FlyingRhenquest 1 #726 April 17, 2015 ryoderThe judge dropped a surprise on the court at the very end of the day: Tomorrow will not be the completion of the trial. In a couple weeks she will be visiting the homes of two plaintiffs, (one close to Vance Brand, and one distant), and will observe the Otter take a load to 12,500 from each location. Then closing arguments will be made back in court that afternoon. Well... that's bizarre. She should also do an observation from inside the otter. And then outside it, naturally, because you really don't want to land with that thing. Actually the pilot is really nice and frequently disregards my suggestion that he should do a barrel roll on the days the wind picks up and we have to ride it back down.I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Edjglass920 0 #727 April 17, 2015 Seriously Bizarre, So is she doing this to get a point of view that the plaintiffs have? If so it is only fair to get both sides and do a tandem to understand how all of us feel about planes and jumping. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #728 April 17, 2015 So what's the plan if the DZ is weathered out?“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #729 April 17, 2015 tonyhays So what's the plan if the DZ is weathered out? Then MHS wins, right?This weekend was ruled out due to weather, so I think the judge knows it could happen again."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zoobrothertom 5 #730 April 17, 2015 theonlyski ******http://www.timescall.com/longmont-local-news/ci_27904056/trial-opens-lawsuit-against-longmonts-mile-hi-skydiving Looks like they're in court for it this week. I'd be interested to hear if anyone is attending and how it's going. Scheduled for the whole week apparently. That video at the bottom of the article is special too. Much better video: http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/04/13/longmont-resident-in-lawsuit-calls-skydiving-plane-penetrating-debilitating/ I appear twice (briefly) in it.Oh, and the reporter is a *babe*, who looks much better in person! I'm trying to take notes of it all, but hell, I could write an article just on the first day. Glad to see there are supporters there for the DZ. Ingrid Moore is an interesting person. Her house was built in 2001, 5-6 years after the DZ opened there, yet she complains about it? Also interesting that she lives less than a mile from the airport but complains about airplane noise. This is fun! She's in a county court arguing about a Federally controlled activity. She "came' to the nuisance and is complaining. I don't recall. Does the airport receive any federal funds? If so, has a noise footprint ever been done or ordered by the FAA FSDO?____________________________________ I'm back in the USA!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #731 April 17, 2015 yoink***In a couple weeks she will be visiting the homes of two plaintiffs, (one close to Vance Brand, and one distant), and will observe the Otter take a load to 12,500 from each location. Then closing arguments will be made back in court that afternoon. I wonder how much money this very, very simple solution has cost people so far? Look, if it makes you feel any better, a lot of that goes to lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #732 April 17, 2015 If this case is decided by a simple judge making a call with her own ears, wouldn't that make it very simple to overturn on appeal based on the federal noise guidelines? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #733 April 17, 2015 Sorry, I truly have no idea. As an aside, just cuz here's where I'm posting, I've yet to see how these threads help the cause. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #734 April 17, 2015 Andy9o8 ******In a couple weeks she will be visiting the homes of two plaintiffs, (one close to Vance Brand, and one distant), and will observe the Otter take a load to 12,500 from each location. Then closing arguments will be made back in court that afternoon. I wonder how much money this very, very simple solution has cost people so far? Look, if it makes you feel any better, a lot of that goes to lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jackwallace 3 #735 April 17, 2015 If the judge is going to listen to the "skydiving" noise. Is he/she staying there to listen to all the other noises? Trains, dogs, cars, etc? Is the judge going to pay the bills, feed and cloth the people he/she will put out of a job if the ruling goes against the skydiving operation?U only make 2 jumps: the first one for some weird reason and the last one that you lived through. The rest are just filler. scr 316 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glitch 0 #736 April 17, 2015 If she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them?Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #737 April 17, 2015 GlitchIf she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them? Not if she does her job properly. https://www.instrumart.com/products/24262/extech-407732-sound-level-meterChuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 8 #738 April 17, 2015 chuckakers***If she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them? Not if she does her job properly. https://www.instrumart.com/products/24262/extech-407732-sound-level-meter The only issue I would have with someone using that is I am fairly certain that it just measures any levels of sound, instead of being able to isolate the otter. It's quite possible that a bird or lawn mower or freeway would register a loud enough signal on the meter without being the otter that's flying overhead."