Welcome!
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Meeting to address airport issues - Daily Inter Lake: News

Login to DailyInterLake.com

Subscribers Click Here

Non Subscribers Click Here

Meeting to address airport issues

Mayor says she wants all facts on the table

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:00 am

A strong contingent of Kalispell residents aired concerns Monday over noise and safety issues surrounding proposed expansion of the Kalispell City Airport.

Their appearance during the City Council work session was the latest of many begun months ago by Steve Eckels in his bid for quiet skies over his neighborhood.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login Now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

Choose an online service.

    Current print subscribers

      You must login to view the full content on this page.

      Thank you for reading 5 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 5 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 406-755-7000 . You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

      Have an online subscription?

      Login Now

      Need an online subscription?

      Subscribe

      Login

      Choose an online service.

        Current print subscribers

          More about

          Welcome to the discussion.

          9 comments:

          • treasurestate posted at 10:55 am on Fri, Oct 30, 2009.

            treasurestate Posts: 41

            “QUIET SKIES HAS joined a website called I-NEGHBOR., where they have posted a lot of valuable information under links and documents. Folks can continue discussions, ask questions, post events / mtgs on the calendar and develop polls . You can use your name or remain anonymous.

            The more residents, discussion and information generated informs us all…and sends a message to our government officials about the importance of this issue to each of us. Please register your account at:
            http://www.i-neighbors.org/59901/QUIETSKIES

             
          • FightOrFlight posted at 1:49 pm on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            FightOrFlight Posts: 75

            Here is a link to Runways with all the answers to your questions.... if it come through the blog as pasted.... we'll see in a second.

            http://books.google.com/books?id=0tjKxekBaW4C&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=minimum+jet+runway+length&source=bl&ots=th5LeKsc62&sig=qPNjBQQ-8SAUHRzdKY54qtJeukM&hl=en&ei=N5_oSq2QD42yswOYkOHlCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CA0Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=minimum%20jet%20runway%20length&f=true

             
          • treasurestate posted at 12:59 pm on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            treasurestate Posts: 41

            Thanks for clarification on "executive jets " not flying in. (you clearly understand aviation more than I do) Still....I keep hearing that larger and louder planes are allowed on a B2 airport. So...are jets prohibited on a B2? How do we find out what is actually allowed and how loud they could be? Any ideas?

             
          • Rebel Rouser posted at 12:51 pm on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            Rebel Rouser Posts: 1564

            FightOrFlight said: "Obviously this is a personality fight for some folks". Mr. Flight Maybe you don't know Fred, but the city council sure does, and they listen to his FAA talk like it is real, so no matter what you say, you cannot discount (a public servants) rude interaction with the public he serves as a non issue. He made it what it is and many do not participate in the airport at all (anymore) because of good old Fred. His attitude has had an impact on people who would vote for or against the airports future. BTW, there would not be much you could do or say about a similar situation on an army base or in the police dept. but Fred IS a public servant, no more, no less. As far as approaching the pilots, good luck getting any friendly response from them as their heads are way up in the clouds and their only concern is for themselves. The airport should be closed or the pilots should have to pay for everything, not the tax payers.

             
          • FightOrFlight posted at 11:15 am on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            FightOrFlight Posts: 75

            No matter what they say, there will be no executive jets landing at the airport even if the runway gets replaced with a 1000 foot longer one. Well maybe a real stupid executive jet pilot MIGHT try it once... but he will have to clean out his pants after scaring himself.
            All the jets will continue to go to Glacier. I would say after the smoke clears, the City will
            vote to extend the runway or leave it the way it is. I can't be sure but I would bet they never will close it. They have talked about it a dozen times in the past. In the mean time, pat your neighborhood pilot on the pants, (check for debris) and remind him you want
            friendlier flying at Kalispell City!

             
          • treasurestate posted at 10:53 am on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            treasurestate Posts: 41

            The proposed airport expansion has grown to a nearly $15-million project, for which the Federal Aviation Administration is willing to pick up 95 percent of the costs.“ So….. That means $750,000 that Kalispell pays. OUCH! What improvements to the airport can be done that could possibily justify that amount of city dollars during this recession? Is the highest priority for such a significant investment from local taxpayers? Who will actually receive the benefits?

