City Government

Anti F-35 Post In Interest Of Fair Play

We are providing space to those opposed to the F-35 being based at Gowen Field in the interest of fair play. Various state and local governments have come out in favor of locating the noisy fighter here, but those opposed don’t have access to the public money or forum.

The GUARDIAN will gladly entertain any “on the record” comments from public officials or others who support basing the F-35 in Boise’s densely populated metro area. The information contained in the graphics is from the US Air Force’s own environmental impact statement.

Another map regarding schools can be found by clicking below.

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Personally, I think the best possible scenario, long term, would be to have the Guard move its base way out south. I know that this is something that has been discussed.

  2. Jason Walker
    Feb 21, 2012, 3:24 pm

    Can larger versions of the images be provided, the current ones are hard to read, and clicking on them does not provide an enlarged version.

    EDITOR NOTE–Sorry, we will try to provide a link as well.

  3. Like Mountain Home?

  4. I am not trying to be non military or anti progressive but as a home owner in Columbia Village I am very concerned about the “not suitable for residential use” classification. I have started to speak with people about this in my neighborhood and no one seems to know this is happening. Does anyone know who the organization is behind the “save our valley now”.org website?

  5. What in the world are the people thinking when they promote basing the F-35 at the Boise Airport? The noise complaints will be endless. The best example I can offer is El Torro Marine Air Base. Around the clock ops and expensive homes in the area put a big fat target on it when bases were closed all over the country in 1994.

    Everything the Marine Corps had was flying day and night. The base was in the middle of orange groves for years and years but growth and demand for housing proved to be the driving force and good planning gave way to developers and what I like to call TOILET TERRACE HOMES taking over the area.

  6. I come from an Air Force family: of my three uncles and one aunt who served in the AF, two were combat pilots. My own father was a navigator/WSO and both of my brothers as well as I were active duty Air Force. I grew up on Air Force Bases watching front line fighters fly sorties day and night. I have worked as a licensed civilian aircraft mechanic and am a licensed pilot. I love airplanes – the look, the sound, the smell, the dirt – everything about them, love ’em. I am proud of mine and my family’s service and am proud of our armed forces. I deeply appreciate the difficult and dangerous job with which they are tasked. So, understand: it is not lightly that I say that Gowen field is not the place to station the F-35.

    The FAA, airlines, and airliner manufacturers have worked for decades to quiet civilian aircraft and develop flight techniques to lessen noise. So successful they have been that large airliners can take off and land at Gowen field almost unnoticed to just about all of the Boise and the Treasure Valley but the residents in the immediate vicinity. Those who may think that only a small area will be affected by noise from the F-35 are wrong. Nowhere in Boise will you be able to escape the noise – not downtown, in the foothills, the North End, Columbia Village, the Bench, Meridian – nowhere.

    A transient situation where fighters operate out of Gowen, such as last week or a few summers ago as with the Oregon ANG, is understandable and tolerable. But the noise that will be generated by flight and maintenance operations on this scale with this aircraft will be almost continuous and it will be permanent. If Idaho wants the F-35, then the proper location to base it is Mtn. Home AFB – it is no accident that the facility was located where it is.

  7. Bench Warmer. Thank you so much for your honest comments. Very well said.

  8. Andrea. I am one of the spokesmen for the SaveOurValleyNow organization and website. We are a group trying to get understandable and balanced information out to the public on the F-35 issue. Our elected officials are pushing this project behind the scenes, but they are completely unwilling to provide facts, encourage public debate, or discuss the EIS conclusions. I am willing to come to any meeting at any time to provide accurate and balanced information on the F-35 impacts that come directly out of the 1,200 page Air Force Environmental Impact Statement released in January. A great way to get a balanced view of the F-35 project is to have presentations by both the Air Force and the SaveOurValleyNow.org group.

