FAA considering making Surf Air flight path over Bay official

The truth is FAA is determined to make Surf Air flight path Over Sunnyvale and Cupertino disregarding whatsoever the local residents have to say.
They published another promotional video on BVA on 9/28, after the strong opposition from Sunnyvale and Cupertino one night before, ant the 9/27 FAA BVA "Community Outreach" event!
And the community outreach event was removed completely from FAA website!!! For the reason of continuous maneuver. Fooling the world!

For more, visit FB page:

Web Link

From the looks of the color coded map either way that's chosen all flights will fly over Sunnyvale. The starting point is the red dot, Everyone gets overhead flights there.

The question from there is wether to fly directly up the peninsula over 100.000 homes and schools or continue over the commercial area of whisman to 237/101, to Moffett Field to over water.

I'm just spitballing hear but i would guess 100 to 1 persons flown over if straight in approach versus the Bay approach. And that's only in clear weather.

Also I'm not sure who chose a meeting time of 6:00 p.m. on a weekday, but it was an hour and a half from Menlo Park, and probably 2 hours from N. Fair Oaks where most of the worst noise and plane traffic is. How about holding the next meeting at the airport.

I agree that this meeting and other Surf Air/San Carlos Airport/ FAA meetings in the past year or so have been purposely set up to ensure low public attendance. Inconvenient locations and times. Most freeways around the bay area are gridlocked at 6PM on weeknights. Very short notice, so that groups cannot organize themselves. Yet, despite this, the public did make it, albeit in small numbers, because it is a BIG PROBLEM.

The Bayside Visual Approach, only redirects a fraction of Surf Air flights, and as the FAA rep stated there are a lot of exceptions. Also the 6 AM departures will continue to rattle our windows.

The main advantage of the Bayside Visual Approach is the safety aspect, in that the planes are flying over a less populated area, and a crash may be less disastrous. I question, what security checks are performed on SurfAir passengers, pilots and flights?

One thing that became abundantly clear to me during the FAA presentation last week is that there are no other routing options for San Carlos airport, because of the flight approach paths into SFO and SJC which take priority. This, I feel, should raise a flag to the FAA that San Carlos airport is not equipped to handle the ever increasing scheduled flights of an airline such as SurfAir, and if SurfAir operations moved to SFO or SJC, there would no longer be a noise or safety problem.

NicZB:

the whole point of SQL is as a "reliever" airport. Relieving traffic load from airports like SFO and SJC.

when was the last time a flight was diverted from sfo/sjc?

The role of reliever airports is not to accommodate flights that are scheduled into primary airports but to provide space for flights that do not need to go to primary airports in the first place.

" Reliever Airports are airports designated by the FAA to relieve congestion at Commercial Service Airports and to provide improved general aviation access to the overall community."

Every flight that lands or takes off from a reliever airport is one less flight that would otherwise cause congestion at primary airports like SFO and SJC.

Sorry Peter couldn't hear your answer to the question

"when was the last time?"

down home:

Peter answered your question. You just didn't like the answer. The point of reliever airports is not to provide a place to divert scheduled airlines from SFO or SJC. They are there for traffic that doesn't have to use the larger airports. Hence the term "reliever". They "relieve" unnecessary traffic from the larger airports. So, no regularly scheduled flight has ever been diverted to SQL and NEVER will. Get it now?

"Every flight that lands or takes off from a reliever airport is one less flight that would otherwise cause congestion at primary airports like SFO and SJC."

So Sql is there to relieve traffic that would otherwise go to SFO, but there has never been a flight relieved,

Sorry doesn't work,

Every flight that lands or takes off from SQL that would have otherwise used SFO or SJC is a reliever flight because that flight reduced the congestion at SFO or SJC.

Be serious for a moment,

If San Carlos Airport weren't there do you think any of those flights would go to SFO

"If San Carlos Airport weren't there do you think any of those flights would go to SFO"

Absolutely.

"I am ashamed to live in a community that takes this attitude towards anything that costs it money regardless of the benefits to the larger community."

Of course they would. Where do YOU think they would go?

"If San Carlos Airport weren't there do you think any of those flights would go to SFO"

Of course they would. Where do YOU think they would go?