            I'd like information on who is pushing the expansion. (Other than Liestiko) I know that there’s been a good amount of interest from speculative investors building hangars at the city airport (for lease) and also heard they’ve been “very good” investments. I’m sure that would only improve with the onset of executive jets arriving. There are so few fact s provided by Liestiko. "Looking at the plans" as he suggests doesn't help me. I want to know what the projected impact to our economy will REALLY be. There should be a study done by an economist…. and it needs to identify WHO will benefit. If it's just the airport businesses, speculators investing in hangars, fueling folks, flight school and the Hilton…sorry…not worth it. $750,000 in this economy.........needs to have the largest impact possible and not just for a "few".

            In my opinion, that type of sizeable investment would be far better leveraged paying for a community center and enhanced youth programs particularly for teens - who have next to nothing in terms of service and programs. The need is HUGE and seems to me would have greater community impact than improving the airport.

             
          • FightOrFlight posted at 9:58 am on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            FightOrFlight Posts: 75

            Obviously this is a personality fight for some folks, however no police department or army base ever got shut down because employees are flumducks and other folks hate them.

            Use at City Airport had its hay day with just as many operations as today back in the
            1970s and early 1980. Strand, Stockhill, Mountain West, and all the private users used it a lot until the depression of 1980 hit hard and general aviation use declined.

            Now the aviation economy has improved somewhat and those "quieter" years have been replaced by pilots who are pissing people off by not flying friendly. They need to improve or get reported to the FAA for busting minimums.

            Twisting the runway away from town make sense, unless the airport does not anymore.
            Limiting aircraft size and noise can be done, too. Lots of options. But making it a personality fight will get nothing done except more noise out some's mouth!


             
          • Rebel Rouser posted at 8:50 am on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            Rebel Rouser Posts: 1564

            I am a pilot and I use to fly out of S27 (Kalispell City airport) up until someone decided to ruin the airport (read Fred Liestiko) by turning it into an enemy koncentration kamp. He came on board (via fraudulent buddy buddy selection) and has reined with a heavy arrogant hand. He thinks he is a representative of the FAA and he creates his own rules that he thinks everyone must follow. Spending any public money to upgrade this "new improved" airport is an injustice to all tax payers as the money only supports a handful of elitist individuals who believe the world is here just for them. Build a nice park with the airport so we can all enjoy it or sell it to balance the city checkbook, but don't spend a nickle more on this political bamboozle. The noise is a secondary issue to the fact that this airport is not needed anymore. Also, the city could save thousands of tax payer dollars by ending the airport manager position. How much money could the city make if they turned this airport into a huge (indoor) mall?

             
          • FightOrFlight posted at 7:47 am on Wed, Oct 28, 2009.

            FightOrFlight Posts: 75

            We have a winner!  I believe one of you have stumbled on the cause of everyones’ concernation.
            Bad apples or in-attentive pilots, pilots who really need to practice safe approaches and landing techniques, plus review the number one rule of flying: BE ABLE TO LAND SAFELY from any position if you are unlucky enough and your engine conks out.
            It goes back to day one of student flying.  Stay within gliding distance of the runway at all times on approach.  So since the pattern altitude at CITY is 700’ AGL,  you cannot be hanging over the mall or the FHS at 80 knots and 700 feet.  You will not make it to the runway.
            Let’s make the flight instructors, Wings Instructors, Professional pilots and new private pilots mentor the rest of the flock to stay within a 1000 feet of the runway on downwind, turn base at 45 degrees passing the numbers on the intended runway you chose to land on, and do a semi steep approach with as little power as you need to glide in safely.
            This will reduce the noise complaints 100% and the low flying complaints 95%.
            The only aircraft over town should be helicopters and the rules for them are 1000 feet above a populated area: except for take off and landing, of course.  If all helicopter pilots added 500 feet to their town flying altitude and reduced power 20%, the land lubbers will really appreciate the difference.
            Of course, these rules all change when its you the one those noisy and low flying aircraft are searching for because you failed to show up for dinner.  WINK WINK!

             

          AP Montana