‘Sitt on itt’, Joe!

Crain’s New York Business recently published an Op-Ed by Joe Sitt, Chairman of the Global Gateway Alliance (GGA). The Op-Ed offers the predictable slanted view coming from a lobbyist for airport expansion and non-regulation: essentially, GGA’s position is that all three major NYC airports (KLGA, KJFK, KEWR) should be expanded further to remove capacity restrictions that diminish profits, especially in the hotel/tourism industry. Ironically, while the streets and neighborhoods of NYC are perhaps the most congested in the nation, Sitt and GGA complain about airport congestion and want to increase passenger counts … which clearly will further congest the streets and neighborhoods of New York City. It seems that money rules (and people suffer) in too many parts of this nation.

A PDF copy of the Crain’s Op-Ed is provided below, complete with an aiREFORM footnoted rebuttal of Mr. Sitt’s statements. Further down in this Post, the footnotes are expanded, to include relevant links and graphics.

Click on the image below for a scrollable view; the PDF file may be downloaded.

  1. Candidates are known to say all sorts of crazy stuff when campaigning. they are also known to always speak positively about creating jobs. During the 2016 campaign season, infrastructure was pushed as a palatable way to create jobs and keep money within our borders. More often than not, though, whenever large sums were proposed for infrastructure (such as this $1 trillion figure) there was little if any reference to airports and aviation. Why not?
    KJMR.20110419scp.. 'Notice to the Citizens of Kanabec County' (full page ad, posted at Scribd by FreedomFoundationMN)

    (click on image to see the in-depth Post about Mora’s new crosswind runway… including maps, pictures, studies, articles, etc.)

    Because aviation is the one area of infrastructure that actually has a very rich revenue base, in the tens of billions in taxes/fees collected (with the majority paid on each leg flown by each airline passenger); indeed, this slush fund is so deep, DoT and FAA are pushing construction of unneeded runways at the most remote locations (see for example the Post about the new crosswind runway at Mora, MN, built in a wetland used by migratory waterfowl!). And, it gets worse: FAA funds and eminent domain were used to acquire lands for this runway.

