Hear hear.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022, 14:48 Jim Thompson <JT@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I normally stay out of this sort of back and forth, with the idea that too
many voices inhibit consensus. I don’t see consensus building here.
SKX pilots, and I’ve been one for 22 years, ought to recognize that we
don’t have much leverage. We exist in a moderately adverse environment -
meaning there are plenty of people that don’t like the airport and the town
council politicians have been swayed by this group over the years. In
fact, the new mayor was, as a part of his platform, opposed to the
airport. Our numbers are small, our “negatives” are high, as they say, and
the town has power and we don’t.
in the business world, when confronted with a circumstance such as this,
the playbook would be to take as many arguments away from the other side as
possible - in other words, to position oneself as responsive to concerns
and reasonable. In this case, I would suggest coming up with a voluntary
noise abatement plan - one we can live with, one that demonstrates
responsiveness and flexibility. To do otherwise, simply strengthens the
arguments on the other side for peremptory action - action that could be
very difficult for us to unwind. Why play into the hands of folks that
don’t like the airport ?
I hope someone with good knowledge, talent and political instincts rises
to the airport manager’s position. We’re lucky to have had Kino for the
town to rely on, or at least talk to, but I’m pretty sure that he would
rather be doing something else.
Jim Thompson
Preston Hollow Holdings
c: 214.709.2399
JT@xxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 8, 2022, at 13:31, Kino Chavez <kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Response;
1) Most of the jet traffic into KSKX arrive VFR. That is because ABQ
center normally asks for a cancellation below 16.000ft when transitioning
from the high altitude environment to a VFR arrival. Also, a jet will
always do a VFR arrival into Taos if able to reduce operating costs.
2) We have always gotten far more noise complaints about light GA aircraft
than jets. This is because the big guys are very concerned about operating
costs and do not ever do multiple patterns or sight see over town.
3) Believe it or not, TSV and the Louis Bacon organization have not had
any input into the operations at the Taos Airport. They haven't even asked
to.
4) The midfield tie downs went away after we observed numerous occasions
where aircraft got stuck in the ruts. In their attempts to power out of the
ruts the aircraft pitched forward and nearly had prop strikes. We had
several times where experimental tail draggers (RVs) have gotten their
tail wheels stuck taxiing in. I have used this safety issue to hopefully
leverage money to rebuild the ramp in the near future.
The town is aggressively looking for an Airport Manager. This could be an
opportunity for an enthusiastic aviator to make a difference.
Kino Chavez
*TAOS*Aviation
P: 575-737-9790
E: kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.*TAOS*Aviation.com <http://www.TAOSAviation.com>
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 10:27 AM Lynz <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, for one, you're targeting small aircraft and local pilots and doing
nothing about jet traffic - which will be on IFR flight plans - and which
are the real noise offenders which upset the community. That's just for
starters. A glaring oversight here is the fact that Taos Ski Valley is now
effectively dictating all flight operations at the airport. And that has
been largely kept from the community. What's next? Tie downs go away to
make room for jet parking as was proposed about a year ago?
On Friday, July 8, 2022, 10:03:38 AM MDT, Steve Hanks <
stevehanks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What’s wrong with VFR pattern restrictions? If it’s good for the town I
don’t understand why it would be a problem. We’re a municipal airport and
depend on the support of the town and the public. It’s good training
too. I trust Kino on this issue.
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 8, 2022, at 10:51 AM, Kino Chavez <kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I have worked airport PR for a long time. If you ignore the complaints of
the local community, regardless of who came first, the airport will lose.
There were two options available:
1) Pass the pilot's name and tail number to the FAA and let them deal
with it (this is what the FAA has asked us to do in the past). I did not
choose, nor do I like this option.
2) Handle it in house by letting the local flying community know of the
problem. My preferred solution.
The aircraft that some seem to be focused on is a U.S. Forest service
contracted aircraft that comes in here every year at this time to do survey
work. The aircraft is flying in pre-approved areas at pre-approved
altitudes and did not cause the problem.
Kino Chavez
*TAOS*Aviation
P: 575-737-9790
E: kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.*TAOS*Aviation.com <http://www.TAOSAviation.com>
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 9:02 AM David Chasteen <dchasteen@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Earlier is better than later on this stuff. Once a critical mass of
people have decided they hate the airport, it's hard to roll it back and
then bad things happen.
https://www.flyingmag.com/shorter-runway-at-ksmo-increases-risk/#:~:text=The%20FAA%20has%20authorized%20the,since%20the%20runway%20was%20shortened
.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022, 06:27 Kino Chavez <kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Pattern Restrictions have been needed for a long time. The community is
going to demand them. I have been receiving requests for a long time.
Kino Chavez
*TAOS*Aviation
P: 575-737-9790
E: kino.chavez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.*TAOS*Aviation.com <http://www.TAOSAviation.com>
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 4:25 PM Lynz <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Obviously the offender is known to the FBO, so why not just deal with
him directly instead of suggesting flight restrictions affecting all
pilots? Then we can also all be spared the hand wringing and amateur ADS-B
CSI. Just a thought...