  9. Monty. Thank you for your reply. The information provided your website was presented to the Columbia Village Home Owner Association Board on Tuesday 02/21 and they were not receptive. The board believes this is not a serious proposition and the likelihood of it happening is slim. They say the City has to post public notices, send out public mailers and hold public hearings before anyone needs to get concerned and since the City has not done any of those things our concerns are unnecessary (hysterical and anti military was implied in my opinion). The board even went as far as to say the upcoming February 27, 28, 29 meetings are not sponsored by “officials” but are just put on by citizens who are unnecessarily concerned. Can you please set the record straight, who is sponsoring the meetings in February? and will “save our valley now” be present at the meeting?

  10. For anyone intersted there is a book called Desert Wings: Controversy in the Idaho Desert by Niels Sparre Nokkentved. The book was written back in the 80’s when the Airforce attempted to take a million plus acres of Idaho land south of Mt. Home and turn it into airforce training ground (for bombing and distruction). The book is very informative.
    The main person behind the opposition to the Airforce plan was a retired career military man who knew an additional training faciltiy was not needed but was instead just a poorly thought out plan by government officials. The way I see it, the same abuse applies this time — this is not a matter of “pro or con military”, so don’t be fooled by attempts to package it that way. This plan is a matter of government officials not representing the best interests of the people of this State, officials pushing the personal intersts and agendas of those with power and money. Remember, we will be the ones left with a ruined city, a place no one wants to live because the quality of life is undesirable. And remember there are more suitable places for this training station to be located.

  11. Does any one remember how up in arms everyone got in the early 90’s when the valley was inundated by another undesireable influx. I remember hearing were coming get over it or get out.

    Much as with that influx the AF will come if they decide too, and those that oppose will be told the same thing those of us who were here pre 90, get over it or get out.

    Mini Micron ville was built at the end of the run way, you knew it when you bought there, did you not think the airport would never have more or louder traffic?
    People who buy in a air traffic pattern have no right to complain when the amount of traffic grows, just as those who bought next to the cheese factory have no right to complain about noise from the factory, or someone who buys property in farm country have no fight to complain about farm noises or smells.

    Take responsibility for your own actions, not everyone will bow to you.

  12. Two public meetings are scheduled: Monday February 27, 5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Capital City. (Just read the box on the left side of the flyer for times and dates of the official meetings sponsored by the USAF).

  13. Andrea, the public meetings on February 27th, 28th, and 29th are being sponsored by the Air Force as a requirment of the EIS process. SaveOurValleyNow.org will not be allowed to present anything at the meetings, but we will be there passing out informational flyers, asking questions, and pointing out EIS deficiencies for the record.

    There are a couple of misconceptions about the F-35 Draft EIS that need to be clarified. The first is the idea that the F-35s are unlikely to ever come to Boise because another site will be selected instead. That is not the case at all. The integrated review of four possible F-35 locations, Boise, Tucson, Luke, and Holloman is not a “winner take all” contest. All four sites are being pre-scoped for pre-approval and stockpiling for activation as F-35s become available. Eglin AFB in Florida already has F-35s located there. Luke has been identified as the next preferred alternative to be activated in the 2013/2014 time frame. How quickly Boise, Tucson, and Holloman get activated depends on how fast Lockheed Martin can push the jets out the door and how many each base is allowed to accept. Once the Final EIS is issued, the stage is set for quick activation as the locations are needed. And since Eglin just had their maximum F-35 numbers reduced from 144 to 59 due to noise lawsuits, more sites are likely to be needed sooner rather than later. So don’t allow yourself to become complacent by assurances that they will never come to Boise. Now is the time to get our questions answered – not after it is too late to stop the deployment?

  14. http://images.bimedia.net/documents/U.S.+Air+Force+public+hearings+flier+%28PDF%29.pdf

    There’s an official post by the U.S. Air Force, looks official to me. Maybe our elected officials are hoping that people will keep their heads buried in the dirt.