  2. Much has been written about the waste and cronyism behind public-private partnerships. Likewise, it is worth noting that ‘private investments from tax incentives’ are essentially a cost-shift, putting the cost burden onto others (while the corporations get their projects and the elected officials get campaign funds and future consulting gigs). In other words, the ‘tax incentive’ aspect of these deals all too commonly reduces down to elected officials saying; “…well, Mr. CEO, your corporation will not have to pay these taxes – that’s our incentive to YOU – and, instead, we’ll just collect these taxes from everyone else … the regular Joe’s who are not part of this deal. Cheers!!”
  3. The delays at these three airports (KEWR, KJFK, and KLGA) will not be resolved by so-called ‘modernizing ATC’. Sitt and others need to demand that FAA actually ‘manage’ the capacity at the most congested airports. Key solutions would include:
    • impose strict (and much lower) limits on operations per hour. Set these rates low enough and, even in the crappiest weather, you will NEVER see JFK or LaGuardia or Newark backing up. You would also eliminate the enormous loops commonly flown, such as the infamous JFK ‘Arc of Doom’. And, the unseen enroute delays at cruise altitude (typically 30-60 flight minutes prior to landing) would also be substantially reduced.
    • disincentivize indirect two-leg (and even longer, less direct) flights, by setting fees appropriately. For example, set passenger fees directly proportional to direct distance flown from origin to hub stopover (to other hub stopovers) to destination. If a direct flight is 1,000 miles but Airline X sells an itinerary that is 2,000 miles, let the passenger and/or airline pay twice the fees for a direct flight.
    • while the Arctic melts (IN MID-NOVEMBER!) it sure would be appropriate to disincentivize fossil fuel consumption. Simplest solution: impose a steep carbon tax, focused initially on the aviation sector.
    • Some have offered yet another brilliant disincentivizing proposal: let air passengers fly their first flight in a calendar year with a small fee (or even zero fees), but step up fees for subsequent trips. For example, a 10% fee on the first trip could become 20% on the second and third trips, and 30% on all additional trips.
  4. Sitt (and GGA) want the NYC airports to build more runways, like they now plan to do at London’s Heathrow. The problem at Heathrow is that the airport is the top hub for through-passengers between North America and Europe. This third runway does not serve the local residents as much as it serves the airlines seeking to ratchet up profits at Heathrow, with the massive through-passenger processing done under the hub concept. A third Heathrow runway will ratchet the local economy minimally upward, but will maximally diminish health quality of life (in terms of noise, congestion, and reduced air quality) for hundreds of thousands of residents. The exact same scenario is happening in the NYC area: FAA is aiding profit-seeking airlines to abandon all environmental regulation (i.e., decades-old noise abatement procedures) to increase ‘hub throughput’ and thus slightly increase corporate profits.
  5. No, what REALLY intensifies the problem of delays cascading out of the NYC airports is that FAA and the airlines are simply scheduling too many flights into too little time each day. The current scheduled traffic levels, all aimed at aiding airline profits via hubbing (accommodating through-passengers who never even leave the airport!) guarantees delays every day. This is a no-brainer. If you or I were trying to manage a congested road area, we would figure out how to REDUCE vehicles, not INCREASE vehicles. But, in this case, as demonstrated by Sitt, the pursuit of profits makes us blind to pragmatism.
  6. The Partnership for New York City study is not only an extremely biased joke, it also contains substantially false data. A table within (here’s a link to an archived copy; see Figure 1 at page 10 of the 37-page PDF file) cites FAA as the source for figures showing annual growth in airport operations at the three main NYC airports. The data is false; the real data, available online at FAA’s ATADS-OPSNET database, proves the P4NYC report grossly exaggerated annual operations. According to the P4NYC report, which was done in February 2009, annual totals peaked in 2007 at 1.45 million operations; but, ATADS shows the true figure was 1.30 million. Furthermore, FAA’s ATADS shows this count declining, with the latest figure (1.23 million, in 2015) down 5% from the peak in 2007.
  7. This line gets the ‘BullSitt Award’. Here, Sitt is citing the same-old false argument, that today’s controllers are burdened with equipment from the 1940’s. This is incredible disinformation. The fact is, the radar system has advanced through a series of improvements, in basic technology (vacuum tubes to transistors to integrated circuits to microprocessors and massive data storage/manipulation capacities), in regulations imposed by FAA (requiring transponders, defining airspace boundaries, requiring sophisticated avionics systems for collision avoidance and navigation, etc.), and in FAA’s development of GPS routes (WAY BACK IN THE MID-1990’s!). At the same time, though, the use of this blatantly false argument strongly suggests how P4NYC is collaborating with FAA, Airlines for America, and other players to sell the fraud that is NextGen.

An Example of a Serious Weather Delay … but Delays Can Also Happen by Scheduling ‘Too Many Arrivals’

A recent day with foggy weather in the Puget Sound area produced a few examples of weather-related delays. ksea-20161110at1009-jza8089-arr-f-cyvr-map-data-wxdlasIn the example presented below, Jazz Air 8089, a Dash-8, departed Vancouver [CYVR] on a short 30-minute flight to SeaTac [KSEA]. The flight departed at 8:55am, just as the KSEA visibility was reducing to a half mile. The crew was turned toward the Olympic Peninsula and issued turns to delay their arrival.

Here is a screen-cap of the METAR weather sequence, reading from bottom to top; thin red boxes have been added, marking the departure time at CYVR and the arrival time at KSEA. The column in the middle is most critical, showing visibility deteriorating from 10-miles to a half-mile; the magenta text to the right, reading BKN001 and VV001 is also significant, indicating low clouds and fog obscuring the sky at 100′ above the surface.ksea-20161110-metar-0825am-to-1120am-low-wx-markedupThe flight altitudes and times at points on the JZA8089 route have been added to this enlarged map view of the delay portion of the flight, over the Olympic National Park:ksea-20161110at1009-jza8089-arr-f-cyvr-map-analysis-of-dlas-over-olypennIn normal weather conditions, the flight is routine, even boring to both pilots and ATC. ksea-20161109at0929-jza8089-arr-f-cyvr-map-dataksea-20161111at0950-jza8089-arr-f-cyvr-map-dataksea-20161112at0915-jza8089-arr-f-cyvr-map-dataTo the left are screen-caps for the same flight on days before and after… on 11/9, 11/11, and 11/12. In all cases, KSEA is in a South Flow, so the minor variations in these three flights are almost entirely due to other arrival traffic.

