Skydive Laconia?

[TheNoonans]

"FAA received over 80 comments from interested parties. The majority of these comments stated that this proposal presents a major safety concern to pilots and airport users".

As I reference above, if we wanted to flood the comment process with "interested parties", we could have provided 800 favorable comments. We left it alone. Wasn't needed (and still isn't).

As a side note, "interested parties" does not dictate "local" interested parties. The LAA is attempting to reach as many people as they can, even outside the Laconia/Gilford area.

More importantly though, "interested parties" does not constitute "educated parties". If I was living in the region and bought into all the scare tactics that have been posted, I'd be concerned to.

Concern can actually be a good thing, it indicates people are actually thinking about it. We are all for that, support it 100%.

The issue though is education versus concern.

Let me give the community here an example to ponder. A factual verifiable example:

Back in 2008 Mary and I were coming up to the meeting with the LAA where we were going to formally address the LAA and request permission to land on the airport. As required, we provided the airport manager and the LAA with all of our supporting documentation, a 40+ page packet of info a month prior to the meeting. Now about a week prior to the meeting, the airport manager sent out an email to the list of local pilots and property owners on the airport forewarning them that a couple was coming up to request to land parachutes on the airport. The email went on to say that we were bringing an entourage with us, people to support our cause. The email went on to encourage local attendance so that these people on the email list could have their say as well.

We would have been thrilled about that, except one thing was missing from the email:

Any reference to the volume of information we provided.

Why would you send out a "call to action" so to speak to the local pilots and hangar owners you are supposed to be serving without letting them know you have a volume of information provided by the proposed business owners that they can research and educate themselves with prior to the meeting?

The answer: Unfortunately, they didn't want you educated at that meeting because it's easier to create panic and chaos that way. Do you think people showed up to that meeting boiled up? Yup. Of course they did, they knew nothing about us, other than that we were outsiders and we were bringing an entourage. (In a way those of you that showed up without being given access to that information ahead of time were being used as pawns by the LAA unfortunately. They were looking for your hysteria, not your educated input.)

Now if it were me and I wanted to make sure everyone was educated, I would have sent out the same email, but INCLUDED that the Airport Manager had the entire proposal including FAA and AOPA documents that were available for the local pilots and hangar owners to study prior to the meeting.

That didn't happen.

I would even go so far as to let the proposed business owners know what I was doing and ask if they would be willing to answer questions from these people.

That didn't happen either. We got a copy of the email privately about a month later. Wonder why they excluded us from that "call to action"? Wait, I know, they're not "legally obligated" to let us know these things........

Is that the transparency that you, the community are willing to accept from your airport authority and it's management?

The irony is..........they had no problem giving our proposal to the Selectmen of Gilford last month.........yet it was purposely withheld from you when it mattered most, at the outset of this process.

Back to the current concerns. Did you know that both FBOs have Bill's "Skydive Laconia" photo on their office windows at the Main Terminal building showing a tandem pair about to collide with a jet? This despite the fact that in the 28 year history of tandem jumping, a tandem pair has never collided with any aircraft, let alone a jet. If I was a local pilot and I walked by that photo for 2+ years, I'd have concerns too.

Fear mongering, plain and simple. And these are supposed to be professional establishments.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[superdawgfan]

But I do know one thing--I will never, ever do business with LakesRegionsAerials.com.

I don't know any of the individuals involved in this, but I find that the smarmy attitude displayed by Mr. Hemmel is quite distasteful.

Too bad for the entire region.

[Jonas Pilot]

... but I find that someone trying to force their way into a place where they are not wanted is very distasteful.

[RLW]

Originally Posted by superdawgfan

But I do know one thing--I will never, ever do business with LakesRegionsAerials.com.
I don't know any of the individuals involved in this, but I find that the smarmy attitude displayed by Mr. Hemmel is quite distasteful.

Too bad for the entire region.

and for your post

[riverat]

Oh I believe there are a lot more people who would like to see them in business than not. It would bring more people to the area and local businesses would welcome them.

[Jonas Pilot]

Maybe so River Rat , but the way they have gone about this has completely turned me off. Is this the type of neighbor you would like?

[TheNoonans]

... but I find that someone trying to force their way into a place where they are not wanted is very distasteful

Sorry you feel that way. Truth be told though, more people want us there than do not. What you are hearing is the vocal minority, people with vested interests in keeping the airport to themselves. The louder they get correlates directly with the ground they continue to lose. It's human nature.

Speaking of human nature, let me try to put this in perspective for you.

Back in the 1800s, my great grand parents arrived in Boston from Ireland. When they arrived, do you think they were welcome? I can assure that they were not. They were repeatedly told they were not welcome and told to go home. They refused to accept the status quo and stayed. They were then relegated to tenement housing and back breaking labor, because the Irish were considered outsiders and second class citizens. As my grand parents were attempting to seek a better life and leave the tenement housing for the blue collar suburbs of Boston, they too were again told they were not welcome. They refused to let the will of others affect their futures. My parents carried that resolve further, wanting yet an even better life for their children, and did the same thing. They refused to accept the will of others telling them they were not welcome in higher social circles. See the pattern?

It's in my genes.

Our cause is just and our resolve is unconquerable. There will come a day when this process reaches an end. I can't promise that we will be victorious, but I can promise that we will never lay down for anyone and we will fight for what is right until the last bell is rung.

There is only one person that will determine the outcome of my life, my future and my American Dream, and that is me. I apologize if that has inconvenienced a few people on the LAA.

We all have dreams we believe in and are told by others to quit. Some quit, others fight. Those that choose to fight can understand our resolve. Those that choose to quit will never understand our resolve.

"I am the master of my fate
I am the captain of my soul"

- W. Henley (from Invictus)

Tom

[Jonas Pilot]

... the American flag and the patriotic music playing in the back ground.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

... the American flag and the patriotic music playing in the back ground.

Do YOU have a problem with the American Flag Jonas Pilot...? Just wondering. NB

[Jonas Pilot]

It's very dear to my heart. I'm not sure which one I love more, the one that covered my grandfather's coffin, a purple heart recipient in World War One or the one that graced my father's coffin, a participant in World War Two.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

It's very dear to my heart. I'm not sure which one I love more, the one that covered my grandfather's coffin, a purple heart recipient in World War One or the one that graced my father's coffin, a participant in World War Two.

I am really moved by your post but.....I can't let this go. GAG ME with a Spoon Jonas Pilot. Do you actually believe anyone will believe your diatribe...you have shown your colors..and they are NOT the Red, White, & Blue. Your record is evident on this board. NB

[Jonas Pilot]

Please explain why you feel that way.

[Resident 2B]

Let me tell you all why I am totally unhappy with the actions of these local clowns that feel they own the airport and claim openly that it is self-funded.

I just Googled FAA Projects Laconia and look what I found:

Laconia Municipal Airport (Gilford) - Airport Terminal Apron
Rehabilitation
Total project Cost $835,420.00

Go do it yourself and you will find the same. This is American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 money, all federally funded.

So they are lying about the self-funding aspect of the Laconia airport. This is very clear.

I will be contacting my US Congressman and US Senators about how my Federal tax dollars are being spent to support this "private" airport. This is the land of the free, not the land of the privileged few.

How anyone can feel this has been a fair process is beyond me.

R2B

[TheNoonans]

Yet even though you have not earned the simplest private pilot license, you are?

Nope. Not a pilot yet anyways. (Ironically enough I had planned to enroll in Emerson Aviations flight school). But I am an expert in tandem operations. By your logic though, none of the LAA or airport manager are skydivers or aviators, yet they broadcast their serious concerns to the public. Ironic and contradictory I think.

As I posted multiple times before, my wife is the pilot and holds multiple aviation degrees from Daniel Webster College, that pilot school in Nashua, NH....She also currently works for one of the largest commercial airlines in the US, in the airport ops division.......

We are a team, I'm the skydiving expert, she's the aviation ops expert. I mentioned that three or four times before up in the thread.

You would have us believe there are two different FAA's? Seriously? And that the "Safety and Standards Branch" does not know what it is doing? Seriously?

Yup. Well, technically there is only one FAA, but it broken down into multiple branches, Flight Standards and Airports Division are the two specific ones that apply here. I mentioned that three or four times before as well.

See, for oh, I don't know, the last 30-40 years, Fight Standards has always been the division to assess airport compatibility issues such as this. But for some reason this time, the local Airport Division (ADO) decided to assert it's weight in the process. It all started when the airport manager filed the wrong forms for the evaluation. They filed a "new construction" evaluation form. When Flight Standards briefed the ADO, it didn't go very well internally. Like I said before, this is now an issue within the FAA.

I combed the FAA website by the way and could not find a "Safety and Standards Branch". Did the FAA create a new division and not tell anyone?

Don't worry, they will sort it out, I trust with their extensive aviation experience, the FAA can resolve this unique situation.

Quote:
Overall Analysis Conclusion

The Laconia Airport is a complex environment that serves a mix of aircraft traffic, with some inexperienced pilots. Further, the lack of air traffic control forces the pilots to operate in a “see and avoid” environment. We conclude that adding parachute operations would increase the risk of operating in that airspace.

The risks generated by the project as proposed, in our view, cannot be mitigated.

Determination
After consideration of the elements discussed above, the Airports Division found the proposed use objectionable. We have determined that the proposed skydiving areas would adversely affect the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace by aircraft, and the safety of persons and property on the ground.

That's the ADO. I thought I covered that before. Oh well, here it goes again. The ADO are not aviators, they are engineers interpreting a manual as they see fit. You'll have to trust me on this one, when Flight Standards properly educates the ADO on practical applications of procedures and precedences, this situation will be resolved.

Since I doubt you'll take my word on it, I would ask you to consider this. If that report was in fact valid and not completely erroneous, why would there be a plethora of meetings scheduled in Washington in the near future addressing this very report?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the LAA opened up a Pandora's Box of compliance short comings within the framework of the local FAA and it is being addressed accordingly.

Two points to close on:

1) I just received the same report you did, today. Ironic huh that you, an admitted non stake holder in this process, received a copy of the report the same day I did......... The LAA, who is not legally required to provide us, the business proposers, anything, yet you have a copy of the report jus as we now do. The LAA must have a mass mailing list. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy you have it and would be glad to address anyone's questions on it publicly, "open book" facts have been our modus operandi since Day 1.

2) We continue to believe in the system, and think you should too. We (you and I and everyone else in this process) have had our say, it is completely and solely in the hands of the FAA in Washington now.

Speaking of the FAA in Washinton, did you know that the chief of the FAA, Randy Babbitt started his career as a jump pilot dropping skydivers? Guess where he dropped them? Yup, on the airports he operated out of.

Ironic, huh?

If you were a member of USPA, you'd have received this months issue of Parachutist Magazine. In it you would have found a picture of Mr. Babbitt side by side with the Executive Director of USPA and the Government Relations Director of USPA (a retired commercial pilot). They had a meeting last month.

