I am so sorry. It must be awful. I’d hate for you to foist it on another person but there are still willing buyers

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can any the Palisades be worse than Old Town with regards to airplane noise. I know it’s 5:45am because that’s when the first planes start.

It’s probably the same? But when I walk around Alexandria (King St) it’s not as noticeable? I don’t live there so not worried about the effects of the inevitable pollution on my health. But, honestly, how Palisades feels today is like that old movie with low flying plane and the guy having to duck for his dear life

I think the difference is that in Alexandria you have a lot of other noise that drowns out the planes (except in the early morning I guess, as PP suggests). It is the same in Rosslyn or Foggy Bottom. The planes are very loud there too but you do not really notice, because there is a lot of other stuff going on. In a place with a suburban feel like the Palisades though the planes become much more noticeable.

If you check the monitoring web site that was posted up thread, it looks like the noise level in Alexandria is lower than Palisades. I used to live in Alexandria in Old Town and further down river and was never bothered by the plane noise. I think there are two reasons (1) the DCA traffic usually lands from the South and takes off to the North, so plane traffic over Alexandria is usually landing aircraft. Palisades gets aircraft taking off and the engine noise on take off is greater; and (2) Geography. Old Town is lower and the river is wider there.

Here’s the web site. I just looked at they are currently landing from the North and taking off to the South, and I think my theory holds. Palisades is not as loud as it was when they were getting outbound traffic the other day and Alexandria is getting into the 70’s under the current outbound planes. It doesn’t look as though it is as loud or for as long as for Palisades the other day, though. So, I still think it’s a combination of prevailing flight paths and geography. Maybe taking off to the North is more common in the AM? I know it has to do with wind direction — maybe there’s a pilot on here who knows?

Planes take off and land into the wind. If the wind has a northerly component, flights will take off to the north and land from the south; if the wind has a southerly component, it's the opposite. The prevailing wind in this area is typically from the north in the fall and winter and from the south in spring and summer (although the actual wind direction will obviously vary each day).

I've seen planes fly both directions over our area in one day, I don't think it's as fixed as you are saying. They do consider weather and wind and clouds and storm formations and their movements, it's why it's not constantly the same, it's probably what gives us a break. I still think creating airplane highways is a wrong way to go. Noise carries, you are creating large swathes of areas that are constantly subjected to noise while sparing others entirely. Then those who are currently spared come here with their smug attitudes blaming those of us who happen to be under the flight paths for our poor choices even though we had no way of knowing, and especially if flight paths changed years after our purchase. There are risks like living really near airports or factories or other hazardous structures, which are obvious. But flight paths are unpredictable when are you are far enough removed from the airports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just to clarify, I emphatize. Not the PP who was accused of being smug (I don’t think they intended to be). I do think that the gvt should buy anyone out who wants out and can’t sell because disclosures should become mandatory (if there’s anyone who doesn’t know)

I don't see how this is plausible, what is easier for the government is to disperse traffic after its' been proven that these flight patterns are untenable. They can figure out better ways. Imagine the logistics of having to empty entire neighborhoods to create fixed flight paths, you'd have to clear miles and miles of housing and business infrastructure. And what if you have to change them again for whatever reasons?

It will never happen. VA and MD are better organized. Planes follow the river. They can’t fly over POTIS/VP etc

That’s why I would buy where it was said. It ain’t dispersing there and there are no planes. Don’t believe me: go and visit Monday am.

Anonymous wrote:Just to clarify, I emphatize. Not the PP who was accused of being smug (I don’t think they intended to be). I do think that the gvt should buy anyone out who wants out and can’t sell because disclosures should become mandatory (if there’s anyone who doesn’t know)

I don't see how this is plausible, what is easier for the government is to disperse traffic after its' been proven that these flight patterns are untenable. They can figure out better ways. Imagine the logistics of having to empty entire neighborhoods to create fixed flight paths, you'd have to clear miles and miles of housing and business infrastructure. And what if you have to change them again for whatever reasons?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can any the Palisades be worse than Old Town with regards to airplane noise. I know it’s 5:45am because that’s when the first planes start.