In an extreme case, if traffic volume is sufficiently large, ATC may need to issue a holding loop, or multiple turns to achieve even 20+ minutes of delay. Note on these screen-caps, the busiest day of the week for air travel (Friday) shows the most extreme excess turns to final; the slowest day of the travel week (Saturday) shows essentially no added delays.

One way that FAA fails to prevent excessive delays is by refusing to manage capacity. Especially at hub airports, arrival rates are set too high, so as not to restrict the airlines. In their NextGen studies, FAA has repeatedly referred to maximizing ‘runway throughput’. The problem, though, is that when arrival rates are set too high, it takes just one minor weather glitch to create a cascade of delays, one airplane after another, often for hours. In the worst cases, typical at LaGuardia Airport, cascaded delays can cause arrivals to finish well after midnight, even more than two hours beyond their schedule times. And these delays nearly ALWAYS result in continuous arrival streams, with repetitive noise patterns impacting residential neighborhoods, a problem being exacerbated under NextGen.

(All graphics & flight data from FlightAware)

Aviation Impacts are Non-Partisan

Here is a screen-cap of a thoughtful Facebook post. Susan is a ‘victim’ of TNNIS and other NextGen routes east of LaGuardia Airport [KLGA], who has worked tirelessly trying to get FAA to responsibly fulfill their role as a regulator that can mitigate environmental impacts.

(click on image to view source at Facebook)

(click on image to view source at Facebook)

It is important to understand that NextGen is really just about spending lots of money. The money comes primarily from airline passenger taxes and Congress, and the recipients are a small group of avionics manufacturers, as well as lobbyists (many of whom are retired FAA ‘regulators’).

In order to obtain needed funds, the Av-Gov Complex had to sell the NextGen concept to Congress. This meant building an appearance of cohesive support, including especially the airlines and labor. This they accomplished by ‘collaborating’ to produce the following strategy:

  • dupe the public (including Congress) by claiming NextGen offers something new and incredibly efficient … such as their coordinated sales pitch with graphics showing zig-zag routes that have not been commonly flown for more than five decades!
  • ignore the many examples of how no substantial efficiency gains are achieved; for example, the routine use of enroute delay vectors (which commonly more than compensate for the short time savings of low/early departure turns);
  • entice the airlines by promising the elimination of noise mitigation routes at major hub airports … allowing turns lower and closer to the runways, for both departures and arrivals;

The airlines and the controllers’ union (NATCA) could say lots about how bogus the whole NextGen sales pitch is, but their silence has been bought. Just a few years ago, NATCA was strongly critical of NextGen; today, controllers who question why the NATCA leaders are advocating ATC privatization (which is hand-in-glove with NextGen implementation) are pressured into silence. And, as for the airlines, Delta stands alone as the only major airline willing to critique the Av-Gov sales pitch.

In simplest terms, FAA is committing a fraud while diminishing quality of life at the homes of hundreds of thousands of residents. This is a ‘taking’, without just compensation. It is being done by FAA, against the People, to narrowly benefit the Av-Gov Complex.

Latest Draft Noise Maps Made Public for JFK & LaGuardia Airports

The New York City area has many neighborhoods that are substantially impacted by airport noise, including new NextGen procedures. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that all three NYC major airports (KEWR, KJFK, KLGA) serve not only the large local population, but ALSO many people from around the world who use these airports to travel THROUGH NYC (while not actually visiting). More through passengers translates to more flights, thus more pressure to cram too many arrivals into each hour. This works well for for airline profits, but is terrible for the quality of life of local residents.