As for me, I'm happy to let the FAA handle this now. I'll keep educating the community though as long as you keep posting your replies, its a system that seems to work.

While I'm waiting for the FAA to do it's job though, I'll be heading to Australia for three weeks to address drop zone owners like I did here in the US in February. Guess what the topic is? Tandem Operation Safety Protocols. Why would they fly me half way around the world to lecture if I didn't have something valid to say?

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[Ironfish]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

I combed the FAA website by the way and could not find a "Safety and Standards Branch". Did the FAA create a new division and not tell anyone?

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...p/offices/aas/

.... located at the FAA headquarters in Washington DC.

[TheNoonans]

Thank you!

It's a sub division of Airports Division.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[tis]

I thought I heard on WASR today that the FAA rejected it. Am I wrong?

[TheNoonans]

I thought I heard on WASR today that the FAA rejected it. Am I wrong?

You are correct that our second landing area proposal was rejected. I apologize if my last post on the report itself wasn't clearer on that. The ADO rejected our proposal and that is the report I presume WASR was referencing.

Bear in mind, as I have said before, the ADO, while under the umbrella of the FAA does not constitute a unified FAA rejection. Flight Standards is ultimately the branch of the FAA that will rule on this. We're just patiently waiting.

There is an article on the rejection/report here:

http://www.citizen.com/news/laconia_...9bb30f31a.html

What's kind of humorous to people in our industry is the quote from Michel Hovan stating that because there is no tower, and pilots are required to apply 'See and avoid" procedures, that its too much to ask to be able to "See and Avoid" skydivers. It is completely contradictory to every operational precedent that Flight Standards provides for. Like I said, kind of funny when one branch of the FAA sets out to completely contradict another branch.

Anyways, the report is no surprise.

Neither is the fact that the Citizen and WASR got a copy of it the same day we did......... The LAA, who never wants to send us anything in a timely manner apparently mass blasted this report to as many people and news outlets that they could find.........lol

I'd suggest they were probably doing cart wheels when they got it.......lol.

So, this round is over.

Next one is just beginning. The "Laconia Situation" as it is being referred to by the FAA is building steam in Washington.

It's going to get pretty interesting in the next few months, that's for sure.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

... but I find that someone trying to force their way into a place where they are not wanted is very distasteful.

Yea, that's what they said before women could vote and blacks had 'separate but equal' facilities.

The history of this country is based on people who had the courage and conviction to fight resistance and oppression.

Sorry, but your comment strikes a nerve with me and makes you sound rather weak.

[TheNoonans]

... but I find that someone trying to force their way into a place where they are not wanted is very distasteful.

You know honestly, we take everyone's comments here to heart and try to empathize with those that don't understand our position, but I agree with you brk-int, we don't understand this statement either.

From the beginning we have been open and forthcoming with every possible regulation and operating procedure that the FAA has set forth. I really can't think of how we could have gone about this any more passively other than just to walk away.

To understand the history of that statement though, you need to go back to the mid 1990s. At that time another operator approached the LAA for the same purpose, to open a dropzone at Laconia. They were met with the same resistance and were told the LAA voted "no", without doing any of the due diligence mandated by the FAA. It was a different time then, the internet and forums such as this were in their infancy, so the operators lacked the resources that we have today, and they walked away from the process. Consider even this thread if you will. We didn't start it. Someone else did, with a clear intent to try and alarm the community. Don't believe me? Anyone that has ever heard the phrase "A picture says a thousand words" only needs to scroll back to the first post of this thread to understand my point.

That set a precedent at the LAA I guess and when we first approached them, they treated us in the same manner.

For example, if you search the Citizen archives, you will see that the day we showed up to address the LAA in December 2008, the then Mayor of Laconia is quoted in the Citizen as saying the LAA already met and voted against our proposal. Before they ever even heard it and more importantly, before they ever contacted the FAA to do a safety study.

So its fair to say that since day one, the LAA has treated our proposal with complete disregard for proper procedure. They didn't want us there and attempted to stone wall us.

Then, instead of contacting the FAA in a timely manner as they were mandated to do, they created a Safety Committe, comprised of members of the LAA that had no background in aviation safety analysis. When we asked them to provide the aviation safety background of the Safety Committe, they stone walked us and said they were not legally obligated to provide us that information.

The "Safety Committee" stunt (for lack of a better term) bought the LAA about six months of reprieve, and when we didn't go away, they were finally forced to concede that they could not formulate a valid opinion and went to the ADO. They then submitted a "New Construction" evaluation form that had nothing to do with our proposal which further impeded the progress of this process and led to the current FAA debacle that is being sorted out in Washington as we speak.

Here's the thing, whether we are a good fit or not is a secondary issue. The primary issue is that the process that should have led to a final outcome shouldn't have taken more than six months. That it is now going on three years is a testament to the big government bureaucracy that exists today at the LAA.

The simple truth is that we were never, from day one, afforded due process. It has been a cat and mouse game of delay tactics designed to break our will. That is not the American Way and that is not what a federally funded airport should be doing.

Yes or no, skydiving or no skydiving, this process should have been handled quickly and efficiently. Obviously it hasn't. This should have been over either way in May of 2009. If the LAA had done their job, it would have been and we would either be operating or would have been told by Flight Standards that the airport is not appropriate for our purpose.

It really is that simple.

So, we were forced, yes forced, to pursue this just path, and we have. And we will continue to do so. If that is perceived by a small group of people that have ties to the FBOs and Bill as "distasteful", then so be it. We can't please everyone and we are confident that those of you that approach this process and situation with an open mind, will see that we are simply following a reactionary path.

My proof?

That email I just mentioned? Where the LAA manager sent out a "call to action" a week prior to the first meeting, but withheld that the airport already had all of our supporting data?

I have had that for over two years. Never published the fact that I had that email. Never intended to. It wasn't until the LAA quoted me out of context in their report to the FAA where they cited on this board that I said "a skydiver/aircraft" collision is simply not a realist concern, trying to paint me as someone who isn't safety oriented, that I finally published that email knowledge. My quote stands in context, that based on all the available data, you, the community of Laconia are about 100000 times more likely to have an aircraft to aircraft collision over your house than a skydiver/aircraft collision. The facts are out there, and they are indisputable.

That's when the dynamic of this process changed, thats when I decided to publish the existence of that email. And I have more. It seems the concerned citizens of the community really are interested in truth, justice and the American Way. Otherwise they wouldn't forward me these emails.

So Jonas Pilot, I'm sorry you feel we are being distasteful, but as the numerous supportive emails we continue to receive from the public continue to show, you are in a vast vast minor opinion on that one.

Blue skies to all and to all a good night,
Tom

[tis]

I don't have an opinion one way or another about this whole thing, because I don't know enough about it. But I can tell you one thing. I feel sorry for you going through all this red tape. What a job. I would be so discouraged. Government makes things so difficult. Why don't they just say yes or not???
How long have you been fighting for this? Ridiculous. And you pay their salaries!

[fatlazyless]

How's about the little airport up in Plymouth, NH, about three miles to Route 93 - Exit 26. It has a green grass runway, and to get a good look at the area surrounding the Plymouth Airport, it can be viewed from the parking lot up top, way up the hill at the Plymouth Wal-Mart. Driving up from Boston, MA, to Plymouth, NH, is an easier 1:45-hour travel than driving Boston to Laconia-Gilford because Plymouth has two Route 93 exits, Exit 25 and Exit 26 that exit directly onto Plymouth and Plymouth State University. Who knows, but maybe visiting skydivers would want to stay at the nearby (Exit 26) www.thecmaninn.com/plymouth/ or chill out at the new and nearby P.S.U. indoor ice arena (Exit 25), or go indoor climbing on a rainy day at the Rock-Climbing Barn (Exit 26).

Who knows but the Town of Plymouth might be welcome to have a skydiver center set up in their little college town, at their quiet little airport? According to wikipedia it has a 2380' turf runway, is public, and is owned by the Town of Plymouth. Plymouth has inns, restaurants, Plymouth State University and Main St businesses that all could use some more customers, so what's not to like for a skydiver center at their airport? The Rumney Rocks, a widely known rock climbing cliff area, is nearby and that brings rock climbers into the Plymouth area from all-over so probably they could be receptive to a skydiver practice area, too. The airport is situated at the southern edge of the huge White Mountain National Forest and within the Baker River valley.

www.airnav.com/airport/1P1 has a 2" color photo of the Plymouth Municipal Airport.

There's an old saying that goes....better just not to go where you are not welcome....so's could be that Laconia's loss could become Plymouth's gain?

www.plymouthnh.org
www.plymouth.edu/

[NoBozo]

Looks to me as though Avaiton Fuel (100LL) is not available at Plymouth. The nearest available 100LL would be Laconia, 19nm away. A bummer....not to mention a Short Field, and Soft Field in spring. Rolling resistance on turf is a lot more than on pavement. NB

[jrc]

This "better just not to go where you are not welcome" stuff is total crap. How do a few people get to decide who is welcome or not? I can't believe there are still people that think like this.

These people have every right to use every legal means to get their business going. Sure have arguements about the rules and safety and whatever else but to stoop to "not welcome' is really over the line. This should be a clean fight based on the merits.

I have no dog in this hunt. Ok maybe the extra air traffic over my marina will be distracting. I live near the grass airport in Pepperell and they have a noisy old drop plane.

[Steveo]

A question to the Noonans:

I would like to understand what the true motives are of the LAA, primarily from an economic position. I guess they are saying that this is purely a safety issue for them but what would be the economic effect on the LAA and the existing businesses there if you had your skydiving business along side of theirs. Or more important what do you think they think would be the effect. I believe most if not all actions are motivated by the almighty dollar, even political actions (just look at the monies involved in DC). So I have to feel that the LAA, et al feels they will lose money with your operation running; but how? I truly feel if they felt they would make more money with you there you would be there already. Maybe if they can get rid of you they can start their own skydiving business, I wouldn't put it pass them.

Just curious

[TheNoonans]

Hi Steve-O

I have no idea what the motivations are of the LAA.

But I'm happy to take a guess on the economic impact concerns.

They believe that

1) If we show up all the other aircraft will go elsewhere. They even believe that there exists an insurance policy that precludes jets from landing at airports with dropzones. It's all unquantifiable, but that's their concern. Jets and GA traffic thrive at other airports with skydiving. LCI will be the same. But the fear of the FBOs is that if we drive away other planes, they lose fuel sales. Our 500-1000 flights a season will generate more than enough fuel sales to offset any loss they might incur by the one percent of flights they "might" lose if we open.

But that's business. If our business model affects their bottom line it becomes there job to become better businessmen. Its a free market economy, survival of the fittest.

