Plane noise

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve done what PP suggested and have hard data. Roughly every 1.5 minutes, breaking 60 and often 70 dB on a workday morning in the Palisades. Absolute disaster. 6-8 planes every 10 minutes

What you can’t hear is the worst. Chronic disease in the making

Oh please, what is your real issue here? I lived in line of sight of National for 15 years. Not once did the noise wake me up, or have any negative effect.

I can tell you things woke me up, the garbage trucks (the worst), the train, but never the planes. You are obviously pushing something here.

Sure, pushing the anti-cancer, anti-dementia, anti-deafness, anti-COPD, anti-autoimmune, anti-dementia drugs. How you doin’? Well? See you in a bit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a sobering article, directly quoting the Palisades and Bethesda residents (some of whom have since left).

https://wamu.org/story/16/10/26/jet_noise_is_no_joke_for_residents_burned_by_report_on_airport_complaints/

The iphone is not a dB meter.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32108336/

True. What a dolt this guy was, eh? He insulated, new windows, including interior windows. And still could not cut it. Wimp, right?

Pay attention to the Fort Knox windows in the bedrooms. This guy is a hero. He fought for his community. And when it would not, he got out. Never met him, but respect. Stop with the gaslighting.

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/4770-Reservoir-Rd-NW-20007

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How come DC takes no responsibility? San Diego has a sound insulation program where they’ll install new windows, doors insulation etc for houses affected by the airport.

Includes air filtration due to the pollution and funded by FAA

How will they do this? A lot of flight paths are along residential SFH areas where people use their outdoor space and move there specifically to have access to outdoor space. The only answer to this problem is dispersing the traffic in as many directions as possible to create overall low concentration of particles over any specific areas allowing each area to recover air during breaks.

This is not the “only answer.” In fact, it’s not an “answer” at all. Dispersing traffic as you suggest would create unacceptable risk and chaos in the skies. Flight patterns are designed to keep the flying pubic safe.

Somehow they didn't have highways in the sky before, what made them change then? You just don't want any ruckus so that flight paths don't appear near you, I got it. It's so obvious. Whatever problem they had before 2016 that they had to "repair" had caused its own problems, so obviously, what we have not is not a solution either.

[Anonymous]

Well, let’s see what happens with the Sherier houses. Both new and gorgeous, both under a horror of a flight path. Nice test, or the buyers haven’t heard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just bought after months of searching for a quiet street not near any major roadways. Because I wanted to avoid road pollution. Now I realize we have a flight path overhead. We are about 9 miles away from airport. WWYD?

You are not alone. but WWYD? Sell and go WHERE? You may end up with worse than what you had, and even if you find a place that's not close to any paths (which is what it will take) what is to ensure patterns won't change again and then you are under a path again?

Plus having to move out of the general areas altogether is a more drastic move, especially if schools are different. We cannot all move within 1 miles from the Observatory to ensure to never be close to any flight paths.

[Anonymous]

You hear far less complaining south of the airport (or the other airport), despite 50% of the time they are taking off in that direction.

There were changes now several years ago in flight paths, that can bring airplanes closer to land, but generally they follow the Potomac, and have very strictly since at least 2001.

Sorry Maryland sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For example.
They state that roadway UFPs agglomerate more easily and so might stay in your respiratory tract. Not great. But with jet ones, there’s not time or defenses and so living under a flight path is much much much worse for that reason too. Plus some claim these are so small by the time they get from a jet to one’s airway that they cross bloodstream barrier and even blood brain barrier.

"previous studies suggest smaller pollution particles are more likely to be inhaled and to penetrate the body than larger particles," officials said.

Researchers said other studies have linked the exposure of ultrafine particles to breast cancer, heart disease, prostate cancer and a variety of lung conditions.

You have now typed “prostrate cancer” twice. Take a seat.

Firstly, that’s your take away?! Secondly, it’s a frequent autocorrect. Finally? Not even true. The above is a direct quote from an article summarizing the UWA study.

