Guest SAJabiruflyer Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Here is the Response to my Email from Council... Mr Thank you for your comments relating to the Jaspers Brush Airport Action Group website. The issues raised have been noted and your email has been placed on the relevant file. You would appreciate that Council has no control over the contents on the abovementioned Jaspers Brush Airport Action Group website. Perhaps not all comments received are in the interests of this particular group. It is understood that the Jaspers Brush Airport Action Group is seeking legal action in the NSW Land and Environment Court with the ultimate aim of closing down the Jaspers Brush airfield. The removal of certain comments from their website may be related in some way. I trust this information is of assistance. Peter Marczuk Senior Development Planner Development and Environmental Service Shoalhaven City Council Ph 4429 3528 Email: marczuk at shoalhaven.nsw.goc.au Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Im sorry top hear you wont suport an airfield because you dont intend on visiting it soon. Im not gay, but I suport gay rights, im not a woman but i believe in equality, and I may never fly at your airfield, but id certainly help defend YOUR right to fly there..:) Cheers and thanx for your input It's not about not intending to fly there, but more about not knowing anything about the airfield. All I know is there are always 2 sides to each story. Your opponents are presenting your airfield as a danger and nuisance to society, you say that's all great, and no reasons for a change. As always, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, although with what I've seen so far from the other group, probably closer to your version. There's that and also I'm not a believer in Facebook activism, seen too many of different groups presenting great ideas, begging for likes, just to turn out something cheap and awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Very democratic Zibi, any pressure on your airfield? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Very democratic Zibi, any pressure on your airfield? To be honest I'm not sure. I know there were people complaining about the noise, and now there are some no fly zones declared around the airfield, but I can't honestly say how much pressure there is. I know there were some new houses built around the airfield, and those people are not particularly happy about us buzzing above them, but I have no idea how far they take it. Obviously nothing as serious as at Jaspers Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 [ATTACH=full]20695[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]20696[/ATTACH] I see the maximum noise recorded there is 75 dBA Just so people have a fair comparison, here are the drive-by noise limits for Motor Vehicles called up in Australian Design Rule 28/01 (all specified in dBA): MB Passenger Car 80 MC Passenger Car 80 MD Light Bus 82 ME Heavy Bus 86 NA Light Truck 79 NB Medium Truck 86 MC Heavy Truck 87 Vehicles with these noise levels are permitted WITHOUT RESTRICTION in: Residential Zones Industrial Zones Retail Zones So firstly there is no foundation to any objection based on the noise levels recorded at this airfield. Secondly, the dBA scale is exponential, that is 87 dBA is not 22% louder than 75 dBA, but SUBSTANTIALLY louder, or putting it in context, these aircraft are making a lot less noise than legal road traffic. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Thanx to all for all your suport. Its fantastic to see we are still prepared to look out for each other. we all appreciate your help. Zibi, im not going to turn this positive thread into a sh!tfight, but I will say this. No body has begged for likes, if you read my original post I asked people to read and offer their opinions. I am no fan of FB pages either, but when fighting a war, we cant afford to let the opposition have a battle front all to themselves, and by utterly destroying their arguments with facts and presenting them with overwhelming response from people in favor, then perhaps we could demoarlise them a bit and make them less likely to start propaganda in the future. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I thank you for sharing yours. I hope your airfield remains open, and I hope you never live close enough to be one of the 'complainers' as I suspect you would be judging by comments you have posted here. Im reminded of one of our proponents, he is a members of the group and offers himself as an 'aviation expert'. he is a Qantas FO (career FO, he must have bummed his command). He is boisterous and outspoken against the airfield. And yet, he uses it quite regularly to fly his RV in and out. :) Im often asked why I dont abuse him and tell him he's not welcome. The answer is, he's a flyer, he may be misguided, but when hes in an aeroplane he is one of us, and I will never turn a flyer away. Regardless of how I feel about them personally. (that and the fact I like the obvious tension he feels when ever he has to talk to me...Lol...it makes my day..:) 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I see the maximum noise recorded there is 75 dBAJust so people have a fair comparison, here are the drive-by noise limits for Motor Vehicles called up in Australian Design Rule 28/01 (all specified in dBA): MB Passenger Car 80 MC Passenger Car 80 MD Light Bus 82 ME Heavy Bus 86 NA Light Truck 79 NB Medium Truck 86 MC Heavy Truck 87 Vehicles with these noise levels are permitted