Part of the collection of tactics Av-Gov Complex uses to nullify citizen involvement in local airport noise mitigation plans is to bog down processes with long delays. Multiple overlapping committees are formed, with large memberships. The committees are seeded with pro-aviation players who reliably spin and reset the process (imagine how impossible it would be to fully bake a cake, if you kept pulling the cake out of the oven; that’s what these committee members do).

Len Schaier is a retired electrical engineer who serves on the Technical Advisory Committees (TACs) for both the JFK and LaGuardia airports. He recently shared this insightful email (scrollable PDF below), attaching the latest draft noise maps being studied by the two TACs (also below, as JPEGs).

Click on the image below for a scrollable view; the PDF file may be downloaded.

kjfk-20160914cpy-preliminary-noise-impact-contours-55dnl-thru-75dnlklga-20160914cpy-preliminary-noise-impact-contours-55dnl-thru-75dnlHere’s the bottom line, as seen by aiREFORM: people are losing sleep and quality of life, and they need relief, not years from now but RIGHT NOW! The DNL metric itself is flawed, yet FAA and industry players (aka the Av-Gov Complex) continue using this metric to obscure impacts and to obstruct and delay long overdue changes needed by people. So, …

  • Should the DNL threshhold be reduced, from the current absurdly high 65 DNL to the international impact standard of 55 DNL? Absolutely.
  • Should DNL be replaced or supplemented with new noise metrics that recognize the impact of repetitive noise patterns? Absolutely.
  • Should we delay further, wasting any more time bringing relief – and enabling a decent night’s sleep – for the impacted residents? Absolutely not!

Let’s get on with it … use the 55 DNL contours on these maps to earnestly formulate solutions that give relief to the tens of thousands of people currently impacted at these two airports. Think outside the box this time. Press FAA to scale back hourly flow rates at these airports, so the community is better served with less noise and pollutant impact.

Why The Huge Increase in Departures Over Northeast Queens?

FAA needs to come clean, and tell the truth: Why The Huge Increase in Departures Over Northeast Queens?

One of the lead groups advocating for balance between airport commerce and local peace and quiet (and air quality, too!) is Queens Quiet Skies. They submitted a data request to the airport authority, and then created the analysis below. It shows that there have been very substantial changes in the pattern for departures off LaGuardia [KLGA], with much larger numbers of flights impacting especially the residents of northeast Queens, Jackson Heights, and Woodside.

These impactful changes are coincident with FAA’s adoption of the TNNIS departure off Runway 13. The changes are also coincident with FAA’s NextGen strategy of using categorical exclusions to ignore noise impacts caused by turning departures at lower altitudes and closer to the runway ends. Essentially, FAA has chosen to help the airlines to potentially save a minute or so per departure, but the cost is shifted onto local homeowners, schoolchildren, and others in the communities below.

Click on the image below for a scrollable view; the PDF file may be downloaded.

This analysis was shared online by PlaneSeneLI.org, and noted as a document from an August 30th press conference at the Bayside office of Senator Tony Avella.

The most damaging impacts are being caused by the TNNIS departure, introduced to slightly shorten the older Whitestone departure. For both departures, flights make a long left climbing turn after taking off from runway 13. The key difference is that TNNIS throws out the noise abatement that was included in Whitestone. Whitestone included a turn to the south; pilots abated noise by making their initial climb over a strip of parklands, and departures were thus higher when they commenced the long left turn over densely populated Flushing. So, when FAA implemented TNNIS, they essentially discarded noise abatement procedures that had been created with community input and had helped for decades.

FAA is not only failing to manage aviation impacts (noise and air pollution off LaGuardia) but is also failing by lying and hiding the facts. For years, FAA has claimed this change is triggered by winds and weather, yet there is no tangible evidence to support this false claim.

See also:

When Viewed Through Cash-Colored Glasses, ‘Clouds Cause Delays’

Everyday, FAA creates a traffic report, then uses social media to report expected air traffic delays.

(click on image to view source tweet)

(click on image to view source tweet)

Cute little graphics are intuitive: the cloud image means delays related to cloud layers (here listing the DC area to NYC area), and the lightning image means delays related to thunderstorms (here listing all major hubs from Charlotte to Houston).