The reality is though, we will increase their revenues. Of the 2000 people to pass through our doors, how many of them could we direct to a scenic flight from an FBO after their skydive? Plenty. People that would NEVER bother to go to the airport on their vacation, will now come because of us, and we will spread that economic growth around. When most first timers land they are usually so jazzed that they want to go back up again, and of those alot ask as much about flying the plane as they do about skydiving. If we were there, both FBOs would have their flight schools book solid.

and

2) The REAL reason no one wants us there is because we will work there and they know it. The REAL FEAR in this process is that we will take over the airport. One of the FBOs told me once "I hear the radio over Lebanon, ME, up and down all day long, if you guys come here, the same thing will happen." It's not so much that they don't want to share the sandbox, they believe if we move in, we will take it over. When I countered that we had no intensions of taking over the airport, that we intended a healthy equilibrium maintaining a "Mom and Pop" feel to the business volume, he was shocked and in disbelief that we didn't want to grow as big as we could. He thought I wasn't being honest with him. The truth is, we know the level we want to operate at, to include an appropriate staff level, and we don't want it to get too big. We want to keep it personal. But he didn't believe that.

So......thats the real issue. They must have watched Fandango one too many times and expect Truman Sparks to fly in with a Cessna held together with duct tape. Thats not us, that's not our business model.

Speaking of economics, did you know that because the airport is federally funded, the hangars on the airport property can only be used for aviation related businesses? Thats one reason most of those 10,000sq ft hangars sit empty. Our business is aviation related.

But with the economy in disarray, and little money being spent in fostering aviation businesses, the airport is an FBOs nirvana. All the federal funding they need to keep the airport a gem, without any neighboring businesses to have to share the field with.

That's pretty much it in a nut shell.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[Steveo]

I guess I could understand the point of less plane traffic results in less fuel revenue for the airport, if they believe that is what would happen. But they can't say there would be less scenic flights or flight instruction activity. I agree with you that there might even be more because you have a whole different clientele that after dropping with you and seeing the beautiful sights from a distant they might want to fly with them to see the beauty up close.

[TheNoonans]

Update for those still interested.

The first meeting in Washington has already occurred. The results were as we expected........POSITIVE.

The proper division of the FAA at the proper level of the FAA is now involved in this process and it's heading in positive direction full steam ahead. We could not be more pleased to relay that information.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[RLW]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

Update for those still interested.

The first meeting in Washington has already occurred. The results were as we expected........POSITIVE.

The proper division of the FAA at the proper level of the FAA is now involved in this process and it's heading in positive direction full steam ahead. We could not be more pleased to relay that information.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[AC2717]

But on June 11th I am taking my first leap in Pepperell MA at noon time!!! Excited and also a little scared
Hope I do not poop myself lol

[jrc]

I've watched dozens of people parachute there. Everyone seems to be smiling.

[robmac]

If your that nervous you may want to look at Skyventures in Nashua. It is indoor skydiving and alot of fun. During the winter I met some instructors and avid skydivers who train there. Good luck and have fun.

[Sal]

I propose that the Skydive Laconia thread be assigned its own
sub-section of the Forum .. Maybe, it should have its OWN FORUM.

[NH_boater]

I jumped at Pepperell with 4 friends as part of a stag party. One of the wildest things I have ever done, with video to prove it.

[trfour]

With all of their combined 2 posts on the subject. Way funny...

Reminds me how Some very sorry folks thought that a certain someone found the very lack of religion, and had No maker to meet in the first place!

The dark side has it's proper place and in the movies!

This thread has no room for those who would try to hide it away from those of us that would love to see an Positive Economic Future here in the Lakes Region!
For those that will read this very thread, TheNoonans have very articulately shown most of us their true Heart! We should at the very least listen and follow them through their right to be, and my hope is that they will be a part of us long and into the future here!

I would jump any time, under their supervision!
Terry
____________________________________________

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Sal

I propose that the Skydive Laconia thread be assigned its own
sub-section of the Forum .. Maybe, it should have its OWN FORUM.

Agreed- I don't take issue with Don's moderating often, however, this one belongs in the issues section of the forum. It is as contentious as any of threads that are there now.

[fatlazyless]

It seems by looking at the airplanes from a distance as they fly past, that the Laconia Airport gets a lot of small private jet planes that cost big big bucks, while the Plymouth Airport gets a lot of small hang glider style planes where the engine and pilot are hung by nylon straps and duct tape from a canvas wing so it looks to be worth maybe $4499 (second hand and flown by a guy nick-named Crash? (my bad, shame on me!)).

........... www.chutesup.com

Suggest you check out the videos in "about us" with a parachute plane taking off and landing from the Plymouth Airport. ChutesUp is a good high quality website with some good Plymouth Airport videos! In particular, take a look at the 2:51 minute video: "Grey Ghost takes off at Plymouth Airport" to get a good look-see at the airport, facility, and surroundings.

It's a fair possibility (that means I have absolutely no clue) that the Plymouth Municipal Airport www.airnav.com/airport/1P1, owned by the Town of Plymouth, might be very happy to have a high quality sky diver operation set up in their little airport that is only a three mile drive from Route 93-Exit 26.

As a high quality sky diver operation, maybe it could be an advantage to run the business from Plymouth's easy-to-drive-to, little grass runway municipal airport, and be a bigger fish in a smaller pond as opposed to arguing a lengthy federal review with the F.A.A. and the Laconia Airport (just my two cents?). Sometimes, it's simply better to switch than to fight!

It's 18 nautical air miles from Laconia Airport to Plymouth Airport. The Plymouth Municipal Airport is a very scenic spot with big views direct from the airport runway to the now closed Tenney Mountain ski area, the Rumney Rocks rock-climbing cliffs, the White Mountain National Forest, and the Plymouth Wal-Mart where you get an automatic, built-in 7-day/week parking lot audience to ooh and aah the colorfull skydivers as they exit their airplane from about one half mile (air distance) away upfront as seen by the many people in the Wal-Mart parking lot that is high up on top of a steep hill. The Plymouth Municipal Airport looks like an antique airport, complete with an old field house situated between the small dirt parking lot and the green grass runway. It is next door to the Long View Produce Farm and about one mile across the very scenic Smith River covered bridge from busy Route 25, also known as the Tenney Mountain Highway. It is in a quiet spot that's one mile close to a busy commercial road which includes Wal-Mart and a number of other businesses, although you would never know it from the airport runway as it is tucked away pretty good out in the countryside.

[Irrigation Guy]

I don't feel this needs a seperate forum at all. If it were there I would have never found it and am very interested now. The is definately some back and forth but emotions remain in check for the most part.


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

[TheNoonans]

I'm not surprised that certain people would want this thread moved or closed.

What was created to be a smear campaign against us using smoke and mirrors turned 180 degrees when we found it and began providing facts. Not only is this thread not serving the smear campaign purpose it was created for, it is now giving us a platform to provide facts and truth to the community. I am sure that fact continues to bother more than one person........

(Please remember this point if nothing else.......we didn't come to the forum to start this debate.......someone else did.)

I'd also like to point out that this thread has been rated with 5 stars and is approaching 30,000 views, so it must be considered to be of some value to the online community here.

And that's really what this whole thing is about, serving the community. You don't like where the thread is going? The easiest thing to do? Don't view it.

Admittedly, I had to look up the word "contentious":

"Likely to cause an arguement" or "controversial"

I don't consider this thread arguementative, it's a debate. Of all my posts on here, how many of them did I make a point to wish Mr. Hemmel well in his pursuits, even if his pursuits were clearly to discredit me? Quite a few.

As for controversial, well, when you photoshop a tandem pair skydiving in front of a jet and label it "Skydive Laconia" and place that at the top of your first post, right before you let the community know that two "outsiders", oops, I mean "Floridians", are attempting to open up a skydiving operation over "YOUR homes", well, I'd have to agree with you on that one.......this thread did start off a little contentious.........especially since never in the history of tandem skydiving, has a tandem pair hit a jet, or any plane for that matter. It quite literally has never happened, ever.

The facts are on this thread and those in the community that are able to think freely and prefer informed opinions and informed debate over censorship will keep reading this thread and even contributing to it.

Those that prescribe to the "If I close my eyes, you can't see me" mentality, will continue to attempt to get this thread shut down or moved.

So in the end, there are a couple of people on here that want this thread shutdown, oh well.

I would just ask the community as a whole to consider one simple question. "Why is that?"

The answer is right there in front of you, and I suspect most of you, if not all of you, already know the answer.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[Sal]

"So in the end, there are a couple of people on here that want this thread shutdown, oh well.
I would just ask the community as a whole to consider one simple question. "Why is that?" "


Not "shut down". Just moved. Because it's BORING.

[SteveA]

Sal

28,880 views dosen't look like many folks find it "BORING". Plus, moving it wouldn't really change anything. The folks that are interested in this thread would find it wherever it got moved to.

Not sure what moving it would accomplish. I just simply "skip" any threads I find uninteresting to me. I don't understand why you would even read a thread you found "BORING"

I'm not giving you a hard time.. just curious to your motive.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

I'm not surprised that certain people would want this thread moved or closed.

What was created to be a smear campaign against us using smoke and mirrors turned 180 degrees when we found it and began providing facts. Not only is this thread not serving the smear campaign purpose it was created for, it is now giving us a platform to provide facts and truth to the community. I am sure that fact continues to bother more than one person........

(Please remember this point if nothing else.......we didn't come to the forum to start this debate.......someone else did.)

I'd also like to point out that this thread has been rated with 5 stars and is approaching 30,000 views, so it must be considered to be of some value to the online community here.

And that's really what this whole thing is about, serving the community. You don't like where the thread is going? The easiest thing to do? Don't view it.

Admittedly, I had to look up the word "contentious":

"Likely to cause an arguement" or "controversial"

I don't consider this thread arguementative, it's a debate. Of all my posts on here, how many of them did I make a point to wish Mr. Hemmel well in his pursuits, even if his pursuits were clearly to discredit me? Quite a few.

I am not one of the "certain people" Frankly, I think your business should be approved ASAP.

My comments stems from the fact that most threads that gained this level of views and posts generally are contentious (speed limits on the lake, no wake zones, etc)- and these threads are promptly moved into the issues section of this forum.

Moderators statement: "This separated forum is provided for the discussion and debate about controversial issues that effect the Lakes Region but are discouraged from the other more friendly areas. Debates about speed limits, no-wake zones, noise and general complaints and griping belong here. Threads in other forums that turn into debates, arguments or bickering will be moved here. Warning! Avoid this area if you don't like debates and arguments! "

My question is, how is this different than a thread on the MP budget being cut? http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ad.php?t=12018

[Winnicandle]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

It seems by looking at the airplanes from a distance as they fly past, that the Laconia Airport gets a lot of small private jet planes that cost big big bucks, while the Plymouth Airport gets a lot of small hang glider style planes where the engine and pilot are hung by nylon straps and duct tape from a canvas wing so it looks to be worth maybe $4499 (second hand and flown by a guy nick-named Crash? (my bad, shame on me!)).

