Ron Bird original ly sent his 4-4-04 Bird's Eye View which we placed online the same day. While it was also sent to the Country Journal advertiser it was not published until the 5-1-04 issue. In the 5-8-04 issue the advertiser published an unsigned letter opposing Ron's views and republished in with a signature of Brandon Cangiano. We do not have permission to republish his letter.
Here is Ron Bird's response to Brandon Cangiano's letter with a summary of his pro airport letter.
The Bird’s Eye View
5-25-04 - by Ron Bird. A recent letter was published regarding aviation issues and the Agua Dulce Airport. My response clarifies the real facts (the original claim paraphrased in bold).
Claim: control towers are only needed on government owned airports.
There is a rumor going around regarding a control tower being in the near future at the airport, which I’m sure, is unfounded. Control towers are needed when the traffic conditions dictate, regardless of who owns the runway. Given the recent traffic pattern growth in Agua Dulce, I would not rule out that a control tower would never be needed there though.
Claim: confusion over the new paved area at the airport.
The new paved airplane parking area (the one that some of the construction workers thought was a new runway) looks big enough to house up to about 100 small airplanes. This was built without the benefit of a county permit (it’s several acres of asphalt) or State Division of Aeronautics approval. The most recent plot plan the Division of Aeronautics has on file contains nothing to the south of the runway (which is where this new tie-down area is located). This plot plan does list a 500-foot long expansion area that would extend the existing runway westward.
Claim: the airport is limited to planes with less than 400 horsepower.
The FAA master record for the Agua Dulce Airpark lists in the comments section, an airport owner limit of planes with 400 hp or less. Also listed here is a comment that allows jet aircraft with prior permission. [His permit is restricted in condition 12 " limited to, propeller driven aircraft"] These are not FAA rules for the Airpark, but rather owner rules. On May 12, 2004 a turbo-prop Rockwell 690B (N60DB) propelled by two 700 HP jet engines (1,400 total HP) landed, stayed awhile, then took off from the Airpark. [But note his operation permit from the county states at 5a "executive type aircraft not exceeding light twin motors"]
Claim: people on the ground are perfectly safe near an airport.
I believe the following statement is true: innocent people not involved in a recreational activity should not be harmed by that recreational activity. On the 4th of July two years ago a small Cessna crashed in a park in San Dimas. Two innocent picnickers were fatally injured with nine others being severely injured. On June 6, 2003 a small plane pilot who was in the clouds failed to pay attention to his instruments over Los Angeles. This resulted in a fatal crash into an apartment building killing one resident of that building and severely injuring 7 others. On January 15, 2004 a general aviation jet flying out of Van Nuys crashed into a trailer park in Mint Canyon. The innocent residents had just departed to shop at Target, so just one trailer was obliterated and no ground injuries sustained.
Several months ago Barry Kirshner made a presentation to the Agua Dulce Town Council and I became rather concerned when he mentioned that he lets local moms exercise on the taxiways with their strollers. In Texas in 2002 an experienced pilot missed the runway and landed on the grass. The NTSB report for this fatal ground incident states: "The pedestrian who was struck by the right wing of the airplane, occasionally took walks during the morning and evening hours on the taxiway of the airstrip".
The NTSB lists 679 aviation fatalities in the US for the year 2003; only six were in fact ground fatalities. For safety reasons use of land both on airport property and off is an important factor in this rather low number. The CA Land Use Policy Handbook states: "Safety is a factor in the interaction between airports and nearby land uses in three distinct ways: Protecting people and property on the ground; Minimizing injury to aircraft occupants; and Preventing creation of hazards to flight". It further describes the area where arrival and departure accidents are most likely to happen. For departure accidents it states: "The most tightly bunched 40% of the points lie within an area 1,500 feet wide, extending approximately 2,000 feet beyond the runway end, but also adjacent to the edges of the runway".
Claim: zero on the ground fatalities between 1980 and 1990 due to general aviation.
Please tell that to the innocent person who on February 11, 1989 in Yarmouth, MA encountered a pilot who “could not make it to the airport, so he attempted a landing on a highway. As the aircraft was about to touch down on the highway the landing gear hit a car, killing a passenger riding in the car”. Or on June 30, 1989 at a small airport in Louisiana lax airport rules allowed this to happen: “airplane was taxiing between parked airplanes and a hangar, after a flight, when a farmer walked into the propeller. The farmer often came to the airstrip to sell his produce to the airstrip workers”. This farmer must have tripped on his shoelaces before hitting his head on the prop - bet that was the real cause. I found these two incidents in the NTSB database by only reviewing the year 1989 in this “accident free” decade.
My Safety Concerns Regarding the Agua Dulce Airport:
As a community we need to ensure that the Agua Dulce Airpark conforms to the safety requirements. The soccer fields are located in the runway protection area directly at the end of the runway. The new access road to the new airplane parking lot is located right next to the runway in an area the FAA calls the "obstacle free zone". On May 6, 2004 a group of young Agua Dulce school children visited the Airpark on a school field trip. The Airpark's website has a picture of these children playing on the grass between the runway and the taxiway, which also is in this "obstacle free zone". I did not find any NOTAM’s (notice to airmen) indicating the runway was closed during their visit and I understand there was air traffic during their visit.
In the last year Los Angeles County has issued violations [1-8-04 - 6-27-03 - 8-15-03 to the Agua Dulce Airpark for: serving alcohol without a permit, serving food without a permit, allowing prohibited acrobatic flying over the airport, not obtaining temporary use permits for special events (repeated violations), allowing air traffic during special events and other violations. Yes, there are safety concerns at the airpark and we as a community need to insist on having the safest local airport possible.
[Caution satire starts here]
About the author: Mr. Ron Bird is an unlicensed pilot who recently upgraded his extensive avionics fleet to MS Flight Simulator 2004. His current experiments entail flying 737's and Beech King Air's successfully out of the Agua Dulce Airport. Although his landing attempts with these craft have not been fruitful at Agua Dulce, no animals have been harmed in these experiments.