In response to an inquiry re the apparent increase in commercial aircraft noisily climbing out at low altitude from DCA REAGAN directly over: Mount Vernon, Manchester, Franconia, Springfield, Lorton, and then Burke - FAA provided the following response which contained links for making complaints.


From: 9-AWA-NoiseOmbudsman@faa.gov
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 8:03 AM
To:
Subject: RE: 12/22/15 - West Springfield

Hello, Thank you for your email concerning aircraft noise. I appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with our office and apologize for the delay in this response. I understand that aircraft noise may be disruptive and result in a variety of effects. The FAA has a long history of studying noise related effects in order to minimize them to the extent possible through research and development, and mitigation measures.



The FAA’s mission is to ensure the safe and efficient use of our nation’s navigable airspace. The agency does not have the authority to prohibit aircraft overflights of a particular geographic area unless the operation is unsafe, or the aircraft is operated in a manner inconsistent with Federal Aviation Regulations. In order to handle air traffic demands, runway configurations are used in accordance with runway selection criteria. Air Traffic's runway selection is based on several factors which include the following: runway availability, wind, weather, operational efficiency, and noise considerations.

Airports are responsible for their noise impact on the communities they occupy. Please contact the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority (MWAA) for more information on their noise abatement procedures and noise restriction hours. Here is the link to MWAA’s Aircraft Noise webpage, which includes information on how to contact their office: http://www.flyreagan.com/dca/reagan-national-aircraft-noise-information

Our office has received many complaints from people in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. regarding the noise from operations at DCA. MWAA has established an airport/community noise roundtable forum to discuss the concerns that community residents have over aircraft noise. The FAA has been in direct communication with representatives from MWAA concerning an increase in inquiries from residents around DCA and is supporting the roundtable. At the December roundtable meeting, the roundtable agreed upon a recommendation to MWAA for submittal to the FAA for further analysis. That recommendation and other information from the roundtable can be found at: http://www.flyreagan.com/dca/community-working-group.



More information about aviation noise is available on the Federal Aviation Administration website and the ASCENT NoiseQuest website: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/noise_emissions/airport_aircraft_noise_issues/

http://www.noisequest.psu.edu/



I realize that this response may not provide you with the desired relief from aircraft noise that you requested in your email message. However the FAA is continuing to manage the national airspace system in a safe and efficient manner while also continuing to develop measures to reduce noise from aircraft in the future.

Andrea S Freeburg
Assistant to the Noise Ombudsman
Federal Aviation Administration
Washington, DC

Interesting link to FAA radar where you can see DCA planes cutting across Fairfax at low altitude - but why don't the planes continue over the Potomac and turn toward the neighborhoods when they hit a higher altitude with less noise??

I love to get sausage links and pancakes at IHOP.

Today's Washington Post- Metro Section front page, 5 March, had lengthy article re the recent increase in DCA Reagan aircraft noise.

Dulles Airport experiencing the same problems. There is absolutely no consideration given to the impact of these cost saving (sic) measures. Any fool can calculate the shortest distance between two points and its impact on time & fuel costs and recalibrate flight paths.

it's been there making the SAME fucking noise since before your born

your so stupid

since it was built there have been initiatives to quiet planes - such as using softer bearings

everyone who has new land or new built complaining did not PAY for the privelage to complain

Here is the deal and how the FAA/Government works.

What is frustrating is the public is being told to get a planes tail number that is noisy and/or flying out of the standard air traffic pattern and call the tail number into the FAA for investigation.

This is such BS, how the hell is anyone able to get outside it time to get the tail number off a plane that is likely already passed your location and locate the tail number between the trees and up at 2000-3000+ feet.

What the FAA does have is a number of aircraft monitoring microphones that can and does track aircraft noise. Between the noise monitoring network and the aircraft radar, why the hell should the public do the FAA's job??

The other problem is the pilots are required to take direction from the Air Traffic Controllers. They are the traffic cops for airplanes. If the ATC's tell a plane to turn at a specific point, the pilots pretty much need to follow the ATC's lead.

For reasons of tying to get late flights into the airport earlier, to avoid weather cells or just general sloppiness planes are far too often over residential areas they should not typically be over. I know where there is a FAA monitoring microphone mounted on a pole only a few blocks from my house, but how the data is used will surprise you.