I have been flying these "private jets that cost big bucks" for 20+ years now and can assure you there is no problem flying into an airport with a skydiving operation.

I would much rather share with a well run skydiving school than with a flight school of student pilots/weekend renters or aviation photographers. Neither are known for paying much attention while circling around "their" home airport in Cessnas. No private jet would shy away from Laconia because of a skydiving operation. We go where the boss wants, so long as its safe...and skydiving is not a concern in the least.

Every little backwards airport I have been to has its few locals who think they own it. They hate the idea of some "outsiders" (Floridians? lol) coming in. Why?

God forbid someone does something to improve the terrible Lakes Region economy huh?...Skydivers travel, they are people with discretionary income and they would rent hotels, use restaurants and bars, etc. Many even fly in with their own aircraft. Its a win for everyone.

Having flown in and out of Laconia many times I can assure you that airport can support MUCH more traffic than it currently gets.

Good Luck in setting up your skydiving business, sounds like you are well on your way.

[jr616]

I continue to read the thread for the day that the Noonans get to post - APPROVED!

It's a shame the the region can not see what this business will do for tourism.

Just my .02

[TheNoonans]

I continue to read the thread for the day that the Noonans get to post - APPROVED!

Thank you. We look forward to posting that message as well. And it is coming. The proper branch and proper level of the FAA now has
complete control of this process and when it concludes in a few months, we fully expect not just to be vindicated, but to have the full weight of the FAA behind us moving forward.

To help better explain the process that is occurring within the FAA now though, I'll offer this information.

There are grassy areas directly adjacent to the runway on each side of it referred to as "object free areas", meaning that their can't be any permanent structures there. The area is intended for departing or landing aircraft that may lose directional control and veer off the runway. The FAA doesn't want a maintenance shed or even a stationary parked car there, which makes perfect sense.

Now the FAA (Flight Standards) has clearly established that parachutists are allowed to use that area to land and clear away from. The ADO and LAA want to label us "objects" and say that we have no right to be there. The problem with that "safety concern" is two fold:

1) It is already an established protocol that has been in existence for about 65 years now, to no ill effect of person or property.
2) The actual people raising the "Safety concerns" are neither aviators nor skydivers. The FAA agents of the ADO are not pilots, they are engineers that have never had to interact with a skydiving operation before in this capacity and have misapplied their role.

The loudest vocal minority with "safety concerns" is of course the airport itself. An LAA board comprised of not a single current aviator along with an airport manager that has never worked on an airport with skydiving. For the airport manager's entire tenure at LCI, there has never been a skydiving operation. Why is this such an important fact? When the LAA and the airport manager cite their concern for parachutists landing in an "object free area" they are doing so without any practical experience or knowledge of the effect of us doing so.

Why is that lack of knowledge so important?

If they were truly knowledgable about the subject, they would know that in the 65 years that parachutes have been landing on airports around the country, including in the object free areas of those airports, there have been approximately 55,000,000 skydives made during that time frame.

Now........how many times in 65 years and 55,000,000 skydives, has a parachutist made contact with an airplane on the ground?

Once. Yup. Only once.

The chances of a parachutist interfering with an aircraft in the object free area of the airfield is about 1 in 55,000,000 over a period of 65 years.

But wait....... the one instance, didn't even occur in an object free area, it happened on the skydiving facility property away from the object free area. But wait....... it was a solo student parachutist who later admitted that she ignored her primary landing area and wanted to land in front of her friends and family. But wait.........it was the skydiving aircraft she landed in front of. The important item here as it pertains to the LAA's "safety concerns" over the object free area? It had nothing to do with the object free area.

So...........using all those facts...........in 65 years and 55,000,000 skydives, a skydiver landing and vacating that feared object free area has never caused a problem. Ever.

Yet the LAA and the airport manager have "safety concerns".........so much so, that the airport manager actually drafted a letter to other regional airport managers, another "call to action" if you will, asking the other managers to band together and contact their congressmen if they felt safety should prevail over lobbying..........The odd thing about the email is that it didn't include anyone from the FAA in the addresses.......

Funny that. A local airport attempting to suggest that the FAA is not capable of properly assessing safety standards and that the FAA could cave in to lobbyists?

Well, the good news is that the proper branches and levels of the FAA have a copy of that email and they will address it when the time is right.

Makes you wonder though? Remember that "transparent process" that the LAA is quoted as providing us from the beginning? Do you think that sending an email to other airport managers and leaving off the very FAA they are tasked to serve, is transparent?

The irony in all this is that the object free area is simply an alternate area for us. We intend to land in the small grassy areas between the hangars and the taxiways..........

Will we occassionally land on the object free area? Perhaps. But it will be on the side of the grass furthest away from the runway. That's the way it's already being done around the country, without ill effect to person or property.

And lastly, to add some comic relief...............

In that horrendously erronious report issued by the ADO, they went so far as to state that the "proximity of the Belknap mountains" contributes to variable and turbulent wind conditions. They even quoted a public comment that "katabolic winds" affect the ability of jumpers to predict their landing areas.............lol.

Gunstock peak: 2,245ft MSL
Mount Everest: 29,035ft MSL

Why is that so comical to me?

I hold a world record for the highest parachute landing on to the Kala Pattar plateau at 17,192ft MSL. Right beside Mount Everest.

Mount Everest: The world's highest mountain creating the world's most turbulent and unpredictable weather and winds on the planet. I landed my parachute beside Mount Everest on a plateau LZ the size of a soccer field beside the Khumbu Glacier (a mile wide block of ice that is filled with 1000ft crevasses and jagged ice out croppings).

Gunstock Mountain: A ski resort a few miles away from the airport...........turbulent winds...........really?



Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[Joby]

Glad to see you are still fired up!
Continued sucess and good luck.

[NoBozo]

I am in favor of this project...but I am NOT Local. Up until now I have tried to keep my face shut, but this needs to be considered.

Let's say the Noonans are successful and win the day. Now they have to rent space (office & hanger) on the airport that doesn't want them.

So let's say they initially get that space. They can't do business without that enclosed space. You can't repack parachutes out on the tarmac.

The jump plane would need to be housed in a hanger....particularly in this case.... to prevent ..Tampering.

SO: Am I suggesting that the opposition would do such a thing....Tampering...which is against FEDERAL Law...?? .... I'll leave that up to you. NB

[trfour]

Thank you Tom!

Never having any doubt about you, and what you stand for and can bring to The Lakes Region, I learned even more today from the Vimeo about you helping out in other areas! And the background music was riveting as well!

Global Angels Ambassadors Wendy Smith and Tom Noonan, make new World Record: skydiving and landing on the Kala Patthar plateau, at an altitude of 17,192 feet (5,242m), right beside Mt. Everest near Base Camp to help raise $1 million for children in Asia.

If anyone is looking for a more positive person for this area, look no further than this thread!

A great pleasure to have you here with us Tom!
Rock And Roll,
Terry

PS; I also enjoyed during Wendy's narration in the video her mention of God, at altitude! Priceless!

_____________________________________________

[NoRegrets]

I just watched the video on the Everest Jump. WOW! And the locals don't want this in town? The marketing of this operation with the pedigree that is being offered would be a hugh benefit to the region.

Thanks for the education and sharing the video

Keep up the good fight!

[TheNoonans]

Hi NoBozo

While I don't ever expect that we will be on their holiday card mailing lists, these are all good people on the other side of this debate.

I have spoken once or twice with both owners of the FBOs, and they are genuinely nice guys. While my wife and I continue to find humor in the fact they have that "Skydive Laconia" photoshop on their FBO terminal office windows, we don't take it personally.

When this is over and we end up operating, and the jets don't disappear and their fuel sales increase because we are flying 5 days a week for the entire season, well, they still may not send us holiday cards, but atleast their concerns will have been abated. I may still even enroll in one of their flight schools. The past will be the past and I expect we will all move forward together.

Same goes for the LAA and airport manager. They're all nice people. They are just doing what they believe they need to do, however misguided and counterproductive to their federal funding grant assurances their actions are.

So.............when this is over, our hangar door will be wide open to the other side. We'll offer periodic educational seminars (or venting sessions if that is what's needed) to both educate and listen to the other lines of business and local pilots and work together to create a mutually agreeable existence on the airport.

With all that said, we have absolutely no concern whatsoever that anyone would even consider tampering with any of our equipment or aircraft.

Regarding use of facilities, if you look at the airport's website here:

http://www.laconiaairport.com/laa/pilots_hangars.htm

You will see that there quite a supply of vacant hangars for lease and/or for sale. We have spoken to a few hangar owners over the last few years and each one was interested in taking us on as either a leasee or a sale. Your airport has a number of beautiful hangar facilities that sit vacant because for commercial use, legally they can only be filled with an aeronautics based business. Put simply, there just isn't a lot of businesses out there that could fill these hangars, especially in this terrible economy.

We will fill one. We will fill it with airplane(s) and parachutes and jobs, lots of jobs. My guess is that within two years of operation, we will employ as many, if not more people at Skydive Laconia than all of the other lines of business combined. And most of those jobs will be filled by locals, by you. Eventually, once we provide the proper skydiving training, we would hope that all of the jobs would be filled by local members of the community.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

Today's video:



Note that we are landing on the grass strip runway. Note that at the edge end of the runway there is a 3000ft drop off. Suffice to say, parachute landing accuracy is rather critical. We are in the Himalaya. The most turbulent weather conditions on earth. Yet the Belknap mountain range causes turbulence? Really?

[TheNoonans]

Global Angels Ambassadors Wendy Smith and Tom Noonan, make new World Record: skydiving and landing on the Kala Patthar plateau, at an altitude of 17,192 feet (5,242m), right beside Mt. Everest near Base Camp to help raise $1 million for children in Asia

Thank you Terry, as always, your support is greatly appreciated.

In the second video I posted, the tandem skydiving footage is of me taking Le Mans champion race car driver Nick Leventis on a jump from 30,200ft the following year in 2010. It's an Everest Skydive record, going above 30,000ft MSL, and we did it for Nick's charity fund raiser. That one jump alone raised 100,000 GBP (about $160,000US) for Global Angels.

Outside of tandem skydiving safety seminars, I also give industry seminars on "Social Responsibility In Adventure Tourism" using the Everest Skydive expedition as the storyline.

The theme of the seminar is that for any adventure operation that utilizes natural resources and affects local populations, it is critical to ensure that the operations gives back as much, if not more to the community than it takes away. That's our mission with Everest Skydive and that is our mission with Skydive Laconia.

I have been very fortunate to have travelled the world the last five years skydiving and have seen and studied numerous business models in adventure tourism. Some may be completely self invested, other choose to share the economic benefit of the operation with the community. Which has a higher probability of long term growth and success? Yup. The environmentally minded, socially conscious operations that integrate their business models into the community as a whole.