Mindlessly, we absorb this report and feel a bit more ‘aware’ of the system managed by FAA. But, if we are a bit more mindful, and actually THINK about what FAA tweets, we have to ask: are clouds really a valid reason for delays?

The answer is obviously NO. These delays are happening routinely, triggered only by clouds. Not severe weather … just puffy, calm, benign layers and pockets of water vapor. These delays continue to happen – and at the same few hub airports everyday – but it is not due to ‘clouds’; they happen because of unmanaged capacity. I.e., FAA continues to allow too many planes in time slots that are too short.

Take a look at the weather maps for this day. In the first image, clouds are white and precipitation is green. Note the existence of both clouds and precipitation in many other parts of the nation… yet, no delays are reported/expected at most locations. Again, the delays are all happening at a select few hub airports, where FAA refuses to impose needed capacity management. All FAA has to do is impose sufficiently reduced hourly flow rates, but FAA refuses. And the consequences are significant: flights are delayed, passengers lose billions of dollars worth of their time, and communities are inundated with excessive aviation noise and air pollution, all to accommodate more flights than are needed to serve each specific community.

(click on image to view current image at ClimateReanalyzer; select the 'Precipitation & Clouds' view)

(click on image to view current image at ClimateReanalyzer; select the ‘Precipitation & Clouds’ view)

(click on image to view current CONUS infrared image at NOAA.gov)

(click on image to view current CONUS infrared image at NOAA.gov)

Although it conflicts with Congress’ original intent, the fact is that FAA serves the airlines, not the people. FAA, beholden to industry profit-interests (of the final-four major U.S. airlines, and of manufacturers, too), refuses to manage airport capacity by imposing reasonable flow-rate restrictions. Instead, FAA collaborates with their industry partners (aka, ‘stakeholders’) and creates manipulative spin/propaganda, trying to sell us on NextGen spending that creates greater impacts while producing little benefits.

FAA works to feed more money to the same industry partners who hire FAA officials when they retire. Just like the rigged U.S. political campaigns, where the system is manipulated by the duopoly parties. We suffer increasing impacts from failures that will never go away until we demand overdue reforms.

FAA Offers $10 Million Giveaway to Buy Support for NextGen

The NextGen program that is destroying communities while supplementing airline profits has been needing more money to advance further. But, the program is seeing increasing resistance, especially from impacted homeowners. So, in order to garner more support and create the appearance of public acceptance needed to convince Congress to invest more public money into NextGen, FAA has announced an investment of $10,000,000 to subsidize ADS-B Out installations on small aircraft.

(click on image to view source article at AOPA.org)

(click on image to view source article at AOPA.org)

The new program will rebate up to $500 per aircraft to as many as 20,000 owners, which FAA believes to be roughly one-eighth of eligible aircraft. Bear in mind, rebate eligibility is restricted to single-piston-engine, fixed-wing aircraft that have not yet added this equipment, which FAA is requiring no later than January 2020, for all pilots who want to access ‘busier’ airspace. In other words, while NextGen is a program aimed at serving the airlines, FAA is directing its supposedly scarce resources to the lowest performing, personal-use aircraft … the vast majority of which will never have an urgent need to fly near any of our thirty busiest airline airports.

As some of the smarter online commenters have noted, what usually happens when a federal subsidy is announced is the industry jacks up the price of the product/service being subsidized. And also commonly, the subsidy is just a ‘gift’ for a huge number of recipients who had already planned to purchase the product/service anyway. So, in total, it is effectively FAA giving $10 Million to the aviation electronics industry. As if on queue, the aviation media reports that alphabet-group lobbyists are ‘applauding’.

20160607scp.. portion of article re $500 ADS-B subsidy, alphabet groups (GANews)

(click on image to view source article at GANews)

Congress never put this $10 Million scheme through an appropriation process. Congress never authorized this substantial expenditure. This $10 Million is just FAA, acting arbitrarily and on its own, as a lobbyist seeking to tip to the balance toward more NextGen funding by Congress. Which begs the question: if FAA has $10 Million or more to arbitrarily spend, how else might they spend OUR money to serve the Public?

