60 replies to this topic

[Robert Gary]

 

I'm not saying they crash more at night.  The "potential crash" argument is more about the flight path chosen (over Folsom vs. over empty land to the south).  The "noise" argument is about, yes, the noise at night.  That is a fact (subjective perhaps, yet can be objectively measured in decibels).

 

Nothing irrational here, and no fears, just reactions to reality.  Why be an ostrich?

 

The area to the South has been annexed by the city and is planned for development. That doesn't solve an issue. Typically the ultimate goal is to move planes over poorer neighborhoods I suppose. 

 

-Robert

[Rich_T]

 

The area to the South has been annexed by the city and is planned for development. That doesn't solve an issue. Typically the ultimate goal is to move planes over poorer neighborhoods I suppose. 

 

-Robert

 

S50 would be a solution if the city didn't plan it for development, against the wishes of most residents.  And at least that way, potential homeowners would be forewarned of what was coming.  But why not even go South of S50, where the land is very empty?  Is there a logistical issue, or is it just too easy to keep up the status quo?

 

Planes already are over poorer neighborhoods in Rancho, surrounding Mather.  I don't think the Folsom/EDH part of the equation is about wealthy vs. poor neighborhoods - although it wouldn't hurt to hear what influential people would think if the planes were cruising low over their own homes non-stop in the wee hours.

[Robert Gary]

Which flight are you referring to? Looking at flights yesterday after midnight I only see one flight at 25,000 feet.  The full approach procedure keeps you only slightly North of hwy 50. ATC can vector aircraft inside of that for efficiency but I don't see evidence of them doing that.

 

ref: http://webtrak5.bksv.com/smf3

[Rich_T]

Which flight are you referring too? Looking at flights yesterday after midnight I only see one flight at 25,000 feet.  The full approach procedure keeps you only slightly North of hwy 50. ATC can vector aircraft inside of that for efficiency but I don't see evidence of them doing that.

 

ref: http://webtrak5.bksv.com/smf3

 

I am not keeping track of which nights bring which flights at which hours, however it happens frequently enough in my neighborhood, and probably more often in other neighborhoods, that we get the 4:00 AM low-flying noisy planes. I am located slightly N50.  At this point I really don't keep track - it used to be worse where I live, so I suppose it must have shifted to where other people live.  I have had the luxury of tolerating the occasional nighttime noise, but I remember how awful it was for about a year or so, about 10 years ago, when the flights started happening without warning.  If others are experiencing the same thing today, then it behooves me to advocate a ban on those early-morning arrivals on that flight path.

[Robert Gary]

If its just one occasional flight there is no guarantee that its even going to Mather. There are 4 airports in the Sac county system and numerous other airports around. In any case; none of this is affected by the improvements planned. 

[Rich_T]

If its just one occasional flight there is no guarantee that its even going to Mather. There are 4 airports in the Sac county system and numerous other airports around. In any case; none of this is affected by the improvements planned. 

 

Don't know.  I expect it's Mather based on the proximity and the fact that only cargo flights are happening at that hour.  If the "improvements" lead to more such flights, as is generally anticipated, then some people will be dealing with more noise.

[Rich_T]

P.S.  I only heard one flight this morning, but it was 4:32 AM and woke me up.  My point is, couldn't it have waited another couple of hours?  (Either way, it would probably also wake someone else up at the point of take-off.)  

 

Then again, a loud car engine started and ran at 4:45 AM, and my neighbor's loud outdoor cellphone conversation kicked in at 6:40 AM, so I guess I had to be up anyway.

[Robert Gary]

That was a UPS 767. Next day AM packages generally need to be sorted and delivered to the door by 8AM. 

 

The preferred procedure is to vector onto final slightly south of the approach. However, around that time Mather was reporting a low overcast. It looks like the 767 turned North over Folsom to intercept the localizer for the full approach. 

[Rich_T]

That was a UPS 767. Next day AM packages generally need to be sorted and delivered to the door by 8AM. 

 

The preferred procedure is to vector onto final slightly south of the approach. However, around that time Mather was reporting a low overcast. It looks like the 767 turned North over Folsom to intercept the localizer for the full approach. 

 

I love the details you are able to provide!

[nomad]

That was a UPS 767. Next day AM packages generally need to be sorted and delivered to the door by 8AM. 

 

The preferred procedure is to vector onto final slightly south of the approach. However, around that time Mather was reporting a low overcast. It looks like the 767 turned North over Folsom to intercept the localizer for the full approach. 

 

What's your vector Victor?

[4thgenFolsomite]

Keep in mind that the occasional 4:30 am fly-over would become a daily occurrence if we (meaning our city leaders) don't try to stop it.

[FolsomEJ]

It is daily.

[Howdy]

It is daily.

Yep...its been going on for well over 10 years. In fact 10 years ago there was probably a lot more of them. 

[4thgenFolsomite]

It is daily.

 

if it is already daily, what would it be like with an expansion?  I think of the Burbank airport and cringe when I think what could happen out there in 10, 15 or 20  years.