Friday, November 6, 2009

Residential Noise Pollution from Commercial Aviation

Residential Noise Pollution from Commercial Aviation

Lake Harriet is a beautiful jewel of a lake nestled in the City of Minneapolis. A favorite pastime, for me, is fishing the south side of the lake for bass near the weedline and shore. I knew when to scramble home when a large Boeing 747 loomed nearby on its approach to MSP. Right on time -5:40 PM the big boy tip-toed through the suburbs toward a landing.

For a short period of time a conversation below was impossible to hear. Think of the number of approaches and takeoffs the people below endure just for the priviledge of living on the shore of the lake each day. Take offs are noisier.

The power reductions imposed by the major jetports are effective on landing and takeoff but the decibel level makes ordinary conversation limited. What you and I need to remember is what we can do to reduce noise to acceptable levels to "keep the peace" with the public surrounding an airport we use.

Low and slow approaches by conventional small planes with small, frequent power adjustments is not the way to keep the peace.

Not quickly gaining altitude within the airport boundries after takeoff is another way to expose those underneath to unnecessary noise pollution.

Busy airports will incur the wrath of the "polluted" that may lead to legal sanctions to reduce noise levels. Ann Arbor airport had a continuing problem with City Council to reduce expansion plans of the airport and times of use. Good flying procedures reduced the complaints and pressure.

Co-operation is the key between the public and the flying community, both commercial and private aviation interests.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Research in Aviation: What Do You Believe?

Statistics - What Do you Believe

Calling all folks who like to play bingo. Calling all folks who like to gamble now and then. Calling all people who believe everything they read in the news sources about new aviation research as the gospel truth. If you do, you have just been scammed!

Jim, get serious. These folks want to believe what they read. They fly, they like it and hang on every bit of positive news they can find. Okay, lets look at "odds" that play into research and believable results.

Take a quarter and flip it five times in a row. Its either going to be heads or tails each time. Everybody has done this at least once in their lives. You know, tonight you do the dishes. Heads I do them, tails you do them!

But, suppose you were going to Las Vegas for the weekend to enjoy a little "R&R." If you flipped that quarter five times and came up with five heads in a row, and you didn't know better, in Las Vegas you bet "heads" everytime in a game....you would lose your shirt. The "Odds" in coin flipping is 50/50. The secret in odds, that you know, is the more trials(times you flipped the coin)the closer the results would be to 50/50.

In research, if you read an article where the experiment consisted of ten trials, the result has no validity. Its like getting five heads in coin flipping. Whatever that researcher says is nothing but an "opinion" and statisticallly has no validity. The opinion may be right. But something is missing that will lend truth to the opinion.

In statistics, the number of trials is very important to support the results an investigator publishes. In order to state a 90% certainty for an experiment a very large number of trials must be run. Rarely does an investigator, seeking approval from the reading public, run a significant number of trials to validate what he is saying.

News leaked to the Press or TV, to gain exposure for a scientist, is not believable news unless backed up by statistics that are credible. Later, if other investigators back up the results of the research, you now have believable news.

A fine point to remember! The news you read about diabetes, in the future, may be statistically correct when more data becomes available. Until that data becomes available and is supported by other researchers the results are just an unsubstantiated opinion.

Major publications, like The New England Journal of Medicine as an example, have strict parameters before an article is accepted for publication. The source of the news is important too.

When is news believable news? Now you have a simplistic rule of thumb what research to put into a "circular file" and what research to become excited about.