an area, anything built above a certain height within a distance of the field is required to obtain a permit subject to the limits of the DOT guidelines. The owner of the airport is also required to purchase land to the extent necessary to create an "easement" between the airport and other land and structures.

So, to clearify, when building a new airport, it is the airport's responsibility to find an area where existing obstructions won't interphere with flight operations. After the airport finds a home, it is then everyone elses responsibility to not get in the way of aircraft. If someone wanted to build a 500 foot tower near an airport, they would be required to get a permit to build, which would not allow them to build it in the flight path of arrivals and departures, or far enough away that it wouldn't get in the way during a normal glide path.

There are a few key court cases that will both entertain you and help you write your paper. The main one that I can think of is one involving Pittsburgh and a family who owned a house at the end of one of the runways the airport built (when the current KPIT was FIRST built). See what you can dig up.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1616 times:

Typically an airport operator has an "Airport Land Use Commission/Group/Agenecy etc..." responsible for ensuring compatible growth around an airport and it's approach paths. The most gross example I know of can be observed at San Diego. Up until recently, the Land Use Commission was a run by a different agency than the agency charged with operating the airport. As a result, you had competing agencies approving use of land. This resulted in incompatible growth around SAN and the other airports in San Diego county over the years. From what I've read, the change has caused quite the stir as the San Diego Airport Authority now not only controls land use around SAN, but also the military bases and all the other airports in the County. The cities associated with the airports have been pitching a fit over project rejections that are incompatible with the associated airports claiming the Authority has "Overstepped its Authority". I say too bad.




The FAA doesn't do much to help the situation. I've ssen form letters over the years that read: "The approval of use resides with the local land use agency in the region, the FAA has no concerns over the proposed project. Please contact them for additional approvals. The later part being the problem. They always point out "the FAA says it's okay". Nice huh???

I'd just once like to see a letter like this:

Dear Idiot Developer,

There's an airport with an active approach and departure path over your proposed development. As such, there are inherent risks with your project, namely the safety of those in the air and on the ground. On occassion, aircraft do crash, statistically such incidents are more likely to occur within a 5 mile perimeter of said airports every 15-20 years. It has been 25 years since the last such incident at the airport in question. Please consult your insurance company for project approval.

Thank you,


[Edited 2006-03-08 01:59:03]

User currently offlineRendezvous From New Zealand, joined May 2001, 543 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1590 times:

Alright thanks for your replies, they're both helpful.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Maintaining Obsticle Limitation Surfaces
No username? Sign up now!

Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Fabric Control Surfaces? posted Wed Nov 1 2006 03:38:16 by 3DPlanes
What Point Control Surfaces Ineffective posted Fri Aug 4 2006 22:17:25 by Sean1234
Toronto Crash Update News - Limitation On Claims? posted Thu Nov 17 2005 11:35:14 by Julesmusician
Movable Control Surfaces On MD-90 Engine Pylons posted Sun Oct 16 2005 22:59:08 by 2H4
A330 Control Surfaces posted Tue Apr 5 2005 13:20:50 by Night Hawk
Forces On Flight Surfaces posted Sat Jan 22 2005 04:32:01 by Jfkaua
Beech 1900d - Vertical Surfaces posted Fri Aug 27 2004 08:27:57 by DeskPilot
Maintaining That Centreline posted Sat Oct 4 2003 01:58:00 by Tarzanboy
Control Surfaces On The Wing posted Tue Sep 16 2003 18:35:39 by DIJKKIJK
Deice Boots Vs. Heated LE Surfaces. posted Sun Jan 12 2003 06:39:55 by Mirrodie

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format