To site an example, I recently spent six months in New Zealand. A national economy heavily invested in outdoor adventure tourism. Some of the most successful business models that exist there are no where to be seen here in the US. We plan to bring those business models to the Lakes Region, and it goes way beyond just skydiving. Skydiving however is the foundation. That is why this process is so critical.

Why do I mention New Zealand? Well if looked at the polar opposite side of the world in latitute and longitude, The south island of New Zealand is somewhere around the Maine/Canada border.

Like seasons. Like climates. Like mountain ranges. New Zealand and New Hampshire are as close to the same ecosystem/landscape/seasonal changes and offer almost identical outdoor adventure opportunities. New Zealand adventure tourism businesses thrive despite the economy as do all of the businesses that benefit from the economic stimulus these operations infuse into the local economies.

Imagine our little "dirt road business" bringing new business models and ideas to a region that is filled with untapped outdoor adventure tourism possibilities and all of the lodging, restaurants and ammenities to accommodate them year round?

Can we change the world and save the economy single handedly? Nope. Not at all. That's not what we are pitching. But are we capable of infusing new ideas and business models that could benefit a number of local businesses outside of our own? Absolutely. If you were elected as the Mayor of Laconia or as a Gilford Selectman by your community, should that local business growth possibility be of interest to you? If it were me, I would be very interested in learning more about something that could have a long term positive economic impact on the community I serve. But that's just me.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[fatlazyless]

Skydive Plymouth - parked at Plymouth Municipal Airport:

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6869793 ... white field house in the background that is both close to the runway and close to the car parking area.

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6862732 ... what healthy looking green grass!

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6863347 ... a Taylorcraft BC-12D.

www.chutesup.com

www.skydiveplymouthnh.com

What a good fit....skydiving and the Plymouth Municipal Airport....plus the locals can all get a freebie terrific skydivers-in-action view as seen from the Wal-Mart parking lot that is high on a hill about one mile away!

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Skydive Plymouth - parked at Plymouth Municipal Airport:

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6869793 ... white field house in the background that is both close to the runway and close to the car parking area.

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6862732 ... what healthy looking green grass!

www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6863347 ... a Taylorcraft BC-12D.

www.chutesup.com

www.skydiveplymouthnh.com

What a good fit....skydiving and the Plymouth Municipal Airport....plus the locals can all get a freebie terrific skydivers-in-action view as seen from the Wal-Mart parking lot that is high on a hill about one mile away!

Hey FLL, weren't you looking for a job a while ago? Do push ups ring a bell? Instead of being such a thorn in the side, maybe once they get up and running, this could be a source of employment for you.

[TheNoonans]

For anyone still interested in our proposal process, there has been some great general news in our industry recently.

There are a few local municipal airports around the country at the moment like LCI, where the airport authorities have ignored proper procedure and due process and have attempted to stonewall legal and viable skydiving operations.

Like our situation, these other would be business owners are victims of "backroom tactics", that are anything but "transparent", and are designed to simply stall the would be business owners into giving up.

Well, the FAA has recently just put it's foot down on the antics of another such airport authority attempting to stonewall a skydiving operator and has ordered the airport to comply with their federal funding grant assurances and allow the skydiving operation to land on the airport.

The good news for future skydiving proprietors is that in each of these current instances, as the FAA deals with them one by one, the FAA will be setting precedences, so that the next time an airport authority looks into its bag of tricks to try and stall or block a legal and viable skydiving business from operating, the bag of tricks should be empty and the approval process won't take three+ years.

It seems there really are agents of the FAA upstream in Washington DC that genuinely do care if airports are abiding by their federal funding grant assurances and that these same agents are willing to enforce the rules and regulations across the country.

Score one for the skydiving industry today.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[TheNoonans]

With the holiday weekend ahead of us, and the increase in both GA air traffic and private jet traffic sure to be noticed at municipal airports all across the country, I thought I would share my weekend travel plans, as they bear slightly on the conversation.

On thursday a friend of mine, who is a commercial private jet pilot and also a skydiver, is picking me up in the plane pictured in the attached photo. We are then flying from Florida to New Jersey.

He is landing the jet at one of the country's busiest dropzones here in Florida and then we are flying to another one of the country's busiest dropzones in the northeast.

When I asked him if the insurance carrier for the plane had any exclusions for landing his jet at airports with skydiving operations, his response was nothing but laughter, followed by the statement "Are you kidding me"?

I hope you all have a wonderful weekend of GA flights and enjoy your holiday weekend.

I guess some pilots are just better trained than others?

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Happy Fourth Of July Weekend!

Tom

[Pineedles]

Would the NJ airport happen to be Teterboro? My nephew works there and I enjoy hearing his stories about famous people landing. He is being trained to dispatch the critters, for safety sake, that tend to frequent the landing strips.

[flyguy]

Originally Posted by superdawgfan

But I do know one thing--I will never, ever do business with LakesRegionsAerials.com.

Fair enough. Everyone in America is entitled to "vote with their feet". If you don't like the truth, feel free to do so.

On the other hand, I would hope you would have the cajones to provide your real name and the name of the business you own (you do own one, right?), so that I and my friends may extend you the same courtesy.

[SteveA]

I happened to be at the airport on Sunday. Wife and mother in law did the "Bi-Plane" ride. They "loved it" and the pilot is a great guy. He provides a great experience for locals and visitors to the lake.

As they started to return to the airport, they where called off because a pilot landing ahead of them did a "touch and go". The pilot said it was no big deal, he just circled and made a new approach.

During the 20 minuets they were in the air, two corporate jets took off, and another small plane landed. Seemed to me, and I'm no expert, that the staff at the airport were very capable of handling the various operations that were going on without any "drama".

I fail to understand why, if all that other business is OK for the airport, why Sky Dive Laconia is not OK? Private Jets, Pilot Training, Ariel Photography, Bi-Plane Rides, etc.

"Lions and Tigers and Bears Oh My" There is a lot more to the story we are not being told by the folks that object to Sky Dive Laconia.

And, the picture that is in the #1 post on this thread is plastered to the window at the airport, that to me is very low rent. The picture is a photo shop job of something that has never happened anywhere. It should come down. JMHO

As a side note, when my wife "Sky Dived" (is that a proper phrase? ) at Sky Dive Key West a few years ago, she took off and landed at a small airport. 6.1 miles from NAS- Key West. That base is one of the busiest military airbases in the country. They fly drug, illegal immigration and training sorties 24-7. PS.. they also do parachute operations on base.

I respect Mr. Hemmel, and wish his and all of the businesses that use the airport success. I just wish he would have the testicular fortitude to explain his "real" motivation behind his objection and take down that phony picture. The objections he has posted so far ... wait for it... "Just Don't Fly"... sorry couldn't resist.

Here's a pic from their flight.

[TheNoonans]

Well, we made it to New Jersey.......

At one of the busiest skydiving facilities in Florida, taxi'd out in the private jet past parachutes landing beside the runway and departed with parachutes still in the air and another skydiving aircraft in flight. No near misses, no drama.

We then came into New Jersey and landed at another incredibly busy dropzone with parachutes in the air and multiple skydiving aircraft in flight. Again, no near misses, no drama.

I flew right seat in the cockpit to try and empathize with the few pilots out there that seem so concerned about the "busy cockpit" and "inability to see parachutes" on take off and landing.

Before this trip, I acknowledged that I had no practical experience in private jets to justify my position, other than the dozen or so private jet pilots that I know that also skydive that have told me over and over again what nonsense it was that a jet couldn't land at an airport with a skydiving operation.

Now I can at least say that I have seen first hand what that process entails.

So what did I learn?

I kept waiting for the cockpit to "get busy" as we approached the airport and enter the pattern. And it never happened. The pilot handled his work flow without breaking a sweat, we easily spotted the parachutes on approach, and the landing process was so clean and uneventful, that I was left with nothing but a reaffirmation that my position was sound. The pilot walked me through the whole process and the reality, as I have observed and experienced it first hand, is that private jets are more that suitable operationally with a skydiving operation on the airfield.

It felt like we were landing in a King Air, but with more control, more maneuverability and the greatest cockpit visibility I have ever experienced.

The result of this experience?

It just reconfirmed that the only reason, let me re-emphasize, the only reason, they do not want us there is because they do not want skydiving to cluster up "there" airport and "there" status quo.

At the LAA meeting in December of 2008, one of the FBOs made a passionate speech about how complex the private jets were he flew and how incredibly dangerous it would be to these jets to add us to the pattern. At the time, having no practical experience myself, I accepted his position for what it was and just resigned myself to "agree to disagree" based on the evidence and input I received from all the other NetJet pilots I knew.

Today, I look back on that speech (I wish it was recorded), and honestly am dumbfounded that someone with that level of experience could stand up there and make such an address.

I respect the opinions of everyone in this process, and I readily acknowledge that one flight in a cockpit of a Citation does not make me an expert. But adding this personal first hand private jet experience to all the supportive letters from pilots that have stated without question that a private jet does not pose any additional safety issues to airports with skydiving operations, my resolve is even greater that this is not a safety issue, it is a "Not In My Backyard" issue.

All of the pilots that I have known and worked with over the last decade have all conveyed a common attribute, confidence.

Those are the pilots I know. Those are the pilots I work with. Educated, well trained, current and confident.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

P.S.- While I am polarly opposed to the way Mr. Hemmel has and continues to approach this thread and process, claiming he has all this super secret information that no one else seems to know about, and that he is crusading for your safety, I would like offer this thought:

After having viewed the photos on his website, I believe that Mr. Hemmel is an exceptionally talented aerial photographer and I would encourage anyone interested in that product to put aside their personal feelings about how this process has been handled and continue to patronize his business. Suffering a sacrifice in product value to make a stand, especially for us, is an admirable quality that shows integrity, but in the end, Mr. Hemmel's position is simply based on a lack of information and fear of changing the status quo, its human nature. Despite the fact that he, and a few others up there continue to prevent us from earning a living doing what we are legally and procedurally allowed to do, I wouldn't want it on my conscience if I thought this process was also causing Mr. Hemmel's business to suffer.

And honestly, I don't say that to gain any favor from him or from any others on the other side of this process, my conscience and my integrity are my guides in this process and I believe in forgiveness and empathy.

Anyone that knows me knows that I speak from the heart and that I am sincere in my request, please continue to patronize Mr. Hemmel if aerial photography is a service you are looking for in the lakes region.

P.S.S. - As for the photoshoped "Skydive Laconia" photos that are posted by the FBOs, that continues to give us no heartburn. 1) It is free advertising and there is no such thing as bad PR. And 2) One day, sooner or later, we will be showing up with the local and national television media with all of our supporting data and documentation, and those photos will make a wonderful backdrop for our interviews.