  15. Monty, If I may suggest that a link be added to the saveourvalleynow.org website announcing that the Guardian is providing this space for public forum. People are having trouble finding these comments and learning about the real possibility of this change to our home.

  16. Jason – you can download a high-resolution copy of the F-35 Facts and Impacts flyer here: http://www.saveourvalleynow.org/F-35_Facts_and_Impacts_-_rev_8_1_.pdf The information in the flyer is taken from the F-35 Draft Environmental Impact Statement itself.

    BenchWarmer – I appreciate the context for your conclusions. Your comments suggest that the F-35 coming to Boise is not an issue of patriotism or of economic stimulus but one of common sense. Is it reasonable, for example, for Boise to one day find itself in the position of Valparaiso, Florida? Unlike our elected officials and those in Tucson, Arizona (also on the short list of sites for the F-35) who are quietly if not openly courting the F-35, the city fathers of Valparaiso took the Air Force to court when the noise from F-35 overflights proved too intrusive.

    Is it reasonable to exact a penalty of extreme noise on more than 10,000 citizens in our community? Timothy Hogan, PhD, studied the impact of the F-35 on home values in El Mirage, Arizona and found home values under the flight path would be depressed, with a $200 million cumulative toll exacted on the community over time in lost taxes and lost economic development: http://www.azcentral.com/ic/community/pdf/luke-air-force-base-noise-study-0414.pdf What about the four schools, thirteen day care centers, two parks and seven miles of I-84 that would be subjected to extreme noise under the F-35? Our elected officials have not publicly commented on the impacts to our community as revealed in the EIS but they should.

    The decision to base 72 F-35s in Boise doesn’t lie with our local leaders but you’d hope they would exercise their duty and their historic inclination to use common sense on our behalf. An un-defined economic stimulus from bringing F-35s to the Boise airport coming at the expense of long-term depressed housing prices and health problems associated with noise pollution, however, isn’t evidence of common sense. As with our civic leaders, the decision to bring F-35s to Boise also doesn’t lie with our local Air Guard. They will be presenting the local public meetings as honest boosters of the F-35 but they are not the ones we need to convince. The good news is, we don’t need to pick a fight with our friends in our local Air Guard.

  17. Having spent most of my 20 years AF career working on fighter type aircraft I do not think a city, any city is the appropriate place to base fighter jets. The noise id too great and the distractions are too many. Mt Home, Cannon AFB near Clovis N.M and Beale AFB near Marysville in the dredded state of Cali. Are perfect places for these type jets.
    That being said I don’t understand how anyone who bought property near the end of the runway in this case a military/civilian runway can get upset about aircraft noise. Missions for the military change and with that comes the utilization of different types of equipment, if Southwest decides to buy noisier aircraft and fly them out of here are you going to stand up and tell them no? I guess I will never understand people I remember people on Eagle Island a few years ago complaining about the river flows being too high and their houses were flooding, if you buy a house on an “island” in the middle of a river it might flood, if you buy a house at the end of a runway you’re going to hear jets.
    The base (Gowen Field) was used to train pilots during WWII it’s been here longer than 90% of the city, the city encroached on the base, the base didn’t encroach on the city. Try to remember that.

  18. The funny thing is how many people have been taken by the false information being put out, inculding the Boise Guradian.

    The original creater of the website that doesn’t want the F35’s went to the AF PDF page and used the information for Mountain Home including the map for Boise.

    They didn’t take into account distance, size, surrounding area. They just made the page to look the way they wanted, and all the sheep followed.

    Good job guarding Boise.

    EDITOR NOTE– If you have information or documents to the contrary, please share.

  19. No Jet Noise!
    Feb 24, 2012, 10:44 pm

    Rick, It will ruin life for about 5 miles around, especially on inversion or overcast days… not just “near” the runway.

    Airlines are prohibited from operating noisy jets to places like Boise. Problem is the noise law is not applied to the USAF. It should be with all the tax-free empty space they already have tied up in the middle of nowhere all over the nation.

