Warbird Information Exchange

It's been a while since I was directly involved with over-runs and safety zones specifics, but some of y'all are confusing the two. The over-run is just that, the area off the runway ends that allows an aircraft to run off of the runway a certain distance with little or hopefully no damage or injuries. The safety zone is a much larger area and has to do with a length and width and an acceptable slope over obstructions, i.e., this 4' fence could be as close as maybe 25' and still have an acceptable slope path. However, at the same time, it can't be in the over-run area, of say, 500' from the end of the runway. Looking at the pic, it's pretty close to the runway. Also, regardless of who owns the property, the city, county or airport authority should have an easement or right-of-way due to public safety. At my airport, the city is the governing authority for the airport, and they do not on property just noerth od the runway, yet they have an easement allowing them to keep that property clear of trees, either by topping as needed or complete removal. So, without a big stink, the governing authority should be able to remove this fence due to public safety concerns as well as FAA requirements.

This. The point of a safety area is to protect or minimize the damage to an aircraft in the event of an "overshoot, undershoot, or excursion from the runway" per the FAA. More than likely someone isn't going to hit the fence on takeoff or landing, but if they slide off with enough speed or momentum it could be a severe problem. A fence pole can and will penetrate, especially if its set in concrete.

And yes it can be a political issue; if the commission or group in charge of the airport sees the potential fight with the landowner as too big of a PR headache, they may not fight the issue. Don't know the specifics here so I don't want to throw mud, but it's happened before.

-BG

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

Hah, I just Google Earthed my airport and our 8' high FAA Approved security fence is about 230' from the south end of the runway but our north end fence is about 400'. Is the Google Earth shot of this one up-to-date? I know mine is.

Are you guys not familiar with ALS lighting at airports?





The lights that stick up out of the ground on steel poles that are closer to the runway than that fence.

It's really not uncommon to have objects in the clear zone.

You think that fence is bad, how about "egregiously erected" from the petition?

Son, where I'm from, we call that "catch fencing".

_________________
Rob C

Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. “

– Michael Crichton

That's got to be one of the worst subject title postings I've seen in a while here. From my friends up at Vintage Aircraft Company:

Dear WIX members:

Here's a little background of Sonoma Valley Airport (Schellville) and I'll try and answer some of the questions y'all have posted.

Sonoma Valley Airport has been in existence since 1946, in a very rural area of Sonoma - in the floodplain. In 2008 we purchased the property from the original family that owned it - as the patriarch of the family had passed on. We are a privately owned, yet open to public use, free. We do not take any taxpayer dollars. Our field is home to many 20s, 30s and 40s aircraft including Chris' P40, Grumman F3F, Walt Bowe's Laird Speedwing, Frank Schelling's Curtiss Jenny, George Perez's P51, and so on...
The airport is located outside the town of Sonoma and the adjacent properties to the airport back to floodplain and wetlands, and the County will not allow import fill to raise grade above flood. Due to these County ordinances, the neighboring property the airport's runway overrun crosses, has never been an issue because of it's locale - floodplain. So all previous owners acknowledged the presence of the overrun, and for 65 years it has been obstacle free. In 2004 that property was sold to Josh Frazier. Josh made plans to open a fly fishing teaching/event center, and submitted plans to the County of Sonoma for review. Since the property butts against an airports runways, due diligence was performed by the building dept. and the project, as Mr. Frazier proposed, was NOT compatible in keeping safe airport operations or keeping the public safe. Frazier designed his center with a couple of ponds and a stream, which the large pond, fresh-water, stocked with trout, (a clear bird attractant) was planned for right next to the runway/overrun, which his plan drawings show the "emergency landing strip." This also meant Frazier would put students, the public, on the ground in this zone as well. The county denied him building permits based on (obvious) public safety reasons, an avoidable risk. So, Frazier built it anyway. Today the Leland Fly Fishing Ranch is completely built out and is still unpermitted. He didn't even get permits to build the buildings, or the septic. In 2009 the County of Sonoma violated the project and took him to an abatement hearing. The Hearing Office went easy on Frazier and gave him 30 days to apply for permits and 4 months to get them finalized. Yet from 2009 to 2011, Frazier didn't get his permits, he continued to elaborate his property with a rifle range for his customers to use pointed across the runway, (no permits) and then erecting a log "pilot killer" fence half way down the overrun, to boundary where he could park his event guests cars (no permits for events). Yes, he has events and his guests wander off Leland property onto the runways of the airport. In 2011 Frazier sold over 600 Groupon Fly Fishing lessons, to be given on an unpermitted pond, without a Use Permit; also the County of Sonoma sued him and slapped a judgment against him. Well, this did not stop him either, so the airport had to file a Writ of Mandate against him in June 2012, and the fence across the overrun gained a rail in height.

