RE: SFO Mitigation - New Windsurf Site?

From: Stephen Hiley (SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis)
Date: Thu Feb 03 2000 - 14:42:55 PST


Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com (root@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis [15.0.168.176]) by jr.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id OAA11410 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:53:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com (hplms26.hpl.hp.com [15.255.168.31]) by opus.hpl.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id OAA22182 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:53:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wsgc-bh.wsgc.com (wsgc-bh.wsgc.com [198.93.40.66]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id OAA00790 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:53:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by wsgc-bh.wsgc.com (8.8.8/8.6.11) id OAA17626 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:43:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sfexfax1.wsgc.com(199.87.10.241) by wsgc-bh.wsgc.com via smap (4.1) id xma017136; Thu, 3 Feb 00 14:42:53 -0800
Received: by sfexfax1.wsgc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <DL3VCZZA>; Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:42:56 -0800
Message-ID: <294B00DB40B2D0119AA900A02461F5670524B6C9@SFEXSVR1>
From: Stephen Hiley <SHiley@WSGC.com-DeleteThis>
To: "'wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis'" <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: RE: SFO Mitigation - New Windsurf Site?
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:42:55 -0800 
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain

Scary -- That thought actually crossed my mind as well. Add to that list an
earplug station at the launch entrance! Those jets be loud!

Given the impact noted already, it sounds like requesting two replacement
sites would not be entirely unreasonable. Given that no other site could
make up for all that Coyote has to offer, One lesser south launch + one
lesser north launch sounds pretty reasonable.

> ----------
> From: Ken Poulton[SMTP:poulton@zonker.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis]
> Reply To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 12:29 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: RE: SFO Mitigation - New Windsurf Site?
>
> A Modest Proposal:
>
> I think we could make a great new advanced site on the Bay side of the
> new NW-facing runway. Sideshore wind, right in the middle of the San
> Bruno gap, close to the channel, water deep enough for all tides.
> All they have to do is give us a parking lot and some access ramps out
> there.
>
> They would object to access close to runways, of course, but
> we were there first.
>
> The basic fact is that effective mitigation must occur very close to the
> airport, because that's where the wind is. Mitigation in SF will
> not help Peninsula sailors at all - it's simply impractical to
> drive to SF from Santa Clara County.
>
>
> Ken Poulton
> poulton@labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis
>
> "Am I getting smart with you? How would you know?" -- Dilbert
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:23:47 PDT