    Boise is their training base target so they can give their training pilots and foreign visitors a nice place to live in Meridian instead of boring little MHAFB, and all the social issues of such a small town.

    Team Dave is ok with this because he wants to play with trains in a bankrupt downtown and just needs a shot of green to do it. They are also overbuilt on capacity at the airport by about 3 times and feel kind stupid about that. So they are disparate to use all that pavement before the feds stop sending them money to maintain it.

  20. Robert, go to this link and look at figure BO 3.2-3 Scenario 3 under the Boise PDF file. Farther down BO 3.2-6 is the Mountain home. They look similar but they are NOT the same.
    http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/index.html

  21. Robert – You raise a good point about qualifying the noise contour map in the Facts and Impacts flyer. The noise contour in the flyer was traced directly from the noise contour map created by the Air Force on pages 14 and 15 of the EIS Executive Summary.

    It’s tempting to imagine that we enlarged the impacted area in the map designated Not Suitable For Residential Use. No such luck. We matched the noise contour exactly and it is alarming just as it stands.

  22. No Jet Noise

    You are right it will be loud close to the airport, ruining life for 5 miles is a just typical cali theatrics, having spent YEARS living A LOT closer to a flight line than 5 miles I can guarantee that.
    It boils down to this, in my opinion, people moved close to an airport/military base now they want to complain about the noise’s associated with living that close to the flight path. I personally have no compassion for you; you did it to yourselves now you want others to bow to your desires.
    Ya they built the airport too big, would have been better to just keep adding on every 10 years or so, things will be cheaper then, kinda like the cali roads, BTW how did that work out for you all? Oh wait that’s part of the reason you all moved out isn’t it?

  23. Is it unreasonable to wonder about our priorities? We will fight for the rights of bugs, rats, green-stuff and worms in the soil that live out in the middle of nowhere, that their life not to be disturbed by military training, and yet we look at 10,000 plus neighboring homes and tell them to bad live with it. I guess their quality of life is of less regard than the previously mentioned. This will affect the entire valley, shouldn’t we be working together to protect it?

  24. Funny you should mention the critters on the Endangered Species list, Lin. If there was anything on the list living among the 10,000 citizens that will be impacted by F-35 overflights there would be all sorts of federal wheels starting to turn to protect them. Down in the Tuscon area those wheels are starting to turn on behalf of the rare Sonoran pronghorn antelope living in the Barry Goldwater training range. 95% of the fighter pilots that fought in the Persian Gulf War trained at the Goldwater range.

  25. To me it comes down to this. The base was there when these people moved in, now because people chose to live in that place now the base must bow to the desires of those who encroached on them? I just think that since people knowingly and willingly moved into the flight path of the base/airport they have no right to complain about the noise. If you are concerned about jet noise don’t buy near an airport. I have read on here that life will be ruiened for 5 miles…. not true…. I have read that the engines spit raw fuel… not true…. do your homework before you buy… if you dont….dont complain…. I hope they station a hundred of the jets there… maybe the population in the valley will go back down to where it should be…

  26. Kevin is appears that it is now our mission to find that endangered species, “Home Owner” is not applicable. 🙂

    The trouble with public discourse, especially in these comment forums, is instead of looking for solutions or compromise, even intelligent, knowledgeable exchange of information, there is always someone who brings nothing to the table but their own ego and rancor. The entire valley will be affected.

  27. John Q Publique
    Feb 25, 2012, 1:34 pm

    First, I’d suggest we all support bedding the planes down at Luke AFB. That’s the preferred alternate for the Air Force. http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/resources/04%20F-35A%20Poster%20-%20PA%20and%20Alternatives%20-%20FINAL%20-%202012-1-11.pdf

    Second, there are four scenarios (baseline, 24, 48, 72 aircraft) evaluated for Gowen Field. I suggest we make comments supporting the baseline or keeping things as they are now (A-10) scenario as having the least environmental impact on the Valley. My second choice would be 24 aircraft one since that scenario reduces the NSFRU area. Remember this is an Environmental Impact Statement.