Sonoma Valley Airport cannot build (legally) anymore hangars on our 80 acres because of the floodplain location; the wine barrel company, located on the other side of Leland, cannot fill a portion of their land to bring above flood because County does not allow import fill, and they have millions of dollars in wood they need to keep above flood water; yet Frazier, breaks all the rules, compromises an existing airport's runway - and the rest of us who obey the rules. If Leland is successful in buying after-the-fact permits from the County, the airport's future could be in jeopardy, as it puts a permittied public gathering place in the safety zones of an active runway.

Please sign our petition. The fence serves absolutely no purpose. https://www.change.org/petitions#search ... %20fishing
If you have any questions, please feel free to send us an email, sheryl@vintageaircraft.com or give us a call 707-938-2444.

The "R" means Restricted - the length is only 1500 feet

The aircraft taking-off and landing are antique, historic aircraft, and a simple engine failure on takeoff could rendere the pilot killed if he hits that log (solid 8 inch round) log fence.

If there was a reason for a fence, a frangible fence or hedge would be considerate.... IF there was a reason for a fence on the runway overrun at all...
--
Sheryl Carlucci
Vintage Aircraft Company
Sonoma Valley Airport
23982 Arnold Drive
Sonoma, CA 95476

And from me, please take a couple of minutes and watch this investigative report/video that was on ABC a few weeks ago..........Roger
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news%2Fiteam&id=8828011

_________________
Roger Cain
www.sfahistory.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Stearman/


We must limit politicians to two terms:
one in office and one in jail.

True, but only one big problem with that; objects mounted within the clear zones (including ALSFs, MALSFs, MALSRs, runway/taxiway edge lights, signs, etc) all have to be frangibly mounted so they collapse in the event of an aircraft excursion. The um..."pilot killing" log fence described earlier most certainly is not.

And just my $0.02 again as a wildlife control guy--large ponds full of fish to attract birds off the approach/departure end of a runway is absolutely not good. The fact that he has been warned about the impact screams liability if something happens as a result.

-BG

_________________
ATC: "Oscar 2, cleared to engage wildlife at your discretion..."

Sooooo, how about signing this now that I've given you information on it, trying to hit 1000 signatures.
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=47458&p=475928#p475928

_________________
Roger Cain
www.sfahistory.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Stearman/


We must limit politicians to two terms:
one in office and one in jail.

This e-mail notification arrived yesterday in response to the petition. Looked like things might work out positively.

This message is from David Mace who started the petition "Leland Fly Fishing Ranch: IMMEDIATELY Remove the Solid Log Fence & Trees Across SVAs Runway Overrun," which you signed on Change.org.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today Mr. Frazier/Leland Fly Fishing Ranch began to take down the hazardous fence that borders the runway on three sides. The log fence rails across the runway have been removed, but the log rail fencing on both sides still remain and they are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the fencing straight across the runway. The side fencing has a zig-zag pattern, and poses log ends pointed straight at you on take-off/landing. All of us here at Schellville are hopeful the side fencing will come down tomorrow. THANK YOU!!! Your voice, your concern and your willingness to get involved touched the hearts of us here at Schellville, and we welcome you to fly in, on soon to be safe runways again, as Chris, Sheryl and the rest of us here at Schellville would love to meet you and thank you personally. We send our heartfelt gratitude to all that supported us... YOU made the difference.

Then a couple of hours later this arrived:

This message is from David Mace who started the petition "Leland Fly Fishing Ranch: IMMEDIATELY Remove the Solid Log Fence & Trees Across SVAs Runway Overrun," which you signed on Change.org.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sadly, the fence removal stopped! The middle section, across the runway was disassembled and logs piled and left, but the sides fencing remains erect all the way to the threshold of 35. The DOT letter regarding the fence violation was specific, all three sides must be removed, especially the side fencing which {DOT states} "presents a hard stop (death) hazard to all aircraft operating at the Sonoma Valley Airport." The side fencing, (zig-zag patterned) with log ends pointed straight at aircraft can impale the windshield and.... The bigger question here, why not just comply with DOT, especially when you have full knowledge of the hazard the fence poses? Email Mr. & Mrs. Frazier (Leland) laurel@flyfishingoutfitters.com and joshfrazier@me.com and request they finish the job completely (all three sides) and correctly (remove debris from overrun) and give aviators and the airport back the safe airport operations deserved. Thanks again. If you would like a copy of the DOT letter, email me dmace1020@gmail.com

Looks like there is still a job to be done!

T J

_________________
Make my day, punk!