By Dan Schlossberg
ConsumerAffairs.com
September 6, 2007
Noise vs. need.
Thats the dilemma facing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as it battles to find a way to relieve extreme congestion in the skies over the Northeast.
It is a battle: although delays involving the three New York airports are the worst in the nation, residents and their elected officials say proposed changes in airplane routes would intrude on their quality of life.
The issue is airplane noise over now-quiet neighborhoods.
The FAA says its new route plan would not only reduce delays into New York and Philadelphia airports by 20 per cent but would actually reduce overall noise. In addition, the agtency insists its plan would save airlines $285 million per year in fuel, allow controllers to line up landing planes more efficiently, provide pilots with the chance to fly more directly between points, and help aircraft avoid storms more easily.
Although it will be four years before the new FAA route plan will be fully operational, the agency says it will provide coast-to-coast benefits because delays in New York eventually spread across the whole country.
Although the three airports hit hardest by delays this year are Newark, LaGuardia, and John F. Kennedy, where more than 40 per cent of flights have been affected, opponents to the FAAs plan include both U.S. Senators from New Jersey, Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez.
Rep. Eliot Engel of New York is also outspoken in his opposition. All three say the FAA plan will provide only minor relief in the sky while causing major headaches literally on the ground.
The FAA spent 10 years studying the plan, and its potential impact, before approving it this week. It is expected to directly benefit passengers using airports in New York, New Jersey, and Philadelphia.
