Rep. Anna Eschoo has a web survey out to gather her constituents' opinions on SFO noise which we find problematic in B'game especially during stormy weather. It asks about things like noise frequency, the times of day, duration and the like. I'm sure SFO could provide her with all sorts of detail about it, but this is good politics if nothing else. Apparently Eschoo and our Rep. Jackie Speier have created the "Quiet Skies Caucus".
For reference, the SFO Noise Abatement page is here. Even more interesting is this take-off and landing map that I found on paloaltoonline.com. They have a bit of news about the NextGen flight program that started in March 2015, but that is mostly about landing paths. My sense is that take-offs are the main B'game noise issue. The purple SFO take-off patterns in the chart show four of five routes shooting engine noise right over B'game and the fifth one is mostly for the "heavies" like 777's that take off low and slow (and loud) right over South City. Not sure there is much that can be done about this. Just another chapter in the love-hate relationship with SFO.
Try the train and motorcycle noise. Burlingame per capita I think is louder than Manhattan, NY.
Posted by: Elliot Barstall | July 17, 2015 at 04:33 AM
Well you live near an airport. If one visits the airport frequently (we're there 2x a month at least either flying or picking or dropping), then living with the _very_ infrequent traffic changing patterns and the noise that accompanies that is acceptable trade-ff for the convenience of living near the airport. Be glad its not San Bruno where the noise is much worse.
Posted by: j. mir | July 17, 2015 at 03:25 PM
I agree j. mir - that's what I mean by the love-hate relationship. I'm there more than 2x a month and I love being this close.
By the way, I was a day ahead of the Daily Post article in yesterday's Post. It appears Anna Eshoo is really only worried about Palo Alto so I hope Jackie Speier is keeping an eye on her!
Posted by: Joe | July 17, 2015 at 03:48 PM
I'm hopeful someone will push the idea of a curfew at SFO since I am wide awake at 2:15 am listening to planes take off. That is unnecessary period.
Posted by: Hopeful | July 20, 2015 at 02:12 AM
I found an interesting (at least to me) factoid in The Economist about US flight routes.
"Flight corridors frequently follow historic routes and zig zag around. Many of the routes which cross America are based on where hilltop beacons were lit to guide Charles Lindbergh's mail flights in the 1920s. Plenty of radar systems still resemble 1940s technology and only provide a limited "view" of what is in the air."
Hence the NextGen project that is causing consternation in Palo Alto, Woodside, etc.
Posted by: Joe | July 26, 2015 at 01:48 PM
When I flew in the late 70's for Cessna Aircraft Company, the aeronautical chart for Sacramento still had tiny B in the middle of a Fairfield ranch denoting an old beacon.
My Dad's 1930's aeronautical chart for the Bay Area had the name Haywards for the Haywards Hotel in the town now known as Hayward. The chart also featured a simple morse-code designator for Oakland Airport; an A and an N. The pilot would listen for the tones to become a single note and that meant you were over the airport. Time to spiral down through the fog... Yikes.
Posted by: Peter Garrison | July 26, 2015 at 04:59 PM
I'm going to move the comments on SFO noise here (where they belong). Most of this is NextGen generated:
Yay for our new council.
Just read in The Daily Post that the FAA will consider calming Palo Alto and San Carlos' nerves by having more easbound flights depart runway 10. Theae are the departures which rattle the windows and nerves of Hillsborough, Burlingame and Millbrae until 2 AM.
Go council, go.
Posted by: Peter Garrison
http://www.flysfo.com/community-environment/noise-abatement/file-a-complaint
Posted by: Lowlander
We need to get to Eshoo and make sure that doesn't happen on runway 10. It is bad enough already. Palo Alto should share the burden for 30 years like we have.
Posted by: resident
Former pilot here: The Daily Post had an article showing the variations in flight paths approaching SFO. Pilots can vary the approach over different cities and throttle back for a higher and quieter descent.
Of course, there would be no variation of take-off pattern if the 10 runways are used more often; the Peninsula cities can share the approach noise but we would get all the departure noise at full throttle.
Write Speier and Hill; Eshoo won't answer you if you'rw out of her email constituency...
Posted by: Peter Garrison
Posted by: Joe | November 19, 2015 at 10:35 PM
Here is an old post that I just found and is pertinent today. I wonder what is happening with the "Quiet Skies Caucus". It's been almost two years.
Posted by: Joe | February 07, 2017 at 02:30 PM