We never wanted to turn this into a national media event, if we did, we would have done that in 2008, but that is where the otherside has driven this process, so the longer those photos stay up, the better. We couldn't pay for better "Not In My Backyard" exposure. Here will be the integrity challenge.....let's see if they keep the signs up when the cameras start rolling ......

[eillac@dow]

Sure wish you guys were open, as I would love to give you guys my business.

My daughter's 18th d-day is tomorrow...cannot for the life of me figure out what to get. A good friend just said "how bout skydiving". So I ask and she says "Ya, I think that would be cool...I'll do it".

Of course my husband and son have always wanted to do it....but here is my problem....my son is only 15. I checked the Pepperal, MA location and you have t be 18. So my question is....where can a family go to skydive when one person is 15?

Thanks to all.

eillac (allie c)

[TheNoonans]

Hi Allie

In the United States, the minimum age for tandem skydiving customers is either 18 years old or the age of legal majority, whichever is higher. Basically everyone that skydives must be able to legally enter into a contract by signing the waiver.

Thank you for your support, we wish we were open too......lol. This process isn't going to hang in limbo much longer, and our patience is still fully intact.

In the interim, I can tell you that if you pick another dropzone to skydive at, you'll be treated great at any destination you choose.

Skydive New England (www.ugojump.com) just across the border in Lebanon, ME.
Skydive Pepperell (www.skyjump.com) just across the border in Pepperell, MA.
and
Jumptown (www.jumptown.com) in Orange, MA.

They all offer exceptional service and staff.

I have yet to skydive in Addison, VT, but I also hear that Vermont Skydiving in Addison (www.vtskydiving.com) also has some great views above the airport.

I hope that info is helpful. Enjoy your skydives!

While we continue to wait to open in Gilford at LCI, I continue to travel to multi-use airports with both jet traffic and parachute operations giving parachute operational safety seminars. Ironic, huh?

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[AC2717]

Went for my first skydive yesterday, it was AWESOME!!!!!!!
went to Skydive Pepperil
I cannot wait for Skydive Laconia to open, Only thing was the anticipation, after I got past that, everything else was the best feeling in the world

I highly recommend it to everyone!!!!!

[TheNoonans]

Congratulations!

I am thrilled you got to make a skydive and enjoyed it. (Did you happen to notice the name of the guy on the training video they showed you?.....lol)

I recently returned from the the midwest US where I was volunteering for a program called "Tandems for the Troops". (Yet another project that we were hoping to also bring to the lakes region through Skydive Laconia.)

http://www.fox6now.com/videobeta/4c4...ing-for-troops

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[AC2717]

I did notice, you were the guy with the beard right??
Nice out-takes at the end lol

I jumped with Keith Murphy (or Murray have to check on my cert when I get home). He was on his 13th jump of the day at 1:30pm WOW lol - wish I was him at this point. He was great, everyone there was great, and he had over 3,600 jumps under his belt since he started way back when

we did some cool things in the air and when the shoot opened he showed me how to control it and we glided around with some figure 8's and sharp turns and he told my wife where to stand, and he put us down right in front of her - sooooo cool. IN fact at first she had no desire and now she is just waiting for her chance to go (just have to have the funds disposable first)


I hope this gets through I want to be one of the first customers up over the lake!!

[TheNoonans]

Yup, that was me in the instructional video and my wife Mary was the passenger in the training.

and he told my wife where to stand, and he put us down right in front of her - sooooo cool.

Wait a second.......lol. You mean to tell me that your parachute didn't drift across the sky uncontrollably? That my friend Keith told your wife where to stand and then landed you in front of her? What about all those technical terms used in all those official reports like "katabatic winds" and "wind sheer"? Keith must not have read the erroneous reports and accusations that he was supposed to drift uncontrollably across runways........lol

You know if people in Laconia/Gilford saw that type of directional control at the Laconia Municipal Airport, it might take away one of the "many many reasons" for concern a certain person(s) has about our ability to operate in Gilford.

Makes you kind of wonder why those few people in power up there are soooo against allowing us the opportunity to prove our point about modern parachute accuracy. Well, its not really a surprise though, right? I think anyone that has been following this thread can understand why they don't want us to show you how accurate those pesky parachutes are these days......lol

As I said before, because the moment we land, their scare tactics will vanish in an instant.

Congrats again on your skydive.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

Yup, that was me in the instructional video and my wife Mary was the passenger in the training.



Wait a second.......lol. You mean to tell me that your parachute didn't drift across the sky uncontrollably? That my friend Keith told your wife where to stand and then landed you in front of her? What about all those technical terms used in all those official reports like "katabatic winds" and "wind sheer"? Keith must not have read the erroneous reports and accusations that he was supposed to drift uncontrollably across runways........lol

You know if people in Laconia/Gilford saw that type of directional control at the Laconia Municipal Airport, it might take away one of the "many many reasons" for concern a certain person(s) has about our ability to operate in Gilford.

Makes you kind of wonder why those few people in power up there are soooo against allowing us the opportunity to prove our point about modern parachute accuracy. Well, its not really a surprise though, right? I think anyone that has been following this thread can understand why they don't want us to show you how accurate those pesky parachutes are these days......lol

As I said before, because the moment we land, their scare tactics will vanish in an instant.

Congrats again on your skydive.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Well it is funny you say that because my wife and I were in amazement how people were landing literally right beside each other, and how it was so accurate (not that we did not believe that is wasn't, we were just amazed) then once I was in it the ease of control was amazing, i mean there I was never had done this before and I was controlling the chute like I was operating it for years


I Need to get up there again!!!! Please keep well at least me updated as to when you win this battle, I need to be one of the first up

[TheNoonans]

Well it is funny you say that because my wife and I were in amazement how people were landing literally right beside each other, and how it was so accurate (not that we did not believe that is wasn't, we were just amazed) then once I was in it the ease of control was amazing, i mean there I was never had done this before and I was controlling the chute like I was operating it for years

Now wait a minute........lol

You mean to tell me that your instructor's accurate landing wasn't just dumb luck, like a broken clock still being right twice a day?

Your telling me MULTIPLE parachutes were landing right next to each other, repeatedly? WOW.

They must have been incredibly skilled to be able to do that? I wonder who trains tandem instructors? (Oh, wait, I forgot, I do that, and trained most of the instructors on that dropzone.........)

C'mon........if you keep posting comments like this, those that oppose us will have nothing left to scare people with on this forum and in the papers......lol

I am really glad you had a great time and look forward to someday taking you on a skydive over the lake.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

Now wait a minute........lol

You mean to tell me that your instructor's accurate landing wasn't just dumb luck, like a broken clock still being right twice a day?

Your telling me MULTIPLE parachutes were landing right next to each other, repeatedly? WOW.

They must have been incredibly skilled to be able to do that? I wonder who trains tandem instructors? (Oh, wait, I forgot, I do that, and trained most of the instructors on that dropzone.........)

C'mon........if you keep posting comments like this, those that oppose us will have nothing left to scare people with on this forum and in the papers......lol

I am really glad you had a great time and look forward to someday taking you on a skydive over the lake.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Tom,

Have you arranged a demo for interested parties- that may help your cause?

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Tom,

Have you arranged a demo for interested parties- that may help your cause?

I volunteer for a DEMO!!!!!!!

[NoRegrets]

I was totally blown away with your jumps in Nepal (Mount Everest) and now you helped bring joy to our heroes. Looking forward to seeing your canopies over Laconia.

Thanks for staying the course......

[TheNoonans]

Hi Vitabene

Have you arranged a demo for interested parties- that may help your cause?

We have offered multiple times, at our own expense to perform demonstration jumps for all the interested parties, dating back as early as 2008. We have offered it to the airport board, the airport manager and the Gilford and Laconia elected officials.

Every time we offer it, we are flatly denied, with no explanation, other than the catch phrase "that is simply not an option."

This, despite the fact that I hold an FAA sanctioned "Pro Rating" and can legally skydive/parachute into stadiums. (I jumped into Lincoln field last summer for a Philadelphia Eagles Fan Appreciation Day).

This, despite the fact that we have "demo insurance" to satisfy the airport's insurance requirement.

This, despite the fact that the airport is practically a ghost town November-April.

This, despite the fact that the airport is practically empty during the week even in the summer months.

This, despite the fact there are only two businesses operating out of the entire airport.

The reason they flatly deny us of course though, is that they don't want us proving them wrong. The moment we land our parachutes safely and accurately, their arguement and all of their fear mongering comes to an abrupt end.

That is why they continue to refuse us access to the airport for a demonstration jump.

At this point however, I wouldn't care to even consider a demonstration jump.

Why?

I could land a sport or tandem parachute anywhere on the field that they asked me to, repeatedly, all day long. But in doing so, it would not sway their opinions. Hence, at this point it would simply be a waste of my time and money to demonstrate what I have been asking to demonstrate for the last three years.

Make no mistake, this is no longer an issue of airport access, it is an issue of self entitlement. For the airport authority to now concede that we can operate, is for them to concede that they were in fact completely, and utterly wrong from the outset of this process, and they will never, ever, ever do that. It's a matter of vanity. Who are we to tell them what they can and cannot allow on THEIR airport.

At this point, atleast when the FAA finally orders them to let us on, they can atleast attempt to salvage some credibility in this process by claiming that the FAA made them let us operate..........

Till then.......

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[AC2717]

Hi Tom,
I fully agree, but with all that said, if you feel you need to do a tandom demo, I will race up to meet you!!!!

Good luck and I am pulling for you, not to mention I think I am close enough where our little spot on the lake is, we can probably watch people come down all the time that would be cool

[trfour]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

Hi Vitabene



We have offered multiple times, at our own expense to perform demonstration jumps for all the interested parties, dating back as early as 2008. We have offered it to the airport board, the airport manager and the Gilford and Laconia elected officials.

Every time we offer it, we are flatly denied, with no explanation, other than the catch phrase "that is simply not an option."

This, despite the fact that I hold an FAA sanctioned "Pro Rating" and can legally skydive/parachute into stadiums. (I jumped into Lincoln field last summer for a Philadelphia Eagles Fan Appreciation Day).

This, despite the fact that we have "demo insurance" to satisfy the airport's insurance requirement.

This, despite the fact that the airport is practically a ghost town November-April.

This, despite the fact that the airport is practically empty during the week even in the summer months.

This, despite the fact there are only two businesses operating out of the entire airport.

The reason they flatly deny us of course though, is that they don't want us proving them wrong. The moment we land our parachutes safely and accurately, their arguement and all of their fear mongering comes to an abrupt end.

That is why they continue to refuse us access to the airport for a demonstration jump.

At this point however, I wouldn't care to even consider a demonstration jump.

Why?

I could land a sport or tandem parachute anywhere on the field that they asked me to, repeatedly, all day long. But in doing so, it would not sway their opinions. Hence, at this point it would simply be a waste of my time and money to demonstrate what I have been asking to demonstrate for the last three years.