WITHOUT RESTRICTION in: Residential Zones Industrial Zones Retail Zones So firstly there is no foundation to any objection based on the noise levels recorded at this airfield. Secondly, the dBA scale is exponential, that is 87 dBA is not 22% louder than 75 dBA, but SUBSTANTIALLY louder, or putting it in context, these aircraft are making a lot less noise than legal road traffic. Just to make it really fair comparison (and again I'm risking as to appear on the opposite side of the fence) those noise levels for a car are recorded at under 1 meter from the exhaust pipe, whereas the plane noise level is probably some 1000', at least that's what I would class as a fly over. And while a noise level may be legal for a single car if you try putting couple of those trucks on some previously quiet suburban street, you'll have way more complaints than this airfield is getting. Again, I'm not supporting those protesters, but we have to accept that an airfield is one of those places that most people would like to have one close by, just not too close, just like a highway, school, shopping center, stadium, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 You're not just risking it Zibi, I'd say you are out to do some damage. The Motor Vehicle figures I quoted are permissible 7.5 metres from a residence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Just to make it really fair comparison (and again I'm risking as to appear on the opposite side of the fence) those noise levels for a car are recorded at under 1 meter from the exhaust pipe, whereas the plane noise level is probably some 1000', at least that's what I would class as a fly over.And while a noise level may be legal for a single car if you try putting couple of those trucks on some previously quiet suburban street, you'll have way more complaints than this airfield is getting. Again, I'm not supporting those protesters, but we have to accept that an airfield is one of those places that most people would like to have one close by, just not too close, just like a highway, school, shopping center, stadium, etc. I don't accept that. I live against three schools. I once owned a residence on an aerodrome. Many of us prefer activity as compared with a stiflingly quiet suburban street where you can't fart without the neighbour listening in, let alone have a "domestic" with the female co-habitor. The price willingly paid for each and every block of real estate transacted around Jaspers Brush at any time during the last thirty eight years has, one might reasonably think, included the purchaser's assessment, in dollar terms, of the positives and negatives of having the airfield in the neighbourhood. This sounds as if someone has made a financial bet on gaining advantage, and has backed him/herself to be able to shut the show down. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 And for the record as a rough rule of thumb, the 'volume' doubles each 3dBA increase in sound pressure level. So there is a huge difference in perceived volume from 75 dBA to 80 dBA. Ambient noise within the average home is around 65 dBA. Close the doors inside your car and the ambient within the car is around 65 dBA. What really ticks me off are those that build or buy near an airfield and then complain about aircraft noise and try and close the airfield. Would they get away with the same stunt on a rail line or the main road ... of course not. They are so hypocritical. There just happens to be a main rail line right along side Jaspers ... are they trying to close that line down as well? Motz, do any freight trains come through there at night? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Im not sure David. The passenger trains are pretty loud as they are diesel, theres no electricity on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 a rough rule of thumb, the 'volume' doubles each 3dBA increase in sound pressure level. That rule is a bit rough, David - more exactly it is 3.010 dB 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 You're not just risking it Zibi, I'd say you are out to do some damage.The Motor Vehicle figures I quoted are permissible 7.5 metres from a residence. No, I'm not, I just try to get my facts straight before I get involved in someone else's battle. Now I'm no sound expert, but quick google shows me that 86dB measured at 1m from the source equals to about 68.5 dB at 7.5 m and now you can see that the aircraft noise can be a bit higher than that of a truck. Nong, the things I've listed were just examples, and up to personal preference, you may not mind having a school, but there sure will be something you can apply. David and Nong I guess the fault can be spread between the people that have bought the houses, the developer and real estate agents. It may have been that those people weren't aware how much noise comes out of an airfield, it may have been that they were only shown the houses at times when there was little activity at the field or maybe they're just a kind of people, that like to ruin someone else's day. I know I've been in a similar boat, when I bought my first car - it has had a modified exhaust, and since it's been my first car and I haven't been driving for quite a while before I've bought it I didn't really notice it at first, I even thought it sounded nice, especially when just driving around the town. But take it on a motorway for an hour or 2 at constant revs, and it gets unbearable, suffice to say, the exhaust got changed to a standard exhaust and now it's nice and quiet. The problem