    Third, we need to comment on the other three scenarios FACTUALLY. Support your comments with information from the Draft EIS itself or other sources you can reference. For example, there is a comment in the document which appears to say that under one scenario air quality in the Valley may actually DECREASE.

    Fourth, we need to ask to see all noise contour lines – not just the 65 dB. There is a comment in the DEIS that West Jr High would experience a noise level approaching 100 dB yet no comments are made about Frank Church High School, the Vo – Tech Building, or the Boise Schools Administration Building – all of which are in the same immediate area. And there are no comments about noise in the neighborhood immediately (about 1/2 of a mile) south of West Jr. High over which all types of aircraft pass at about 500 ft on their approach to the airport.

    Fifth, if you testify, be prepared to make all your comments within a time limit – maybe 3 minutes. Rehearse you comments before hand.

    Lastly, download (http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/EisDocument.html) (Chapter 4) and read the DEIS for Gowen Field. It’s about 160 pages. There’s also some supporting tables and other information that can be downloaded. Inform yourself. Make informed comments. You have until March 14, 2012 to submit comments either by email or snail mail.

  28. The problem with these type formats is not the rancor but the arrogance. Some post blatant untruths and purport them as fact in an effort to ensure that their position is the only “logical” position to take.
    It sounds as though you all have found a coach who will lead you through your testimony to ensure that the one true voice of the valley is heard. He seems to have already got the sheep rounded up and given them their marching orders, along with step by step instructions.
    My major problem with people like you is you want “compromise” and “knowledgeable exchange of information” but then let everyone who opposes you just how wrong they are. You sound like voters who scream for budgets cuts… just don’t touch MY entitlements.

  29. John Q Publique, Thank YOU Thank YOU..

  30. No Jet Noise!
    Feb 25, 2012, 5:23 pm

    Rick, you are out of CG. It is funny to watch.

    Those few jets making an orbit of Boise last week were at 10,000 feet and very low power, but still caused people all over the valley to complain.

    Has not been a noisy gaurd base since 1996, and then it was just a hand full of old F-4s making a few flights a day at mid-day. This is a louder airplane, many many more of them, 18 hours a day.

  31. I suggest any of you take a trip to Mt Home set in the parking lot of what used to be Scrubbies Smokehouse… well within the 5 miles purported to be made uninhabitable and just listen to the F15E’s taking off and landing. The F 35 is supposed to be louder yes at 50k pounds thrust the motor has to be the shit, but at the distance Scrubbies is from the runway normal speech will still be able to be heard. Go see for your selves before you get your knickers in a bunch.

  32. I am out of CG. Not really my CG’s fine. How long did you spend in fighter units? It is funny to listen to you guys whining. You say they will fly 18 hours a day, full up units don’t fly 18 hours a day. How many of you who know so much about military ops have ever been in the military? Most days first goes will be around 8 or 9 am with last downs around 7 or 8 pm, I didn’t go to school in cali…. but I don’t think that’s 18 hours. There will be night flying about once a quarter then last downs will be somewhere around mid night and will probably last about a week. I looked at your little flyer who ever made that up has a vivid imagination; the numbers make no sense at all. 72 planes = 3 possibly 4 squadrons, flying a 10 turn 8 turn 6 each you do the math.
    Go to Mt Home see how a flying base works then if you are still against it so be it, at least then you will be basing your opinion on fact rather than fiction.

  33. Great suggestions, John Q. Referring to the F-35 EIS is especially useful since it represents the Air Force’s point of communication with us as a community that would be affected by F-35s coming to the Boise airport. It is troubling that legal experts here and in Arizona and New Mexico conclude that the EIS is misleading and incomplete, thus failing in its purpose. A group in New Mexico was successful in getting an extension of their EIS because it was unclear. A group in Arizona is getting ready to attempt the same thing. We have a case for trying for an extension as well.