Make no mistake, this is no longer an issue of airport access, it is an issue of self entitlement. For the airport authority to now concede that we can operate, is for them to concede that they were in fact completely, and utterly wrong from the outset of this process, and they will never, ever, ever do that. It's a matter of vanity. Who are we to tell them what they can and cannot allow on THEIR airport.

At this point, atleast when the FAA finally orders them to let us on, they can atleast attempt to salvage some credibility in this process by claiming that the FAA made them let us operate..........

Till then.......

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

I am very much looking forward to the day of Skydive Laconia's Grand opening!
And as most of us can and will agree about the LAA...
We didn't like the play, but then saw it under adverse condition - the curtain was up!!!!

Best wishes to the Noonans!
Terry
__________________________

[TheNoonans]

Since I love to do research, and have all this time on my hands waiting for the FAA to finally correct this airport access process, I thought I would share with you all an email I just sent to the mayor of Laconia and Gilford Selectmen.

It pretty much sums up the irony in this process, that whether it's the LAA or the town elected officials, it seems that those with the least amount of practical knowledge are in the greatest position to affect the outcome of this decision.

Does that bother you? It should.

Anyways, here is the letter I sent:

Good afternoon Mr. Mayor (Laconia) and Selectmen (Gilford),

I am writing you today to keep you in the loop on a couple of items as they pertain to Skydive Laconia. I have cc'd the reporter from the Citizen as Selectman Hayes was quoted by the paper in a prior Citizen article when he ambiguously stated that there "may be some" possibility of private jet insurance requirements precluding these jets from patronizing the Laconia Municipal Airport if a skydiving operation were allowed to operate on the airfield to include landing our parachutes on the airfield.

The item of interest that I would like to address with you today pertains to NASCAR. Of the handful of people that object to our desire to land parachutes on the airfield, the foundation for their argument centers around private jets, that the addition of skydiving to the airport will drive off the private jets.

I have talked to many private jet pilots since this process began, and have yet to encounter any that have any objection to flying into or out of an airport such as Laconia if there is a parachute operation present. That is to say, the only private jet pilots to publicly speak against us are an employee and the owner of Sky Bright Aviation, a company based on the airfield itself. It would not be unreasonable to assume that any opinion coming from a business already on the airfield may be somewhat clouded in bias, as the easiest way to avoid having to share the airfield with another business is to prevent that business access to the airfield.

My point is simply this: I recently contacted the chief pilot of an air charter service that ferries quite a few of those NASCAR drivers into New Hampshire for the races at Loudon. He and the pilots he manages have flown into and out of Laconia for years in private jets. These are the very same private jets Selectman Hayes was so fearful of losing with our presence on the airfield.

The highlights of the conversation went as follows:
- After having flown into and out of Laconia repeatedly, making them intimately knowledgable about the airport and it's approach, none of them would have any issue whatsoever with arriving or departing Laconia with a parachute operation on the airport that included landing parachutes on the airport.
- They do not preclude landing at airports with skydiving operations when they do their flight planning.
- When they fly the largest of their private jets, they don't even come to Laconia any more, they fly them into Manchester.
- They have never in their entire professional history, ever heard of an insurance policy that would preclude a jet from landing at an airport with an on-field parachute operation.

I offer you this information in advance, as the FAA on a federal level is currently in the process of correcting the two erroneous reports issued by the local office of the FAA (the ADO), and when that is complete, we fully expect the FAA to instruct the Laconia Airport Authority to either allow us to operate or to forfeiture their federal funding grant assurances for discriminating against an aeronautical activity such as ours. I have requested all of the documents associated with this reporting process through the FOIA and when I receive it, I plan to publish it all locally and nationally. In so much as the federal government cannot be litigated against, the court of public opinion has no such boundaries and the public can decide for itself whether or not my wife and I were treated fairly during this lengthy process.

I have cc'd Mr. Haas for two reasons on this email:
1) Simply to keep him informed on the current status of our request
and
2) More importantly, in the hopes that when the time comes, he will be willing to ask a very important question of Selectman Hayes: "Where did you get that purposely ambiguous information that some insurance policies may prevent private jets from landing in Laconia if there is a parachute operation on the airfield?" (My bet, should Selectman Hayes be willing to answer the question, is that it came from someone already in business on the airport in Laconia, or possibly from a member of the airport board itself.)

I recognize there are two sides to every story, and I welcome Selectman Hayes' opportunity to share his side of the story by answering that simple question.

I fully understand that despite the fact that anyone "in the know" in the aviation insurance industry acknowledges that such a policy simply doesn't exist, that motivation to save face being what it is, I would not put it past anyone in this process to track down a one-off insurance provider that is willing to write in an exclusion to a policy to protect the person or persons that have fed Selectman Hayes his erroneous information.

(Mr. Haas, assuming the Selectman can even find a singular instance of such a policy, I would be curious to follow up with the policy writer to find out 1) When it was written (I would assume it would be written after this email) and 2) how many other policies were written with the same exclusion (I would expect none).

As I can only assume that since a member of the Gilford Selectmen also sits on the LAA board, that this email will be forwarded to the LAA, who will in turn forward it on to the FBOs, and anyone else on their "Skydive Laconia" email list, I would like to candidly offer anyone that receives this with any questions to feel free to contact me directly.

Best regards,

Tom Noonan
Skydive Laconia

If any of you would like to follow up directly with your elected officials:

The mayor of Laconia: citycouncil@city.laconia.nh.us

or the

Gilford Selectmen: selectmen@gilfordnh.org

Please feel free to do so.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by TheNoonans

Since I love to do research, and have all this time on my hands waiting for the FAA to finally correct this airport access process, I thought I would share with you all an email I just sent to the mayor of Laconia and Gilford Selectmen.

It pretty much sums up the irony in this process, that whether it's the LAA or the town elected officials, it seems that those with the least amount of practical knowledge are in the greatest position to affect the outcome of this decision.

Does that bother you? It should.

Anyways, here is the letter I sent:




If any of you would like to follow up directly with your elected officials:

The mayor of Laconia: citycouncil@city.laconia.nh.us

or the

Gilford Selectmen: selectmen@gilfordnh.org

Please feel free to do so.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

I cannot wait for the day that the FAA comes through for you. I've had my own experiences with those arrogant clowns on the Gilford Board of Selectmen. It will be a great day when they have to open up and swallow the bitter pill.

[Jonas Pilot]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

I cannot wait for the day that the FAA comes through for you. I've had my own experiences with those arrogant clowns on the Gilford Board of Selectmen. It will be a great day when they have to open up and swallow the bitter pill.

That should help convince them.

[fatlazyless]

Just a brief friendly reminder here......if the Laconia Airport goes nowhere with a skydiving business proposal, then maybe you might consider that beautifull small municipal airport, just off Rt 93-Exit 26, in Plymouth NH......the Plymouth Municipal Airport. It has a very soft green grass runway with excellent quality green grass that would probably be good for skydiver landings as opposed to the black asphalt runway at Laconia. Plus, it's just a short distance from the Rumney Rocks-WMNF natural cliff, sport rock climbing area (see Rumney Rocks in the Outdoor Recreation section) that attracts rock climbers from all over the world. Probably, there would be some cross interest with people who come to rock climb who could also give skydiving a first time jump.

Likewise, the yummy $3.98, 4-cheese frozen pizzas at the Plymouth Super Wal-Mart probably shares a strong demographic with skydivers!

See the links in post #352 above!

www.chutesup.com/aboutus.htm and click on the u-tube videos of slow flying, powered parachute take-offs and landings to get a feel for the Plymouth Airport!

Say hey; the Gilford Wal-Mart which is an immediate abutter to the Laconia Airport, carries no frozen pizzas what-so-ever, so's that another excellent reason to stay the heck away from the Laconia Airport and make the move to the Plymouth Municipal Airport!

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

That should help convince them.

You really think anything said on this forum will sway them one way or the other? I think their minds are already made up. But, I too can't wait until those clowns have to swallow that bitter pill once the FAA approves this!

[TheNoonans]

You really think anything said on this forum will sway them one way or the other? I think their minds are already made up.

Personally I don't believe that any information on this thread has, or will sway anyone on the LAA. They made up their minds in July 2008 when we first approached them, before they ever even saw our proposal. This is THEIR airport and they will run it the way THEY want, regardless of proper procedure and due process. It was, is and continues to be, an example of a local political machine at it's worst.

I post what I post here for a couple of reasons:
1) To educate the intelligent masses here on the forum that refuse to give into the fear mongering. To the citizens that are being denied new jobs and additional economic stimulus. I post for their benefit, to keep them in formed.
2) To provide a permanent record of the mismanagement of this process by the LAA and the local elected officials, so that when the next election rolls around, the citizenry of these communities can demand accountability for the actions of those put in power to serve them.
and
3) To continue to communicate, even in a one way capacity, with both the LAA and those elected officials. They are all on here reading this, despite never being willing to respond publicly. Ironic, huh?

Since I found this thread, I have been an open book. I post honest and factual information, while the other side hides, refusing to take a public stand. I post to continue to show you that I am not afraid of the facts or the truth, that I invite anyone to challenge the veracity of my statements.

I stand up. They hide.

Does that bother you? It should.

But in the end, look where we are from post #1, where you were warned about those two "floridians" that were trying to drop skydivers on to the airport, over "YOUR homes".

Facts have thrown out every argument that they have made.
1) Landing parachutes on the airport (even AOPA recognizes that as the appropriate method).
2) Size of the airport (everywhere else in the country, similar size and traffic airports support skydiving)
3) We will lose our jets! (Sorry, the NASCAR guys and the John Marriots will still show up, they said so)
4) Landing on the object free area of grass (already happening around the country)
5) Flight schools and No Radio GA traffic (already established by the FAA that's not an issue)
6) Skill of the operators (Despite the cowardly actions of the LAA claiming my stance on aircraft/skydiver collisions is of concern, the rest of the free world continues to consider me a global expert on tandem skydiving safety)
7) Jets "may have some" insurance problems with parachutes (not from any insurance carriers anyone knows of)

and so on and so...........

We met every one of their concerns HEAD ON, never shying away, never backing down. We brought the facts and the truth with us and because of that, they have never been able make any valid argument against us.

Remember all of this come election time. The people you put in office and that are placed on the LAA board are meant to serve you. You are not meant to serve them.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[NoBozo]

Hi TOM: I have posted here before with my thoughts. I am a Pilot and have no problem with your proposal..support your IDEA.

I FAIL to understand WHY you still PUSH to Land in Laconia with Skydive Laconia..when you are clearly not wanted by the people on the ground ..."At The Airport."

IF the FAA says you CAN land there.....NOW What..? You have to rent hanger space, office space, purchase fuel, aircraft maintnenance... THEY will not be your friends. ...