is when you invest a substantial amount of money into something it's hard to accept, that you've just been, I'd say conned, but that may be a too strong word, but at least stuck in a bad situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 What the hell happened to 'due diligence' and 'buyer beware'. We all have the blame mentality these days and are not prepared to be responsible for our own decisions. How could any intelligent person see an airfield next to their land and think it would not affect them in some way ... pllleeease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Just to make it really fair comparison (and again I'm risking as to appear on the opposite side of the fence) those noise levels for a car are recorded at under 1 meter from the exhaust pipe, whereas the plane noise level is probably some 1000', at least that's what I would class as a fly over.And while a noise level may be legal for a single car if you try putting couple of those trucks on some previously quiet suburban street, you'll have way more complaints than this airfield is getting. Again, I'm not supporting those protesters, but we have to accept that an airfield is one of those places that most people would like to have one close by, just not too close, just like a highway, school, shopping center, stadium, etc. The majority of houses at Jaspers Brush are closer to the Princes Highway than they are to the airfield, the nearest houses to the airfield are all with in 400m of the train tracks, there are 18 regular trains that pass the location per day ranging between 5am and 9pm running roughly every hour (this includes to and from Nowra-Bomaderry Train Station), trains are noisy, no houses are under the approaches to any runway, no houses with in around 1km of the airfield. As per the links provided on the previous page, 80 flights per month is less than 3 flights per day. Noise from the airfield is certainly not an issue, and the facts already highlighted in this thread are additional proof of this. If noise were truly an issue, these people would be wanting the trains relocated or removed and the highway also relocated or removed. Stats Traffic: Highway - Thousands vs: Trains - 18 vs: Flights - 3 Operation Hours: Highway - 24 hrs vs: Trains - 5am-9pm vs: Airfield - Daylight Hours Distances: Highway - 50 metres to 1km vs: Trains - 50m to 400m vs: Airfield - All over 1km away The clear issue is that a selfish group of people with nothing better to do are trying to shut down a long standing airfield that benefits the local economy (I visit the Shoalhaven region specifically to visit Jaspers Brush Airfield and intend to do so on a regular basis over the course of this year, and in doing so, this year I will spend approx $7000 directly supporting businesses in the Shoalhaven region). All aviators of all locations should be in support of protecting a vital part of our aviation community; if airfields of all sizes slowly disappear, eventually you and every other pilot will have no where to fly. Then what? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 What the hell happened to 'due diligence' and 'buyer beware'.We all have the blame mentality these days and are not prepared to be responsible for our own decisions. How could any intelligent person see an airfield next to their land and think it would not affect them in some way ... pllleeease. If you haven't spent a substantial amount of time at an airfield, you may imagine a small recreational airfield as a place where a plane or 2 land and take off a day, not a place where you have planes doing circuits from 6 am on a weekend with up to 5 planes in a circuit (just an observation from the airfield I fly out of, as I've mentioned earlier, I have no knowledge about Jaspres Bush). The majority of houses at Jaspers Brush are closer to the Princes Highway than they are to the airfield, the nearest houses to the airfield are all with in 400m of the train tracks, there are 18 regular trains that pass the location per day ranging between 5am and 9pm running roughly every hour (this includes to and from Nowra-Bomaderry Train Station), trains are noisy, no houses are under the approaches to any runway, no houses with in around 1km of the airfield. As per the links provided on the previous page, 80 flights per month is less than 3 flights per day. Noise from the airfield is certainly not an issue, and the facts already highlighted in this thread are additional proof of this. If noise were truly an issue, these people would be wanting the trains relocated or removed and the highway also relocated or removed.Stats Traffic: Highway - Thousands vs: Trains - 18 vs: Flights - 3 Operation Hours: Highway - 24 hrs vs: Trains - 5am-9pm vs: Airfield - Daylight Hours Distances: Highway - 50 metres to 1km vs: Trains - 50m to 400m vs: Airfield - All over 1km away The clear issue is that a selfish group of people with nothing better to do are trying to shut down a long standing airfield that benefits the local economy (I visit the Shoalhaven region specifically to visit Jaspers Brush Airfield and intend to do so on a regular basis over the course of this year, and in doing so, this year I will spend approx $7000 directly supporting businesses in the Shoalhaven region). All aviators of all locations should be in support of protecting a vital part of our aviation community; if airfields of all sizes slowly disappear, eventually you and every other pilot will have no where to fly. Then what? Now that makes the story much clearer and I guess those are