Like any good spin doctors, the noise levels are AVERAGED in a way that the 3 or 4 very loud planes or the planes way off course are AVERAGED down by all the over air traffic in a 12 or 24 hour period. I do not recall the exact formula for the averaging, but when you see it you will understand how this does not do anything for residents near the flight path.

Rather than understanding that some planes are much louder than others, the Airport Authority should clearly limit these older/noisier planes to specific hours of operation in areas where they can and do disturb homeowners in the area.

For Reagan/DCA the FAA also implements an up river GPS take off guidance system that is supposed to keep airplanes over the river properly and for a longer period of time. An attempt to keep planes from veering off over houses while they are climbing. Not clear how well this system is working out and if it really helped with reducing aircraft take off noise. From what I see it is rather rare that the planes take off up river, tends to be due to the wind direction. I personally find that the down river airport approach noise is consistently louder and more annoying that the less frequent up river departures.

Directly from the Reagan National Airport site Noise Monitoring section.

"The primary objective of the noise monitoring system is to monitor historical trends experienced in neighboring communities as the result of aircraft and community noise contributions.

Federal rules prohibit real-time measured noise levels to be used to audit, investigate or enforce the DCA Nighttime Noise Rule. Please see DCA Nighttime Noise Rule for more details."

When Dulles opened, more flights were suppose to go in and out of Dulles and less from National. That was the case, until a politician decided it was too inconvenient to fly into Dulles and commute into town, so the ordinance or policy was revoked. Maybe what needs to be done is close National and/or restrict flights. The rich and powerful can be so self-serving.

jmtvc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> everyone who has new land or new built complaining
> did not PAY for the privelage to complain

You nailed it.

The airport was here long before most residents. If you moved next door to an airport You have ZERO right to complain about noise. Its called a preexisting condition.

approach isn't as much of a problem noise wise as th eplanes are generally throttling down and "coasting" for lack of a better term. Take-off is the bitch.


you can take off with less power, requiring longer runways which means the noise will be around for a longer period of time as the plane takes longer to climb out, or you can jam the throttles to the firewall and get the fuck out of town, faster but with more noise....

mjs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jmtvc Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > everyone who has new land or new built
> complaining
> > did not PAY for the privelage to complain
>
> You nailed it.
>
> The airport was here long before most residents.
> If you moved next door to an airport You have
> ZERO right to complain about noise. Its called a
> preexisting condition.
>
> approach isn't as much of a problem noise wise as
> th eplanes are generally throttling down and
> "coasting" for lack of a better term. Take-off is
> the bitch.
>
>
> you can take off with less power, requiring longer
> runways which means the noise will be around for a
> longer period of time as the plane takes longer to
> climb out, or you can jam the throttles to the
> firewall and get the fuck out of town, faster but
> with more noise....

People who complain about the noise of aircraft near DCA either have short memories or just moved here. I've lived on South 23rd Street in Arlington for 44 years. Back in the 70's, the planes were so noisy you couldn't talk to someone in the same room. Outdoor events had to be limited to late night or early morning hours due to the noise and pollution.

Today's aircraft are significantly quieter and cleaner than those of 40 years ago. Just stop complaining...

And in 20 years, aircraft will be driven by ion drives and the issue will become moot...errrr, mute?

mjs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> The airport was here long before most residents.
> If you moved next door to an airport You have
> ZERO right to complain about noise. Its called a
> preexisting condition.
>

That would be a lot of people. The airport opened June 16, 1941 just before US involvement into World War II. I wonder how many planes flew out back then and how loud they were compared to today?

causeican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> mjs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > The airport was here long before most residents.
>
> > If you moved next door to an airport You have
> > ZERO right to complain about noise. Its called
> a
> > preexisting condition.
> >
>
> That would be a lot of people. The airport opened
> June 16, 1941 just before US involvement into
> World War II. I wonder how many planes flew out
> back then and how loud they were compared to
> today?


All they had in 1941 was 2-engine piston planes like the DC-3. They are not very loud.

There probably weren't many flights a day either. Flying was for the rich (and daring) back then.