    For instance, Rick and John Q both mention 72 F-35s coming to Boise. According to the EIS the Air Force has decided to consider only three squadrons of F-35s—72 aircraft—in their search for bases because anything less would not be cost effective. Instead of removing the B1 and B2 scenarios (24 and 48 aircraft) from the EIS, however, the Air Force offers a straw man solution of leaving the lesser numbers in the study, confusing the issue. Yes, Rick, the EIS states that 72 F-35s would make 50 sorties a day in Boise for a total of 14,000 in a year. I agree with you—in an urban community like Boise it makes no sense whatsoever.

    Another weakness of the draft F-35 EIS is that the only noise data offered in the study was modeled in software instead of by a team of audio engineers going out and physically measuring the noise. An egregious flaw in the EIS is that the 65 DNL noise contour that the EIS uses is a sleight-of-hand built on averaging periods of ordinary noise with moments of loud noise. It is disingenuous for the Air Force to average the noise level of no jets flying—including at night—with the extremely loud noise events of F-35s flying overhead and call it actionable data. The Air Force uses the same averaging scheme when describing the average noise levels inside impacted schools.

    DNL numbers and the noise contours created from them probably are the result of accurate calculations but without a reference to the actual noise levels of F-35 overflights they mis-direct our attention away from the real issue of repeated moments of intrusively-loud noise. If you’re interested, ask the Air Force for Lmax data that describe the actual noise levels of the F-35.

    We all get to believe who we will, Rick. You don’t have to convince those opposing the F-35 coming to Boise and they don’t have to convince you. Forums like this do help us all better understand the issues. Both sides should share their views at the public hearings next week or directly via email. Your suggestion that we go listen to actual jets in Mt. Home is exactly the kind of real-world data we’re hoping to get out of the Air Force.

  34. Rick, have you read any of the Draft EIS on the Air Force website? I suggest the Executive Summary, Section 4 (Boise specific), and the Noise Appendix. Our Flyer is taken directly from information in the EIS. We can prove every point on the flyer comes from the EIS. On the SaveOurValleyNow.org website is a document that footnotes each point on the flyer. Have you looked at our website? Where do you get your “facts?”

  35. Monty, I get my facts from spending over 20 years in the AF. I spent much of that time on the flight line working on aircraft ranging from F111’s to F15E’s and F16 C/D’s as an engine mechanic (the part where all the noise comes from). I lived on base for a good deal of that time much closer to the flight line and runway than ANYONE in Boise will be living.Were those aircraft loud yes, will the F35 be louder yes, but not at the distance the general public in Boise will be living.
    I guess it comes down to this, as I have said twice already, go to Mt Home stand 2 miles from the runway and listen you will find that your flyer which states that “the area all the way to Federal way would be unsuitable for residential use” is simply not true.
    313 people who live inside your pink area are no more likely to have increased hearing loss, and you’re flying numbers and burner excursions are ridiculous. I don’t care what the EIS says.
    Try experiencing something for yourself, just because something is written doesn’t make it so. Those who have lived it know better,
    I, as I have said before, don’t think the planes should be stationed here, expand Mt Home and base them there. What I don’t agree with is the misinformation being used to recruit more people to you’re camp.

  36. Agreed the F35’s should not be stationed in an area where 25% of the Idaho population lives. No one is being recruited. I read the grueling/confusing report and the information that is being bantered about is what the EIS states. Emotional preference will not support our desires, nor will your personal knowledge give you any bonus points. We are limited to comments on the information that the EIS presented. Good, Bad, wrong, miss-leading etc. So what is the best way to present, represent an express this common goal to the local authorities who would like to make this a beddown for the F35’s. (what does the city get $$$$ wise?) And once the stage is set for the F-35’s will there be more and more?