How Might FAA Better Invest $10 Million?

Here’s two simple ideas (readers are encouraged to share their ideas, too!):

  1. for the NextGen-impacted people of Phoenix, offer a small subsidy to the airlines to fly the old departure routes out of KPHX. Try this for just 2-months, pay Southwest and American a couple million tops to cover their added cost, and see what it does to noise complaints and residential quality of life.
  2. for the NextGen-impacted people in the NYC area, take advantage of the current major project to upgrade the LaGuardia terminal (at KLGA). This is a great opportunity for a ‘test’. For a period of at least 6-months, get the airlines to voluntarily reduce their daily schedule by say 25%, and hourly flow rates to say a maximum of 25 takeoffs per hour. With these lower and more manageable KLGA traffic levels, revert to the old (and since-abandoned) noise abatement departures such as Whitestone Climb. Get the airlines to voluntarily make this happen, then see what a scaled-down LaGuardia does to improve efficiencies and reduce impacts for both JFK and Newark. The results may be surprising.

A Rebuttal of JetBlue CEO Robin Hayes’ Recent Call for Faux-Modernization

(click on image to view original tweet)

(click on image to view original tweet)

Boston Business Journal has printed an opinion piece by the CEO of JetBlue, Robin Hayes. Very similar pieces have appeared in the past few months, offered by other airline CEOs and the lobbyist Airlines for America, all spreading the same unsubstantiated claims that ATC privatization and NextGen implementation are needed. It strongly appears that, this week, the rotation went to JetBlue, hence the piece. And, given the mainstream media’s consistent subservience to commerce, it comes as no surprise that Mr. Hayes’ opinion piece was eagerly accepted and passed on for public consumption.

Here is a PDF copy, with highlighted footnotes added by aiREFORM.com:

Click on the image below for a scrollable view; the PDF file may be downloaded.

Politics Today, in the U.S.A.

Hakeem Jeffries is a young lawyer representing the New York 8th congressional district, a strongly gerrymandered district in Brooklyn and Queens. In this video he is going to bat for the Hillary Clinton campaign, making wild statements, all part of the Clinton campaign script, designed to undermine the legitimacy of candidate Bernie Sanders. Yes, he is a lawyer, so he seemingly has a license to lie and deceive, all to produce whatever nefarious end-result is intended, such as perpetuating our very, VERY broken representative democracy – yes, the one owned by a plutocracy of corporations and elites (a plutocracy Thomas Jefferson warned of in 1825).

So, ponder this embed of a short news discussion, with Nina Turner speaking on the Sanders’ side…

…and here’s something else to ponder:

If Mr. Jeffries can go to bat for Hillary Clinton and stretch the facts this far, what would happen if he applied his lawyering skills to advocate on behalf of those impacted by KJFK and KLGA flights? What possibly might stop him from speaking up, forcefully, on behalf of the people and against the FAA, the airlines, the Port Authority – the Av-Gov troika who are doing so much to diminish quality of life in his congressional district? Could it be the money that helps Mr. Jeffries (and the vast majority of U.S. elected officials) to pick their fights, to be selective and ALWAYS come out advocating for the source of funds needed to be reelected? Could it be we are long overdue to end this sordid corruption?

See also:
  • 4/11/2016 – an article by H.A. Goodman, in Huffington Post, includes this quote: “…An iceberg named Hillary Clinton threatens the system of honest graft that provides political power to so many establishment Democrats….”

20160411.. 'I'm Going With the Jewish Guy' (Bernie tweet-pic)

La Guardia Airport: Better to Close It?

Wall Street Journal printed an article slanted toward generating public support for a multi-billion dollar redevelopment of the La Guardia Airport [KLGA] terminal by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey. A scrollable PDF copy is posted below, but first here are the musings of a retired airline pilot, very familiar with this airport, and also familiar with the huge airport noise impacts that are not even mentioned in Scott McCartney’s WSJ article:

“Probably the truest statement in the entire article is the one where it states that things are going to get worse before better. What the PA and the city should do is find another airport location, let people endure LGA the way it is during that process and then close LGA down, completely. Of course the problem with doing that is finding another location. The first that comes into my mind is Floyd Bennett field, but that is very close to JFK. Or, I don’t know how large Riker’s Island is, but there has been talk of closing that down (maybe this is the infamous “trial balloon being floated?).