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #739 April 17, 2015 Plaintiff attorney cross: "Why didn't you talk to the plaintiffs?" Expert defense witness: "I tried but you had told them not to talk to me." "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #740 April 17, 2015 Awareness if nothing else. Maybe the USPA could start an AADF program or something to help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #741 April 17, 2015 theonlyski******If she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them? Not if she does her job properly. https://www.instrumart.com/products/24262/extech-407732-sound-level-meter The only issue I would have with someone using that is I am fairly certain that it just measures any levels of sound, instead of being able to isolate the otter. It's quite possible that a bird or lawn mower or freeway would register a loud enough signal on the meter without being the otter that's flying overhead. I don't know squat about audio stuff (yeah, I'm a radio guy and admit that) but I would think a bit of common sense would need to be employed. I also don't think sounds "stack". In other words, if there's a lawn mower nearby giving let's say a 60db reading and then a plane flies over at 100db, I think the device would simply read the same 100db that it would read if the lawn mower wasn't present. Either way, the way to do it would be to take several readings to get a typical average and also consider other sound factors in the testing.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #742 April 17, 2015 I thought that had already been performed, no? Wasn't there a company hired to do that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #743 April 17, 2015 chuckakers*********If she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them? Not if she does her job properly. https://www.instrumart.com/products/24262/extech-407732-sound-level-meter The only issue I would have with someone using that is I am fairly certain that it just measures any levels of sound, instead of being able to isolate the otter. It's quite possible that a bird or lawn mower or freeway would register a loud enough signal on the meter without being the otter that's flying overhead. I don't know squat about audio stuff (yeah, I'm a radio guy and admit that) but I would think a bit of common sense would need to be employed. I also don't think sounds "stack". In other words, if there's a lawn mower nearby giving let's say a 60db reading and then a plane flies over at 100db, I think the device would simply read the same 100db that it would read if the lawn mower wasn't present. Either way, the way to do it would be to take several readings to get a typical average and also consider other sound factors in the testing. Sound is a wave, two different frequencies (separate noises) do not stack as in 50db+80db=130db, but it can resonate in a particular way that certain waves within two individual 'noises' can 'stack' to increase the power of the noise. Things like a gas engine in a lawnmower or motorcycle could be close to the same frequency as a spinning aircraft propeller and actually register a higher reading. I don't think that would happen in this case, but it could. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #744 April 17, 2015 That doesn't sound much like "judgy" type stuff, that's what would worry me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyMarko 1 #745 April 17, 2015 Oh man...I had a scary thought, almost posted it, and it would've been in favor of those crazies if they still get on here Glad I kept my mouth shut for once...well, I guess I still made a post, but didn't ask the question I thought of. Hey Kim!? I live on a busy one-way in Denver. Can you help me get traffic banned on that road? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JWest 0 #746 April 17, 2015 chuckakers*********If she's there specifically to listen to the skydiving noise, as in actively listening FOR it, wouldn't the noise be perceived 'louder' than someone standing next to them who were, say, not paying attention to the circus around them? Not if she does her job properly. https://www.instrumart.com/products/24262/extech-407732-sound-level-meter The only issue I would have with someone using that is I am fairly certain that it just measures any levels of sound, instead of being able to isolate the otter. It's quite possible that a bird or lawn mower or freeway would register a loud enough signal on the meter without being the otter that's flying overhead. I don't know squat about audio stuff (yeah, I'm a radio guy and admit that) but I would think a bit of common sense would need to be employed. I also don't think sounds "stack". In other words, if there's a lawn mower nearby giving let's say a 60db reading and then a plane flies over at 100db, I think the device would simply read the same 100db that it would read if the lawn mower wasn't present. Either way, the way to do it would be to take several readings to get a typical average and also consider other sound factors in the testing. The best way to do this would be to data record a day when there is no jumping, then do the same when there is jumping and average out the DB levels for each day. Even better would be to average it out over a week but that won't happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #747 April 17, 2015 Defense called last witness and rested. Then defense counsel made a motion for a "directed verdict". Judge declined to make an immediate decision on it, but will decide later. Details were hammered about between judge, plaintiff counsel, and defense counsel for the site visits."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #748 April 18, 2015 The witness in the article is the defense acoustic expert witness. The plaintiffs had their own acoustic expert witness earlier in the week. http://www.timescall.com/longmont-local-news/ci_27937014/noise-expert-says-mile-hi-doesnt-have-loudest"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #749 April 18, 2015 Can you tell us what the plantiffs expert said?“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JWest 0 #750 April 18, 2015 ryoderThe witness in the article is the defense acoustic expert witness. The plaintiffs had their own acoustic expert witness earlier in the week. http://www.timescall.com/longmont-local-news/ci_27937014/noise-expert-says-mile-hi-doesnt-have-loudest 52% were made by one person. The judge should see the bias right there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