No, sorry. Look, I just typed “prostate” and it did not autocorrect to a different word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a sobering article, directly quoting the Palisades and Bethesda residents (some of whom have since left).

https://wamu.org/story/16/10/26/jet_noise_is_no_joke_for_residents_burned_by_report_on_airport_complaints/

The iphone is not a dB meter.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32108336/

True. What a dolt this guy was, eh? He insulated, new windows, including interior windows. And still could not cut it. Wimp, right?

Pay attention to the Fort Knox windows in the bedrooms. This guy is a hero. He fought for his community. And when it would not, he got out. Never met him, but respect. Stop with the gaslighting.

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/4770-Reservoir-Rd-NW-20007

HAHAHAHA. You’re delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How come DC takes no responsibility? San Diego has a sound insulation program where they’ll install new windows, doors insulation etc for houses affected by the airport.

Includes air filtration due to the pollution and funded by FAA

How will they do this? A lot of flight paths are along residential SFH areas where people use their outdoor space and move there specifically to have access to outdoor space. The only answer to this problem is dispersing the traffic in as many directions as possible to create overall low concentration of particles over any specific areas allowing each area to recover air during breaks.

This is not the “only answer.” In fact, it’s not an “answer” at all. Dispersing traffic as you suggest would create unacceptable risk and chaos in the skies. Flight patterns are designed to keep the flying pubic safe.

Somehow they didn't have highways in the sky before, what made them change then? You just don't want any ruckus so that flight paths don't appear near you, I got it. It's so obvious. Whatever problem they had before 2016 that they had to "repair" had caused its own problems, so obviously, what we have not is not a solution either.

It isn’t going to change. Go find another windmill at which to tilt impotently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a sobering article, directly quoting the Palisades and Bethesda residents (some of whom have since left).

https://wamu.org/story/16/10/26/jet_noise_is_no_joke_for_residents_burned_by_report_on_airport_complaints/

The iphone is not a dB meter.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32108336/

True. What a dolt this guy was, eh? He insulated, new windows, including interior windows. And still could not cut it. Wimp, right?

Pay attention to the Fort Knox windows in the bedrooms. This guy is a hero. He fought for his community. And when it would not, he got out. Never met him, but respect. Stop with the gaslighting.

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/4770-Reservoir-Rd-NW-20007

HAHAHAHA. You’re delusional.

I know it’s low and loud, but put the wine down.

[Anonymous]

I looooove… the sound of planes in the morning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How come DC takes no responsibility? San Diego has a sound insulation program where they’ll install new windows, doors insulation etc for houses affected by the airport.

Includes air filtration due to the pollution and funded by FAA

How will they do this? A lot of flight paths are along residential SFH areas where people use their outdoor space and move there specifically to have access to outdoor space. The only answer to this problem is dispersing the traffic in as many directions as possible to create overall low concentration of particles over any specific areas allowing each area to recover air during breaks.

This is not the “only answer.” In fact, it’s not an “answer” at all. Dispersing traffic as you suggest would create unacceptable risk and chaos in the skies. Flight patterns are designed to keep the flying pubic safe.

Somehow they didn't have highways in the sky before, what made them change then? You just don't want any ruckus so that flight paths don't appear near you, I got it. It's so obvious. Whatever problem they had before 2016 that they had to "repair" had caused its own problems, so obviously, what we have not is not a solution either.

It isn’t going to change. Go find another windmill at which to tilt impotently.

+1

I think the PP has a tough time realizing that the world doesn’t revolve around their neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Two developments.

3 houses for sale under the flight path are still on the market, 1 back on the market. I don’t know why other than the flight path, just a guess

A recent call of the people all over the country including from DC on these issues focused on adverse health impact beyond just the noise from living under a flight path. This is new and needs more understanding by the community. But it’s clearly now a confirmed issue.

Hopefully growing understanding leads to some solutions

[Anonymous]

If planes are 6-7k feet altitude not directly above but about a mile away. Within sound distance, what is pollution exposure?

[Anonymous]

Significant. Just read the past posts, or better get the actual studies. And they are much much much lower in the Palisades