Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JFK Rwy31R Noise Abatement?  
User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 51
Posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 15574 times:

I don't understand why I never seem to see planes departing on 31R, which from what I understand is because of noise abatement.

There is nothing there for which to abate noise!!!!

LGA has houses all over near it, and they only divert traffic when the stuck up rich people at the US Open whine about it in late August.

What's the deal with JFK departures and noise abatement? Why 31L and not 31R?

Phil Derner Jr.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6534 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 15559 times:

Quite simple: 31L is 11,248 ft. long, while 31R is 8976 ft. long.
It makes most sense to use the longest runway for takeoffs.

About the noise abatement, you don't have to rich in order to have the right to protest if the noise levels grows to high. There ARE plenty of houses around JFK, and since the 31L Canarsie Climb departure almost at once takes you out over the oceans, it makes more sense, in my view, to use 31L over 31R.

User currently offlineEastCoast From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15544 times:

Phil -

LGA very rarely use RWY 22 for departures for the same reason.

User currently offlineJeff G From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 449 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 15519 times:

The departure procedures for 31L and 31R are the same: a left turn towards Canarsie. So there would be no point in sending traffic off of both runways if the traffic had to be staggered anyway. Typically, 31L is used for departures and 31R for arrivals. Also, there is little room for taxiing aircraft near the departure end of 31R, while there are long parallel taxiways leading to 31L. Looks like geometry more than noise is the issue.

User currently offlineFrequentflier From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 422 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 15506 times:

I think it might also have something to do with the restrictions put into place after the Belle Harbor crash last year. Apparently, they were going to get rid of most of the air traffic over that spot to ease peoples' worries.

User currently offlineH. Simpson From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 949 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 15498 times:

Frequentflier, even before the crash of AA587, Belle Harbor was always under the departure route of JFK. 31R is occasionally used for departure, but only limited to Saab 340 (American Eagle). After the departure, most Saab 340 are vectored toward NE bound byt the tower, so you won't be able to see their departures.

On 13R, it's whole other story! Big grin

User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (13 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 15488 times:

Simpson, sayign that Belle Harbor is under the departure route is like saying that planes should not fly over Ohio. Have you ever seen how high up the planes are by the time they reach Bele Harbor? The noise at that point is almost nil.

I'm not expert at measure altitude by sight, but those planes have to be at least 2 or 3 thousand feet up already. It takes the plane a couple minutes to even get over Belle Harbor.

East Coast, yes, granted for LGA Rwy22, but what about from August 26th to September 8th, during the US Open, when planes departing on 13 will be making a SHARP left turn upon liftoff and going directly over College Point (my town). THAT is because of the US Open people being rich.

Diverting air traffic from over 10,000 whiny rich people to go over a town over 100,000 instead?

Yeah, that sounds fair.

Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 15330 times:

I'm love to hear feedback in regards to the situation I posted i my previous post.


(This was moved here form Civil Aviation. I don't understnad how Noise Abatement is Tech Ops, I think this is as technical as airline peanuts, but oh well)

Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineJcxp15 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 997 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 15313 times:

Phil, it's simple. Us rich white folk do not particularly like the engine noise from airplanes, let alone at a tennis match while sitting there sipping our tea. You see, once you we leave the Upper East Side, we need to travel around with personal bodyguards in our Lincoln Towncars, because, frankly, the city has become too dangerous to get around alone. Getting back to the airplane noise, you see, it is more beneficial to have the airplanes affect the 100,000 so called "College Pointians" who live in shacks along the crime ridden streets, than affect the level of play at the US open, and the 10,000 people watching. This is the reason for the plane diversions. It's always such a task to enlighten the less "fortunate" people, but it gives me such a special feeling.

User currently offlineLeftypilot79 From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 455 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 15288 times:

Jcpx  Laugh out loud

That is very funny. And you know thats exactly how they feel too. Classisim....you have to love it.  Yeah sure


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic JFK Rwy31R Noise Abatement?
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 We Pilots Should Follow Noise Abatement Procs posted Fri Apr 9 2004 04:36:01 by Flyf15
IL 62 @JFK, Noise Reg? posted Wed Oct 8 2003 23:54:44 by Hush-kit
Airport Noise Restrictions. posted Sun Nov 26 2006 03:33:54 by HAWK21M
Noise After T/O On Airbuses posted Wed Sep 13 2006 03:19:54 by HighFlyer9790
B777 Noise Question posted Thu Aug 31 2006 16:21:25 by Dakota123
Runway Headings At EWR,JFK,LGA posted Wed Aug 9 2006 02:59:15 by Cs03
What's This Noise On Landing In A 777 posted Mon Aug 7 2006 03:59:39 by UAL747
Does Bypass Flow On A Turbofan Decrease Noise? posted Tue Jul 25 2006 08:01:33 by Bio15
P&W Waterfall Engine Noise On 757's posted Fri Jun 30 2006 21:42:08 by Rick
PW2000 Water Fall Noise posted Fri Jun 30 2006 18:44:24 by Rick

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format