SO what is your obsession here..????? I am your friend.. just wondering..NB

EDIT: BTW: Maybe you could drop the ..Always: "Blue Skies To All And To All A Good Flight". I'm sure it just totally aggravates THEM...and doesn't advance your case. NB

[Pineedles]

NB, your post is nothing but an attempt to stir a pot that Tom has refused to participate in.

[TheNoonans]

Hi Pineedles,

Thank you for your support. (I really don't mind responding though.)

Hi NB,

I covered the answer to "Why here?" further up the thread in terms of location and my refusal to be bullied by a handful of locals that don't like seeing things change, even if the change is lawful, economically sound and (despite their claims) doesn't create an unsafe condition on the airfield.

As for them not wanting to be our friends? That's really their loss, not ours. Believe it or not our presence could increase their profits as well, they just fail to see that, because they are blinded by their emotional attachment to the issue.

I've stated before, there a number of hangar owners willing to work with us. They want to work with us and we want to work with them. We will make them lots of money and they will help us make lots of money. Not a bad deal.

As for the FBOs not selling us fuel? Believe me, short of the chief of the FAA Randy Babbitt, every agent of the FAA from here to Los Angeles is watching this. When I say that the LAA and the FBOs will be under a microscope when this is over, trust me, they will be. Any signs of discrimination and they lose their funding.

My "obsession" here is simply truth and justice in America.

As for friends, I have enough friends around the world to not be worried about how a handful of "small town good old boys" will react to our presence on the airfield. Let it bother them all they want, it won't bother us at all.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

[Jonas Pilot]

With all those friends around the world why wouldn't you go someplace else where you are more welcome? Why cheat them of the benefits of your presence?

[trfour]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

With all those friends around the world why wouldn't you go someplace else where you are more welcome? Why cheat them of the benefits of your presence?

Hi JP. To answer your two part question in a nutshell!
The world is no longer flat, and we need many more wonderful people like the Noonans right here, right now!!!!

Would you please readjust your js?

Terry
________________________________

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

That should help convince them.

Doubtful, because nothing else has. So what would you do? Get down on your knees, perhaps?

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

With all those friends around the world why wouldn't you go someplace else where you are more welcome? Why cheat them of the benefits of your presence?

They have plenty of friends and supporters here, don't worry. They are quite welcome here by everyone but the royalty at the town government (or those who think they are) and apparently you, No Bozo and a handful of others.

Tom, you're almost home. These posts are evidence. Don't give up now, we're behind you. On the other hand, we need more guys like you...how about a 2012 run for president?

Laconia traffic, this is N0---Y on westbound departure Runway 26.... no parachutes in my way!

[NoBozo]

I think a couple of you people need to go back and read my post again. I am in FAVOR of Tom's idea. NB

PS: Here's another way to frame it. Lets say you were interested in buying a house in a certain neighborhood, and while you were looking at the house with your real estate agent, a number of your neighbors to be came over and told you .."You are not welcome here". Would you still want to move in with such nice neighbors next door. Just sayin.

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

I think a couple of you people need to go back and read my post again. I am in FAVOR of Tom's idea. NB

PS: Here's another way to frame it. Lets say you were interested in buying a house in a certain neighborhood, and while you were looking at the house with your real estate agent, a number of your neighbors to be came over and told you .."You are not welcome here". Would you still want to move in with such nice neighbors next door. Just sayin.

I agree with this situation becuase it is residential, I think it is a different ball game with a business

[gtagrip]

Originally Posted by AC2717

I agree with this situation becuase it is residential, I think it is a different ball game with a business

I will ditto that!

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

Hi TOM: I have posted here before with my thoughts. I am a Pilot and have no problem with your proposal..support your IDEA.

I FAIL to understand WHY you still PUSH to Land in Laconia with Skydive Laconia..when you are clearly not wanted by the people on the ground ..."At The Airport."

IF the FAA says you CAN land there.....NOW What..? You have to rent hanger space, office space, purchase fuel, aircraft maintnenance... THEY will not be your friends. ...

SO what is your obsession here..????? I am your friend.. just wondering..NB

EDIT: BTW: Maybe you could drop the ..Always: "Blue Skies To All And To All A Good Flight". I'm sure it just totally aggravates THEM...and doesn't advance your case. NB

Using your logic, the civil rights movement never would have happened. Sometimes, doing the right thing is hard, both for you and other people. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't go ahead and do it. Due process and equal treatment under the law are bedrock American principles. Choosing to abandon those principles simply because you're "not wanted" at a certain location strikes me as being un-American.

[jrc]

This is never simple and clear. The Noonans are lucky that they have the connections, money and stamina to fight this battle. How many times does a situation like this go unnoticed by the public. Someone applies for a business permit, the neigboring business find out and calls his buddy on the board, permit denied.

People have been talking about the dollar cost of big government a lot lately but this shows the other cost, maybe corruption is too strong a word but definitely this smacks of political favoritism. When government people are favoring one business over another, it's not right.

I see how the housing and civil rights seems like it fits, but the harm here is purely financial. In the civil rights case, it was a henious crime intending to strip a person of basic human rights.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by jrc

I see how the housing and civil rights seems like it fits, but the harm here is purely financial. In the civil rights case, it was a henious crime intending to strip a person of basic human rights.

Oh, I agree that discrimination based on race, religion, ethnicity, etc. is much more offensive than a group of locals wanting to keep a newcomer out to protect their turf, but the general principle is the same. And don't think that there aren't financial aspects to racial discrimination.

[tis]

Originally Posted by jrc

This is never simple and clear. The Noonans are lucky that they have the connections, money and stamina to fight this battle. How many times does a situation like this go unnoticed by the public. Someone applies for a business permit, the neigboring business find out and calls his buddy on the board, permit denied.

People have been talking about the dollar cost of big government a lot lately but this shows the other cost, maybe corruption is too strong a word but definitely this smacks of political favoritism. When government people are favoring one business over another, it's not right.

I see how the housing and civil rights seems like it fits, but the harm here is purely financial. In the civil rights case, it was a henious crime intending to strip a person of basic human rights.

It happens all the time. I KNEW he was going to have a hard time when he first posted.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

Using your logic, the civil rights movement never would have happened. Sometimes, doing the right thing is hard, both for you and other people. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't go ahead and do it. Due process and equal treatment under the law are bedrock American principles. Choosing to abandon those principles simply because you're "not wanted" at a certain location strikes me as being un-American.

I don't think this has anything to do with the Cival Rights Movement. NB

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

I don't think this has anything to do with the Cival Rights Movement. NB

I'm not saying that the disagreement over locating a skydiving operation at the Laconia airport is a civil rights issue. Obviously, it's not. What I am saying is that using your logic (don't try to force yourself in where you're not wanted), the civil rights movement, at least as we know it, would not have happened. No civil disobediance. No sit-ins at lunch counters. No school integration. We would still have separate but (not so) equal. Would you have advised MLK and his compatriots to not try and force themselves in where they're not wanted? If not, what's the difference in your mind between exercising your rights in one instance but not another, when local sentiment is against you?

The Noonans have a right, within established rules and regulations, to open a business where they damn well please. I think that you probably agree with that. If they end up getting permission to operate at KLCI, the decision to do so shouldn't be dictated by NIMBYs who for whatever reason would prefer that they go elsewhere.

[trfour]

WE, elect people to Govern us... The Noonans have come here in good faith, and of heart to open both an economically sound proposal for a New and to continue to add to an very important tourist destination, ( Area significant )... Wise?

Local government sure has No help from the Hill, these days.
No A'Wake, No progress!... However, we will remember them maybe when we are all in default!..


I know that this is a very long thread, but pretty Please read all of it before you post a reply!
Terry
____________________________


Remember that; All people are born alike - except Republicans and Democrats...

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by TMI Guy

I'm not saying that the disagreement over locating a skydiving operation at the Laconia airport is a civil rights issue. Obviously, it's not. What I am saying is that using your logic (don't try to force yourself in where you're not wanted), the civil rights movement, at least as we know it, would not have happened. No civil disobediance. No sit-ins at lunch counters. No school integration. We would still have separate but (not so) equal. Would you have advised MLK and his compatriots to not try and force themselves in where they're not wanted? If not, what's the difference in your mind between exercising your rights in one instance but not another, when local sentiment is against you?

The Noonans have a right, within established rules and regulations, to open a business where they damn well please. I think that you probably agree with that. If they end up getting permission to operate at KLCI, the decision to do so shouldn't be dictated by NIMBYs who for whatever reason would prefer that they go elsewhere.

NB has said he supports the Noonans and their right to do business. He was questioning the practicality of co-existing where they were not wanted.

Using your logic, I take it you support Northern Pass' right to open their business wherever they (damn well) please and equate it to the Civil Rights movement.

[superdawgfan]

Originally Posted by flyguy

Fair enough. Everyone in America is entitled to "vote with their feet". If you don't like the truth, feel free to do so.

On the other hand, I would hope you would have the cajones to provide your real name and the name of the business you own (you do own one, right?), so that I and my friends may extend you the same courtesy.

Thanks for your permission to "vote with my feet"; I've been waiting anxiously for your approval.

No idea what 'cajones' are; perhaps you mean 'cojones'--I guess this is just another example of you getting the facts wrong?

Yes, I do own a business. But since I am not obstructing another business from starting up and preventing the addition of jobs to our local economy, I don't feel the need to disclose the name of it. Nice try at intimidation though--that seems to be what you do best. Pathetic.

[P-3 Guy]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

NB has said he supports the Noonans and their right to do business. He was questioning the practicality of co-existing where they were not wanted.

Using your logic, I take it you support Northern Pass' right to open their business wherever they (damn well) please and equate it to the Civil Rights movement.

I had to Google "Northern Pass" because I had no idea what it was. I won't offer an opinion on your comparison because I don't have enough information to do so.

The point that I was trying to make, which apparently I wasn't making very well, is that to give up and go away simply because some people might not want you around (whether it's because of the color of your skin or because you're not a local and your presence will upset the status quo), even when you have every legal and moral right to be there, smacks of defeatism. It's not the kind of attitude that made (and makes) America a great country.

I'll give the Noonans the benefit of the doubt and presume that they've done an analysis that shows Laconia to be the best place to locate their skydiving business. Maybe that's why they're being so persistent. If what Tom is saying is accurate, and his proposed business can thrive and coexist with other airport users, maybe those who are against him will change their minds, if he is given a chance. Who knows, they might even see some benefit from the additional people who come to the airport. But to turn tail and give up solely because potential neighbors want you to go away is wrong.

[VitaBene]

Tom,

Have you looked at Moultonborough Airport?

Moultonboro Airport
Runway 02-20
Length: 3,475' x 50'
Lighting: PCL (non-standard)
Surface: Asphalt
Inst. App. None
Fuel: 100LL (24/7 self serve)

I live on the other side of Berry Pond from it and would welcome the sight of you flying over and floating to earth at Mboro Airport.

I have a 5 acre field in front of my house on which I will paint all sorts of landing zones for you to practice on.