just people with nothing better to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Yes, im afraid this discussion with Zibi has steered away from the matter at hand. The group are taking us to court claiming that our consent was granted illegally by council. It has nothing to do with noise levels. The noise has been ONE of the groups sticks they use to bash us. But when the noise study proved it was not even classed as nuisance noise they moved on to other areas. They claim that because the hangars didnt have DA they were unsafe etc. They have changed their tack several times. I really dont know exactly what the issue is because they have never ever not ever approached us about it. Preferring to go straight to council and the print media with their defamation's. Zibi, I have one last thing for you. Where will you fly if there are no airfields left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Zibi, I have one last thing for you. Where will you fly if there are no airfields left? Well, I either wouldn't or look for a place further away from a city...although the way big cities are developing right now if it's within a reasonable driving distance from a big city, there will be housing development in there soon. Just to put everyone at ease - I did like the FB page now, it's just that the first post in this thread, sounded to me like - they've got a "burn the witch mob", we need a "don't burn the witch mob", get on board people. After it was explained that it actually has a proper purpose and it's not a "don't burn the witch mob" I can get behind it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentreau Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Zibi, I have to say your comments amaze me. Are you really a pilot? I don't live on the other side of the country, I live on the other side of the world, yet I am prepared to support Jaspers Brush for exactly the reason quoted by Motz above. "Where will we fly when there are no airfields left" I personally don't want to have to land at a strip which is 10 miles from civilization, just because my engine noise might p*ss off someone. One day I will be in Australia and I will be sure to visit Jaspers Brush, assuming it's still open. If it's not then the local community will not be seeing any of my cash as I would have no other reason to go there. OK, if you're unsure about the particular issues, then stay out of it, rather than disrupt this thread with posts which sound like you have sympathy with the people attacking this airstrip. You must feel some conviction in that direction otherwise why would you go to the effort of posting ? . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Motzie ... the bastards have blocked me, I made one comment about their ridiculous claim of 80 movements a month as 'intensification' and pointed out that was only 2.66 movements per day based on a 30 day month. Now my post has been deleted and I cannot post. Don't you just love procedural fairness ... sounds like the Executive of RA Aus. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Yes. They have removed all my post's with the noise assessment and flood study 'evidence' aswel. And im blocked aswel. Its ok, im pretty sure the battle is over. Theres no new info on there, any one watching the page would have gotten the message. Now its time for stage 2. Im going to get our entire club to write to 'Joanna Gash' the mayor as per JBAAGs request. Im going to make sure the FB saga is brought to the attention as point in case for the groups deception and lies. I encourage any one else who felt it dodgy to do the same. The real clincha for many is the fact that the club is not for profit. We have no money and this group know that and are hoping that we cant afford to defend ourselves. They have alot of sydney money (weekend holiday farmers) and the tactic is to basically starve us out. Pretty low really when you think about it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 That would be a good story for a local journalist. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocketing Posted February 12, 2013 Author Share Posted February 12, 2013 Freight trains: There are several every week from 00:00 - 4:00 am . Trust me. I live a few km away from the railway line and it makes a big noise and I sometimes wake up from it. (Yes, I like to sleep with an open window) It would be great to see the noise complaints against that :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I don't understand why a fellow aviator would make half a dozen posts about this issue trying to defend this action group... Pretty stunned actually... and when the arguments are pointed out as not valid... would actually take the time to research and attempt badly to defend the position. Not welcome at all in my life... Bloody incredible really!!! I guess this is the sort of BS you guys are up against... A very selfish and self righteous attitude based upon what it best for ME ME ME regardless.... In fact this sort of BS is a problem for society as a whole these days. Well done whoever you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 After it was explained that it actually has a proper purpose and it's not a "don't burn the witch mob" I can get behind it. Best not to comment on something so eagerly when you don't know what you are posting about... I certainly appreciate the explanation but would appreciate it if you would do your research BEFORE posting next time or you could do some real damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now