long-range motion detection/radar

[troymccraw]

I live near an airport (it's a long story) and I advocate for noise mitigation. I have a home-grown sound-monitoring system which data I use to persuade people of the magnitude of the noise problem in my neighborhood as a result of aircraft over-flights. I actually publish this data on my web-site, http://www.myphx.net. The airport is not too happy about my advocacy efforts and has challenged the accuracy of my data asserting that my unattended noise-system can't identify the source of the noise.<p>So, I'm looking for a fool-proof (and affordable) solution to the problem of automatically correlating "sound events" with their aircraft sources. Aircraft pass overhead along a path that more-or-less parallels my street about a quarter-mile from my house and I have a line-of-sight view.<p>Hardware is not my area of expertise, so I don't know if it's even within the realm of possibility to construct a radar device or some other device that can detect moving aircraft at this range. Any suggestions would be most appreciated.<p>Troy

[Engineer1138]

Get a cheap digital camera and aim it at the departure path. When the noise level passes a certain threshold, take a picture. Either use a camera with a remote shutter release, or (more likely on something cheap), hack into the camera for access to the shutter pushbutton.<p>Note that they can still say it's not that airplane you took a photo of causing the noise. Correlation doesn't prove causation.

[redrocker]

I once lived in Belleville, NJ and suffered from the airplane noise from Newark airport, so I am sympathetic with your plight. At the time I also looked into mitigation efforts. It sounds like you are building a legal case. Perhaps you could share with the forum a bit more detail about the noise mitigation responsibilities of the airport and the burden of proof you are trying to meet to establish that the airport is in violation of their obligations. I understand that this is "soft" reply, but I think it is important for two reasons: 1) it will motivate others to support you; and 2) it will help to focus the technical solutions to your problem consistent with the burden of proof outlined in the statutes.

[jwax]

Like Eng said, when you photo catch the aircraft, be sure the date/time stamp is "on" in the camera.
That stamped variable for each flight will correlate exactly with the actual arrival/departure times of each flight-proving it the perpetrator of the noise. A video camera with sound would be best.

[troymccraw]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Beaker:
I once lived in Belleville, NJ and suffered from the airplane noise from Newark airport, so I am sympathetic with your plight. At the time I also looked into mitigation efforts. It sounds like you are building a legal case. Perhaps you could share with the forum a bit more detail about the noise mitigation responsibilities of the airport and the burden of proof you are trying to meet to establish that the airport is in violation of their obligations. I understand that this is "soft" reply, but I think it is important for two reasons: 1) it will motivate others to support you; and 2) it will help to focus the technical solutions to your problem consistent with the burden of proof outlined in the statutes.<hr></blockquote><p>In response to Beaker's post, here's some additional detail.<p>The goal isn't (or wasn't) to build a legal case. For one thing, I certainly don't have the resources to litigate, and for another, the airport has successfully rebuffed all legal challenges of the past. It would appear that, in the final analysis, there really isn't anything in the law to protect the public in this situation. The hard reality is that any noise mitigation procedures that the airport institutes are voluntary. If the FAA says that planes need to fly over your house, then they'll fly over your house. No, my thinking is that this problem can only be solved politically.<p>The airport is owned and operated by the City of Phoenix, which has strategically located their airport on its city limits. My community is in the adjacent City of Tempe. Flight paths on the Phoenix side lie over commercial/industrial-use lands; flight paths on the Tempe side lie over mixed-use lands, much of which has been historically residential.<p>Because of this, City of Phoenix politicians are pretty much immune to public discontent about noise, since none of their own constituency is affected. They reap all the economic benefit and none of the liability, and the airport expands with impunity.<p>In 2000, Sky Harbor added a third runway which created a flight path directly over my neighborhood. Initially there was a surge of complaints, but to no avail, and eventually people gave up. Realizing that if residents were ever going to see any relief from Sky Harbor’s relentless growth, it would have to come from our own City Hall, and complaints were going to be critical in motivating our own elected officials to take on this powerful business interest. <p>I set up my sound-monitoring system to publicize the problem, and more importantly, to give people a way to complain untiringly: when noise levels reach a certain threshold, an email complaint is automatically generated, and anyone in the affected area can sign-up to have complaints generated on their behalf.<p>This has been so successful that it’s led to this challenge from the airport. The charge is that in the absence of radar data showing an aircraft’s flight path, one can't certify that a noise-event--regardless of it's profile--can be attributed to this airport’s traffic, even though, anecdotally, it's pretty obvious that on my cul-de-sac, that the only conceivable source of such loud noises are over-flying aircraft in airspace that’s dedicated to this airport.

