Cubreporter (Cubreporter)
Moderator
Username: Cubreporter
Post Number: 78
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 8:36 pm: | |
January 7, 2008
Reader Feedback
There are 8 comment(s) comments on this story:
annonymous wrote on Jan 7, 2008 7:04 AM:
" Oh, and pollution is the other item. Any of us with decks (or sidewalks!) can attest to the increase of spent jet soot. A little wash down (oops, forgot the water police!) and see the increase in black stuff. What a farce this article is! "
Mark J. wrote on Jan 6, 2008 4:17 PM:
" I don't care if the noise level is the same. It's still LOUD! The second to last sentence of the article is the key issue. If JW Airport is allowed to grow, the frequency in takeoffs and landing will increase. I've resigned myself to a certain number of jets. But if that number of jets goes up, it's a directly proportional reduction in the amount of peace and quiet that we can enjoy. My blood pressure is already high. John Wayne management should consider how to be a better neighbor by stopping growth. "
Randy Seton wrote on Jan 6, 2008 3:07 PM:
" To bad we don't get to have noise level monitors on Balboa Island! The one or two decibels also have a relation to high and low db sound waves that cause vibration (like bass and treble or EQ on your stereo). I have noticed more things rattleling in the house. So, its not all about audible loudness. The comments from the neighbors have been, "Wow! that flight must have a full load, you can feel the rumble".
I will also call airport propaganda on this report. "
Concerned wrote on Jan 6, 2008 1:08 PM:
" I remember when airport officials promoted the hope noise would be REDUCED, because airlines would be buying newer airplanes with quieter engines. What they failed to mention is that the increase in planes and passengers would offset that positive and we would be forced to endure MORE noise not less. That increase CAN and has been detected by citizens. So, instead of a noise reduction, we get stuck with an increase and worse yet nobody has even measured the added air pollution those flights have caused or investigated the increased cancer risk. "
Bruce Krochman wrote on Jan 6, 2008 11:30 AM:
" Does anyone else see something wrong here? We should be looking to REDUCE noise, not pat ourselves on the back for a minor increase. Of course we will hear the platitudes about a “decrease in per-passenger noise”, or “increases at a decreasing rate.” They all add up to the same thing, more net noise for our community. Our new Mayors in Costa Mesa and Newport Beach should take this opportunity to reaffirm their respective communities' goals of reduced impact from the airport. They need to redouble efforts to restrict airport growth, noise, pollution and traffic. "
Felipe D. wrote on Jan 6, 2008 11:27 AM:
" An increase of 1 to 2 decibels is NOT insignificant. The decibel scale is logarithmic in base 10 on the original unit (the bel) and measures the intesity of the sound.
1 or 2 decibels more actually means that the noise is 26% and 58% more intense than before. "
Leonard Kranser wrote on Jan 6, 2008 10:32 AM:
" Full data on this subject - including noise measurements from the airport monitoring stations going back to 2002 - is available on the web at http://eltoroairport.org/issues/Million-passenger- noise.html "
annonymous wrote on Jan 6, 2008 9:01 AM:
" Chris, you've got to be kidding me!! "Noise Boost Minor"? Where is the 3rd party credibility to these readings? Do we merely take the word of airport personnel? Give me a break! It will be very interesting to hear what AirFair has to say when they come out with a response! Propaganda at its best I'd say. "
Copyright 2008 Daily Pilot |