  37. Rest assured that I will help launch a class action suit against the Air Force for destroying my property values and life style. We’ll make it hot for you! Why should tax payers fund your polluting flyovers when there is barely enough money for schools. Let’s face it. America can no longer afford an Air Force. I say, keep the football team, but dismantle the rest of the operation. You want to choke the life out of our children by crop dusting them with aviation poison! Shame on you! Stay out of the Treasue Valley! You should be ashamed of yourselves for even flying such obsolete junk. END WAR NOW!

  38. Economist Kevin E. Cahill, PhD, has just release an expert report on the F-35 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and finds serious flaws in the document.

    In his words: “The socioeconomic analysis contained in the Air Force’s [DEIS] is fundamentally flawed and grossly insufficient. The DEIS cannot possibly be considered reliable or informative in any way with respect to the true socioeconomic impact of the F-35A Pilot Training Center on the Boise community.

    The expert report highlights the following issues, among many others:
    1)The methodology used by the Air Force ignores the possibility of negative impacts to the economy;
    2)The Air Force fails to conduct any analysis with respect to impacts on quality of life and productivity; and
    3)The Air Force fails to conduct any kind of real-world socioeconomic impact analysis based on places that already deal with extreme noise.”

    The complete text of Dr. Cahill’s report is now available: http://www.saveourvalleynow.org/Expert_Report_by_Kevin_E_Cahill_-_DRAFT_-_02-26-12_1_.pdf

  39. nothing like the non-stop sound of the hideously loud F35 fighter jets tearing up the air to cram the industrial war machine’s complete domination of mankind, and their need to force fear and anxiety upon every man woman and child. welcome to the new world order.

  40. Ah, the sound of freedom. Love it. Perhaps if the USAF would send three or four F-35s to Boise for a week of flying, then we the people could make up our own minds. I’m sure many of us would salute them and say thanks as they flew overhead. Pete

  41. Outstanding idea, Peter!
    Please bring in one or a few F35’s for a “demo day”. If there is no excess noise problem, the Air Force should be happy…even anxious to demonstrate that the F-35 noise opponents are wrong. Shut up and fly it. We can make up our own minds based on the experience and stop the endless nagging in forums and meetings. A month ago something took off, orbited North over the city and flew away to the West. it was loud…REALLY LOUD. I wondered at the time if that was a stealth F-35 demo to see if it garnered any complaints. I’m well away from the airport but ongoing exposure to noise like that one would have me hopping mad

  42. No Jet Noise!
    Feb 27, 2012, 10:04 pm

    It is important to understand that this is about making Boise a training base or not. The F-35 looks like it may never be built, but they will still want to fly some other noisy fuel sucking beast over our town. Say NO to the expansion for a training base.

  43. The F-35 has the power to take off in any direction I believe. A little common sense would have the pilots taking off in the direction away from the City and would come out of “burner” as soon as they reach 2000′ perhaps and climb to their FL using the enormous power they have. Every takeoff does not have to come over the Cities with full burner going until they reach their FL. It’s showboating to think otherwise. A little common sense would go a long way here. It can be compared to the Harley Riders with their illegal and excessively noisy exhaust systems drawing attention to them–Hey, look at us!!

    There will also be engine replacements and an accompaning engine trim at times. While in the Air Force at Paine Field, WA I could hear the F-102’s on the trim pad 14 miles away at my home in North Seattle under certain wind conditions.

    Think of another location folks. I tolerated the excessive aircraft engine noise for 20 years and 22 days because I had to. We have a choice and now is the time to forbid it from happening.

  44. Recently I met some people who just moved to Boise. They had no ties to this area at all. How they ended up here was from researching the best place to live in America. Boise was on several top 10 places to live. They have only been in Boise for a couple of months now and they have even heard of the F-35s coming and are very concerned. I live in Columbia Village which has one of the largest home owners association in the state of Idaho. My family and I love the area but if the F-35s come then we will seriously contemplate moving to another area of Boise, which may still be affected by the F-35s. I really don’t want to move just because of some airplanes. Boise is one of the best places to live and I want to keep it that way.