[redrocker]

Very good. So you are seeking redress through the political system rather than the court system. That is admirable considering the increasing and improper use of the court system to redress political issues that are unpopular with the citizenry. Unlike many people, I bet you and your neighbors know who your local representatives are, because for you, they really matter to your quality of life. (I don't mean to insult those of you who do, this is just a generalization.)<p>Now on to the technical stuff. Your automatic email system sounds cool. Perhaps you could share some basic details with the forum just for the "cool factor" (and your bragging rights).<p>Lastly, do many of the overflights occur when dark outside, and consequently, will the suggested photographic method work at night?<p>Good luck. I am going to let the smart guys get it from here.

[haklesup]

Though I couldn't find the free website (and I do think there is one) I did find this software www.airnavsystems.com<p>If you setup a radar at the end of a runway, you would probably hear from Homeland Security before long anyway. I can't believe they suggested that. It might be illeagal (not sure).<p>Basically, you can track flights online. It appears this software can feed you real time flight path data for your airport. Looks like all you need to do is save a log from this program and correlate it to your audio data. <p>This would be much better than a fuzzy picture of a plane in the distance. The data would be FAA certified and you would know the exact flight number, altitude and location in the sky. It may even be possible to anticipate incoming flights and create a statistical review of all noise associated with traffic.<p>Once you know the Airline, equipment, altitude and path of the noisiest planes, you may be able to make a specific request from the airport that would result in desired mitigation. It would also be useful to know what about the quietest planes makes them that way. If you can target a particular airline with solid data then they are more likly to bend since they are more sales sensitive.<p>Additional correlation with weather data would also be useful in determining meaningful trends. This can also be gathered online from the airport website or other weather related sites as well as this software (atmospheric conditions will effect how you hear sound from the same source)<p>Rather than just pester the airport, you could collect a detailed database of events that can be analyzed to determine the reason for the loudest planes. It may be that if planes of a certain size were restricted on the new runway when the weather is just so , might be enough to make you happier.<p>Are you haveing a bigger problem with takeoffs or landings? Might be able to convince them to use "short run takoffs" during certain times for certain equipment. This has been tried at other airports. Should be studies available somewhere<p>One more comment: I have heard some very loud planes over my house which turned out to be military. Some of them pass directly over San Jose airport and would be difficult to distinguish from a civilian flight without looking up(except they are much louder and don't show up on any air traffic software)<p>So many edits
[ November 11, 2004: Message edited by: haklesup ]<p>[ November 11, 2004: Message edited by: haklesup ]<p>[ November 11, 2004: Message edited by: haklesup ]</p>

[dacflyer]

you know a lot of people complain when they move near a airport.or next to a rail road..i do not know why.. you knew the airport or railroad was there was there , and most likely they was there before you moved there. so why do you want to mess with them for ??
you know the old addage....if you do not like the noise..move...<p>sorry if i am out of line here....its just one of theose days ,
but hey,,if your just doing a science experiment...good luck..

[troymccraw]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dacflyer:
you know a lot of people complain when they move near a airport.or next to a rail road..i do not know why.. you knew the airport or railroad was there was there , and most likely they was there before you moved there. so why do you want to mess with them for ??
you know the old addage....if you do not like the noise..move...<p>sorry if i am out of line here....its just one of theose days ,
but hey,,if your just doing a science experiment...good luck.. <hr></blockquote><p>You are out of line, and at the risk of further abusing the forum…<p>I get this response from a lot of people here because most people here are not “natives”. I was talking recently to the superintendent of the elementary school, located a few hundred yards from my house (which I attended in the 1960s), who told me that the students don’t like to go outside for recess because of the noise. I can assure you that when I planted sapling trees at my house—when seeing a large commercial jet was still a bit of a novelty—that I never dreamed that when those trees reached maturity that Phoenix Sky Harbor would be the fifth largest airport in the nation in terms of traffic volumes.