It’s probably the same? But when I walk around Alexandria (King St) it’s not as noticeable? I don’t live there so not worried about the effects of the inevitable pollution on my health. But, honestly, how Palisades feels today is like that old movie with low flying plane and the guy having to duck for his dear life

I think the difference is that in Alexandria you have a lot of other noise that drowns out the planes (except in the early morning I guess, as PP suggests). It is the same in Rosslyn or Foggy Bottom. The planes are very loud there too but you do not really notice, because there is a lot of other stuff going on. In a place with a suburban feel like the Palisades though the planes become much more noticeable.

If you check the monitoring web site that was posted up thread, it looks like the noise level in Alexandria is lower than Palisades. I used to live in Alexandria in Old Town and further down river and was never bothered by the plane noise. I think there are two reasons (1) the DCA traffic usually lands from the South and takes off to the North, so plane traffic over Alexandria is usually landing aircraft. Palisades gets aircraft taking off and the engine noise on take off is greater; and (2) Geography. Old Town is lower and the river is wider there.

Here’s the web site. I just looked at they are currently landing from the North and taking off to the South, and I think my theory holds. Palisades is not as loud as it was when they were getting outbound traffic the other day and Alexandria is getting into the 70’s under the current outbound planes. It doesn’t look as though it is as loud or for as long as for Palisades the other day, though. So, I still think it’s a combination of prevailing flight paths and geography. Maybe taking off to the North is more common in the AM? I know it has to do with wind direction — maybe there’s a pilot on here who knows?

Planes take off and land into the wind. If the wind has a northerly component, flights will take off to the north and land from the south; if the wind has a southerly component, it's the opposite. The prevailing wind in this area is typically from the north in the fall and winter and from the south in spring and summer (although the actual wind direction will obviously vary each day).

Modern house Bending Lane

Here’s a good example: a stunning house backing onto federal land sold significantly under ask at the top of the market and Redfin has it estimated at even less than it sold for while the market went another 20% up.

That’s a crazy area, might as well be on the runway. Gorgeous

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s always someone trying to deflect from the real issue. That people should stop buying in these areas or if they do get it for cheap because you’ll pay in chronic disease, stress etc

Classic DCUM. There are no bad polices and there's never a reason to fight to improve the status quo. It's all about people who made poor choices and their problems aren't deserving of attention.

"improving the status quo" means sloughing off airplane noise to areas where people bought houses that were not in the flight path previously. Seems kinda selfish.

Not really. Dispersing the flights more would mean occasional noise for many instead of constant noise for some. Sounds more fair to me and not that disruptive toward those not affected by the noise now.

Dispersing flights would make the airspace unnecessarily more hazardous and chaotic. The skies are already congested. Concentrating flight patterns isn't about screwing certain neighborhoods on the ground; it's all about keeping the flying public safe.

As others have said, places like the Palisades have dealt with airplane noise from DCA for decades. This isn't a new issue. Frankly, I have no sympathy for whiners who knew (or chose to ignore) that they were buying into a neighborhood that sits either adjacent to or underneath flight paths.

It's about keeping you nice and comfy and smug, isn't it? Because you want this to assure this never happens to you, don't you? Hopefully you are wrong and one day you get your share of traffic, but like PP is suggesting it will be dispersed, so not life altering for you to hear a few planes per day, and a huge break for others who live under the beelines of planes right now. Also it was explained ad nauseum here that flight patterns changed, so many people bought in the areas they thought were far enough away from the airports and even inland from the river, but now got planes flying close enough in beelines for hours on end.

