03-21-2009, 02:35 PM
quote:That was discussed in length awhile back. The restrictions you are talking about were rescinded on Hawaii after the 2 year trial phase. It remains over the national parks and certain designated state historical sites. Be it apathy on the part of the residents, lack of understanding of the importance, or a failure of local politicians to get the word out, public comments was limited to a couple of people saying it was noisy. So based on the information the FAA received, the overwhelming majority of the comments was to remove flight restrictions over Puna.
Originally posted by riceflower
The pilots are not even obeying their orders to fly along the highways,to avoid disturbing residents. They believe they are an elite class, and do not have to follow the rules and regulations already in place. I am hoping the ACLU will become involved, and we can have a class action suit on behalf of subdivision residents, who are otherwise too poor to launch a case themselves.
The info I and I think you were talking about was the original flight restrictions that had specific routes to be followed and certain height restrictions along that route. The purpose was to keep air tour operators from areas by requiring them to fly designated routes. It was rescinded because it just didn't work and opposition was great. However since the FAA was finalizing the previous post linked procedures, the FAA decided to let things be as it was because the final plan was due out in 2008. The new plan did away with routes such as following the highways but does have identified areas that has minimum flight levels.
The ACLU isn’t the organization it’s the Sierra Club. They did make an attempt but erred in citing safety and that was shot down by independent flight experts. They hopefully will resurrect the fight and this time maybe use the right arguments based on the successes of others.