  45. well this discussion has degraded to a point where it is a joke..

    new world order..”saluting” Jets as they fly over… obsolete junk….

  46. At the first public hearing last night, Jim, it caught my attention the number of vets who avowed their allegiance to the military, past and present, but strongly argued for basing the F-35 somewhere besides an urban center like Boise. Sadly, a number of those gentlemen described experiencing hearing loss as a result of their service and how that was part of their opposition to bringing the F-35 here.

    While the news clip below paints a balanced picture of those supporting the F-35 and those opposed to it the folks opposed greatly outnumbered those in favor. http://www.kboi2.com/home/video/140673573.html

    There is another public hearing tonight at the Boise Conference Center on Vista (the old Holiday Inn)running from 5:00 to 8:00 pm. Everyone is invited to speak their mind on the F-35 for three minutes apiece.

  47. Jim

    Trimming jet engines is a thing of the past….. has been for several years… on fighter jets anyway… fighter jets dont use burner to their assigned FL on a regular basis… you are right common sense would go along way here…too bad most people are not using any

  48. Jim DuFrain
    Feb 28, 2012, 1:09 pm

    Rick,

    And you know fighter jet engines require no trimming after an engine change how?

    I retired in 1973 and it was not a thing of the past then, I continued to work for Boeing for 21 years and engine trims were still required then for all airplanes. I participated in some of them.

    I now live in the south end of Nampa and there are times the fighters will come directly over the city and turn north with burner still on. It is only when they reach a point perhaps 5 – 10 miles north of here they come out of burner. You can no longer see the airplane but you can hear the noise. Very noisy and very irritating, even with my engine noise damaged ears!

  49. The fact is Boise Air Terminal is simply an unacceptable location for the propossed plan. Gowen field is NOT and should NOT be turned into an active duty AFB which is what this will essentially accomplish. The fact is most AF Bases are distanced from the local civilian population center for the many reasons – one of them being the issue of NOISE. The argument of “you should have known better when you bought your house next to an airport” is correct if we are complaining of existing commerical or Air Guard activity. I knew this when I purchased my home in Columbia Village and accepted this fact – HOWEVER, I NEVER would have expected that Gowen field would be promoted as a location to house 60-70 Active Duty Air Force fighters flying at all ours 300-365 days a year!

    If by chance these planes do end up here you bet your ass I will be starting a class action lawsuit.

    In the meantime, I ask all of you to please submit your written opposition at the following link:
    http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/Commenting.html

    Comments are only being accepted until March 14th. If you don’t at least voice your opposition via written comment, then don’t bother complaining!

  50. Jim
    How do I KNOW that, because I was a Jet Engine Mechanic in the AF for 16 years and I worked for Raytheon Aerospace for 3 ½ years after retiring from the military on a Contract Field Team. I’ve probably tore down, built up and ran more jet engines than anyone in this valley. I have well over 1000 and probably closer to 2000 hours of engine run time under my belt when you total it up that’s how.
    Since 1992 I have had the privilege of attending both Pratt and Whitney and General Electric factory jet engine courses, both were taught by some of the same engineers who designed the Pratt F100pw229 in the F15E and the GE F110-129 used in the F16 C/D and even the U2’s which was re engined in the early 90’s to the GE F118-100” NONE” of those aircraft are even capable of being manually trimmed. Variants of those engines are in aircraft ranging from those mentioned too F18’s F117’s B1’s B2’s just to name a few.
    What type of aircraft did you trim when you worked for Boeing? My guess swabbie jets or B52’s OLD OLD KC135’s in the 90’s even the KC was re engine to the CFM 56 another non trim engine.
    How much run time do you have?

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address:

Categories