Huh??? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> People who complain about the noise of aircraft
> near DCA either have short memories or just moved
> here. I've lived on South 23rd Street in Arlington
> for 44 years. Back in the 70's, the planes were so
> noisy you couldn't talk to someone in the same
> room. Outdoor events had to be limited to late
> night or early morning hours due to the noise and
> pollution.
>
> Today's aircraft are significantly quieter and
> cleaner than those of 40 years ago. Just stop
> complaining...
>
> And in 20 years, aircraft will be driven by ion
> drives and the issue will become moot...errrr,
> mute?

Well played! [for the folks who don't get it, "mute" is a common mistake made when people mean "moot"]

We live less than 5 miles from IAD as the crow (or other airborne object) flies, but not in the normal glide path. Occasionally--usually after a blizzard, when only one runway is open--planes on final will come over the house. They aren't that loud, and (since it's rare) it's entertaining rather than irritating. If it happened all the time, we might be irritated--but we'd never have moved here.

I do have some sympathy for folks who buy houses that aren't a glide path and then a new runway opens and oops, all-day noise. But them's the breaks, and runways don't appear overnight so they might should have paid attention and sold out...

Greybeard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Huh??? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > People who complain about the noise of aircraft
> > near DCA either have short memories or just
> moved
> > here. I've lived on South 23rd Street in
> Arlington
> > for 44 years. Back in the 70's, the planes were
> so
> > noisy you couldn't talk to someone in the same
> > room. Outdoor events had to be limited to late
> > night or early morning hours due to the noise
> and
> > pollution.
> >
> > Today's aircraft are significantly quieter and
> > cleaner than those of 40 years ago. Just stop
> > complaining...
> >
> > And in 20 years, aircraft will be driven by ion
> > drives and the issue will become moot...errrr,
> > mute?
>
> Well played! [for the folks who don't get it,
> "mute" is a common mistake made when people mean
> "moot"]

Thanks for supporting my poor humor...;)

> We live less than 5 miles from IAD as the crow (or
> other airborne object) flies, but not in the
> normal glide path. Occasionally--usually after a
> blizzard, when only one runway is open--planes on
> final will come over the house. They aren't that
> loud, and (since it's rare) it's entertaining
> rather than irritating. If it happened all the
> time, we might be irritated--but we'd never have
> moved here.
>
> I do have some sympathy for folks who buy houses
> that aren't a glide path and then a new runway
> opens and oops, all-day noise. But them's the
> breaks, and runways don't appear overnight so they
> might should have paid attention and sold out...

While not impossible, I'd say it's highly improbable that DCA gets a new runway but your point is well taken at other airports.

The other thing I find interesting about DCA is that if it weren't there now, would the FAA ever agree to build that airport there? Absolutely not...especially not in the post-9/11 age. The flight paths in and out of there with the airspace restrictions, bridges close to the runways (AirFlorida anyone?) and short runways make this a very challenging approach and take-off even for the most experienced pilots flying today's equipment. And yet...DCA continues to operate. It's all about giving access to airservice to Congress.

https://youtu.be/iVQSic19w1g
Attachments:

The picture above and the following excerpt were posted in http://www.shorpy.com/node/17200

State of the art relics
Submitted by neil49 on Fri, 03/28/2014 - 4:17am.
When Washington National Airport (DCA) opened in 1941, it offered state of the art aircraft servicing facilities, designed to reduce ramp congestion and shorten turnaround times. Visible in this photo are service pits built into the ramp apron, in proximity to the aircraft's respective service points.

The right (pilot's perspective) landing gear of this DC-3 rests on a six-foot diameter turntable after being guided to this spot by pavement markings and a ground marshaller. This positioning allowed the aircraft to pivot (with the right wheel braked) for a smooth departure towards the taxiway, with minimal stress on the landing gear supported by the turntable.

When a DC-3 was thus parked, it was in the correct position to facilitate various servicing requirements (fuel, oil, electrical, cooling air, and communications, which included a pneumatic tube for written messages between crew and operations agents).

It was a good idea while it lasted, but the explosive growth of civil aviation in the post-war years, with attendant increase of aircraft types, rendered the system impractical, and in short order most servicing facilities were returned to mobile provision.

In areas of the ramp that haven't been completely repaved over the decades, a couple of these abandoned relics are still identifiable by various access doors and turntable plates. Perhaps they were intentionally left in place in keeping with the terminal's status on the National Register of Historic Places.