Another problem that isn’t even mentioned is that LGA is rapidly sinking, probably because it was originally built on a garbage dump. I vividly recall when I flew out of there walking (when you could do that) from the airline hangar (the Delta, American Shuttle terminal now), to the main terminal and noticing how much lower the curbs and tarmac were alongside the hangars. It was obvious back then that the entire airport was slowly sinking. And, none of that is even mentioned in anything I have read about “fixing” the airport. What is going to happen to this “upgrade” to resolve that potentially-huge problem? Then, of course, there is no mention of bringing mass transit in the form of a subway line to LGA. Every major airport that I have been to in Europe has a subway line that takes you directly to and from the airport with ease. This is probably due to the taxicab industry lobbying against it in NYC.

A lot of this story seems to me to be “pie in the sky,” wishful thinking on the part of the PA and their buddies that are going to be doing the work there. Where were the PA when needed repairs were never made? Why were they never made? Those pertinent questions have all been conveniently overlooked, with no truthful answers forthcoming. All they do is keep their grubby hands in residents’ pockets with their ridiculously high tolls on bridges and tunnels.

Where does all their money go? These are questions that the governors of NY and NJ should be asking, but aren’t. Why not?”

Click on the image below for a scrollable view; the PDF file may be downloaded.

There is also the issue of La Guardia’s horrible access. This airport is surrounded by dense urban residential development, and real estate is expensive and limited. Unbelievably, most people from places like Manhattan have to further congest the crowded streets with a cab-ride to/from the airport. An obvious fix would be to add a rail link, a proposal that has been pushed for decades, but with no real forward progress. And, too, the transit line it would connect to, the No. 7 line, is already maxed out.

NYC is a great city and should be proudly shared with the world as a beacon of the American exceptionalism so many politicians often cite during their campaigns. The many failures at La Guardia – by the FAA that refuses to manage capacity, and the local officials and labor unions that impede problem-solving – are instead a grand American embarrassment. This area is sclerotic with too much overdevelopment driven by pols who trade building permits for kickbacks (aka campaign and PAC donations). The status quo is broken.

There is a clear need to look into all the possibilities for KLGA before this renovation gets underway. One of the most ‘exceptional’ possibilities is to actually downscale the airport, even close it entirely. We all know that, once the project starts, the argument will become that they don’t want to waste the money that has already been spent. For everyone’s benefit, we need a long-term, viable solution – especially to provide relief for noise-impacted residents – and that solution will likely include:

  • use of technologies to carefully minimize noise and other adverse impacts
  • for both noise reduction and to ensure KLGA does not create delays that cascade through  the NAS, impose a substantial reduction of hourly operations, to a strict limit of perhaps 20-30 departures per hour.
  • impose schedule management methodologies that ensure this critically located airport is used solely to serve passengers into and out of New York City, and ensures the airlines are NOT using KLGA as a hub for the profitable sorting of through-passengers.
  • manage airline use of the NYC-area airports using a larger ‘system-view’ that disperses impacts, ensuring that no single communities are excessively impacted with noise and other aviation pollutants.

See also:
  • 3/31/2016Press Release: Meng Urges Key Congressional Committee to Do Everything in Its Power to Combat Airplane Noise over Queens
  • 5/24/2015‘A Matter of Trust’
  • 5/8/2015‘Don’t Rehab La Guardia Airport. Close It.’
  • 8/16/2014 ‘Florida Airports are Particularly Vulnerable to Sea Level Rise’ … and given the low elevation at KLGA, money invested will soon be wasted due to global warming and polar ice melting. This airport did flood during Hurricane Sandy.
  • September 2012‘An Aerial View of Flushing While on the Whitestone Climb’
  • 4/29/2004La Guardia Slot Allocation – A Clock-Proxy Auction Approach
  • April 2001‘La Guardia Airport: Can the Airport and the Community Coexist?’