Simon Hobson

On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 22:34:51 +0100, Joe Harrison wrote
(in message <%jySh.7819$Wl2.1255@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>):

> OK, well I have no idea how far 500 feet actually is but these things look
> so low I just assumed they must be less. Maybe you are right then I will
> have to think about it. I work in a ten-storey building so I will ask our
> admin what the height is and see if I can imagine it from that.

As for your building, you should be able to get a reasonable estimate of
floor height, then multiply by ten !

> I actually quite like airplanes but it is just so annoying when you're in
> the garden pruning the squirrels and something goes belting overhead,

I agree, the noise can be very intrusive and noticably different between
aircraft. I try to be as considerate as I can when I'm flying, unfortunately
I think there are a significant number of pilots who've never even considered
it.

Something else you may be interested in, though it doesn't really help you.
There are in fact a number of well known ways to significantly reduce the
noise from small piston aircraft which are what most of these will be - but
the way the regulatory system is run makes them VERY expensive to fit, so
expensive that few owners would be able to afford it if they wanted to. I
personally know someone who imported a plane from Germany fitted with one of
these "hush kits" (different propellor and exhaust system) and replaced it
with standard parts (at a cost of about £3k IIRC) because the cost of having
it approved by the CAA would have been much higher. We are SUPPOSED to have a
unified regulatory system across Europe, and were supposed to have had when
this occurred.

When I part owned a plane I would have liked to have "done my bit" to reduce
my impact on those below, but with the costs involved I didn't even bother
raising the issue with the other 9 people as the cost, even when split 10
ways, would have been well past anything we could justify.


> When I talked to the CAA last year the guy asked what their registration
> numbers were so I wrote down a few and rang him back. I assumed it was like
> cars and police but in fact all he then did was tell me the postal address
> of the owners and told me to take it up with them.

Well if you can go along with evidence then they can be very hard on a pilot
- stories abound of their heavy handed approach. However, as someone else has
pointed out, experience shows that it's very difficult to judge height from
the ground - mostly because you have no frame of reference.


Someone has already suggested you pop along to the local airfield. I'd go
further and suggest that if you find a friendly club and explain who you
are/why you are there, then you'll almost certainly find people that will be
happy to take you up to see the situation from the air. I don't know what the
places down there are like, but I would hope that they'd be that friendly.


One final thing, hopefully to dispel one of the common myths - not all
aircraft owners are rich. To put it in perspective, some of those aircraft
flying overhead are worth as little as £15k - look along most streets and
you'll see plenty of cars in that sort of value range. My share of a plane
was worth about £4k, so less than most people have invested in their cars.
Yes there are MUCH more valuable aircraft, but as value goes up, numbers come
down. Running costs are a different matter of course :-(