Honestly, no one real estate agent ever disclosed the risk. I do think now there’s no excuse. It should be mandatory for public health if nothing else. Just like you get a flood zone on the listing

You cannot disclose something that can change. What's bad for public health is to create patterns that do punish some areas sending all the planes in concentrated lines. Dispersing them to give people breaks is what needs to be done. Also even now flight patterns are not fixed and constant every day, some days are worse, some are better. They have many paths they can use. How would a real estate agent know this or predict what will happen? Flood zone is a different problem. Airline traffic problem is manmade and changeable.

Just to clarify, I emphatize. Not the PP who was accused of being smug (I don’t think they intended to be). I do think that the gvt should buy anyone out who wants out and can’t sell because disclosures should become mandatory (if there’s anyone who doesn’t know)

I live in that zone and can assure not one plane has gone over my house in years. I’ve heard a few in distance

Yet, there’s a house for sale right now and not a word about glorious plane spotting. It’s all gorgeous etc but they are selling up at cost 2 years in

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not even sure how they could “disperse” the flight paths given that there are so many restricted airspaces in the region. They can’t fly over DC itself, the Pentagon, CIA Langley, etc. They follow the river BECAUSE it’s not a restricted airspace. But even the Potomac is tough because you start crossing into the flights paths for planes going to/from IAD.

the flights were actually more dispersed prior to the 2015 change. They became much more concentrated then. Yes, Palisades always had the noise, but not this level of constant noise. My understanding is that they also started flying lower in 2015. This article shows the flight paths before and after Next Gen.

The person who says there are these "prohibited areas" is delusional. Planes fly all over, maybe not directly over specific objects, but close enough for anything near these objects to have noise. It's all that matters. You don't need a plane right over your head to hear noise. And what makes it bad is not occasional plane (even if right overhead) but a beeline of planes one after another as they take off or land. You get no peace at all, the noise is constant and the planes don't need to be overhead or even low, they just have to be near and audible and constant. Some weather causes the noise to be worse. The reasons some people are so smug in NWDC like in Woodley thinking that it's the observatory that protects them, is because there are directed beelines of planes like you said, where traffic is concentrated and they are currently lucky it's far enough away from them to not hear it. It can change obviously as it changed before. And I do hope it changes, nobody should be hearing planes every 40 sec for hours on end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s always someone trying to deflect from the real issue. That people should stop buying in these areas or if they do get it for cheap because you’ll pay in chronic disease, stress etc

Classic DCUM. There are no bad polices and there's never a reason to fight to improve the status quo. It's all about people who made poor choices and their problems aren't deserving of attention.

"improving the status quo" means sloughing off airplane noise to areas where people bought houses that were not in the flight path previously. Seems kinda selfish.

Not really. Dispersing the flights more would mean occasional noise for many instead of constant noise for some. Sounds more fair to me and not that disruptive toward those not affected by the noise now.

Dispersing flights would make the airspace unnecessarily more hazardous and chaotic. The skies are already congested. Concentrating flight patterns isn't about screwing certain neighborhoods on the ground; it's all about keeping the flying public safe.

As others have said, places like the Palisades have dealt with airplane noise from DCA for decades. This isn't a new issue. Frankly, I have no sympathy for whiners who knew (or chose to ignore) that they were buying into a neighborhood that sits either adjacent to or underneath flight paths.

It's about keeping you nice and comfy and smug, isn't it? Because you want this to assure this never happens to you, don't you? Hopefully you are wrong and one day you get your share of traffic, but like PP is suggesting it will be dispersed, so not life altering for you to hear a few planes per day, and a huge break for others who live under the beelines of planes right now. Also it was explained ad nauseum here that flight patterns changed, so many people bought in the areas they thought were far enough away from the airports and even inland from the river, but now got planes flying close enough in beelines for hours on end.

Honestly, no one real estate agent ever disclosed the risk. I do think now there’s no excuse. It should be mandatory for public health if nothing else. Just like you get a flood zone on the listing

Yes, but I think it’s true for the future. And the speed of rise. Potomac is a struggle.