Blinking red lights are bad, mmmkay?

[Leee]

The stupid - sometimes it hurts so bad.
Someone, make it stop.

Kansas has a gazillion windmills for electricity generation.
And the red lights are an eyesore?
Get outta here…

I can see dozens of windmills from my house in west Texas, a couple of them are within a mile of me.

Being a pilot for over 30 years, maybe that has something to do with it, but I just don’t think it’s a good idea to turn all of those warning lights off in the dark - and then rely on “technology” to turn them back on in the nick of time.

And I can assure you, the man on the street has no idea how radar and transponders work in an airplane.
That’s why this bullshit may actually get passed.
Fucking stupid…

Red lights blinking 24/7 atop wind turbines may stop with deal by Kansas lawmakers

Kansas has about about 4,000 turbines now with plans to add 6,000 more.

www.cjonline.com

 

[Juan Tumani]

I guess the people would rather their view of the night sky be interrupted by the occasional plane crash.

 

[Leee]

Maybe... and I'm just spitballing here.... maybe, if you're a pilot at night you should fly more than 600 feet above the ground.

Why should pilots get an advantage over birds?



Plus... think of all the electricity it will save.

Well, if you’re less than 600 feet above the ground, you probably don’t know it.
And the first clue you might get could be a blinking red light.

My position?
If you don’t want the red lights, we’ll just remove all of the windmills.

If those structures are there, they need to be lit.
ALWAYS.

 

[Leee]

The guys who regularly fly 600 feet or below are the crop dusters.
This is Kansas.
Crop dusters everywhere during much of the year.

Helicopters are legal to 500 feet.

Of course, I would say both of these groups of pilots are well aware of low altitude flying hazards.

It’s the guys that find themselves down there where they shouldn’t be that would pay the ultimate price unnecessarily.

 

[bilbarstow]

Well, can't they just fly in the daytime ? They'd be able to see the big damn windmills that way ? /purple

 

[rfrizz]

The guys who regularly fly 600 feet or below are the crop dusters.
This is Kansas.
Crop dusters everywhere during much of the year.

Helicopters are legal to 500 feet.

Of course, I would say both of these groups of pilots are well aware of low altitude flying hazards.

It’s the guys that find themselves down there where they shouldn’t be that would pay the ultimate price unnecessarily.

Do you think the FAA will sign off on this?

 

[Leee]

I don’t trust any alphabet agency to do the right thing anymore.

And Kansas?
That’s where I grew up.
Sensible people.
Keep it simple.
Do the right thing.

I can’t guess what any of these regulatory bodies will do.

 

[ArchEtech]

Wind and solar farms are an eye sore and expect to see more of them. The blinking red lights are annoying if you live out in the country and your neighbor has 50 of them next door. Wind turbines also make noise. I don’t suggest that it’s a good idea to turn off the lights though…..I wouldn’t want a view of them out my back door.

 

[rcole_sooner]

The night sky views are definitely deteriorating. Kinda sad. But one of those things I just gotta accept. Nothin I can do about it.

 

[CB91710]

Maybe... and I'm just spitballing here.... maybe, if you're a pilot at night you should fly more than 600 feet above the ground.

Why should pilots get an advantage over birds?



Plus... think of all the electricity it will save.

And how do you know that you're less than 600ft above the ground on a dark night?
You have an altimeter... that tells you your altitude above sea level. Your charts tell you what altitude you *should* be at in a particular area, except when you don't know exactly where you are.
Boats hit submerged rocks all the time, even with GPS and charts and such. Locals know where these rocks are and steer to avoid them. Those unfamiliar with them can come up on them very quickly, even when they have a chart and GPS.

That's what Lee was referring to in forcing pilots to rely on technology... technology that may or may not turn the lights on soon enough for a pilot to see them, and technology to tell the pilot where he is and how low he is.

What about an emergency situation? Pilot needs a place to put it down right-fucking-now, and all he can see is a row of streetlights on a highway that would make a perfect runway... but he can't see the obstructions on his path to that highway because they are dark, and he may have an electrical malfunction that prevents his transponder from working properly.

It's typical elected-official bullshit where people who know nothing about the topic make decisions based on the torch and pitchfork crowd and those who DO know about the topic are forced to deal with the fallout... and THOSE are the people who are going to end up in court when someone dies... not the elected officials who passed the law.

 

[CB91710]

Wind and solar farms are an eye sore and expect to see more of them. The blinking red lights are annoying if you live out in the country and your neighbor has 50 of them next door. Wind turbines also make noise. I don’t suggest that it’s a good idea to turn off the lights though…..I wouldn’t want a view of them out my back door.

Agreed 100%

 

[Leee]

I don’t intend to wade into the discussion for or against wind and solar.
It would be ‘political’ right off the bat, because that is simply the nature of it.

I am all for wind and solar.
As long as it is investment that pays for it, and not my tax dollars.
The need for electricity isn’t going away anytime soon.
It’s not even going to diminish.

The other aspect of this is property rights.
The land that I am on was developed as part of a massive ranch that goes back to the homesteading days of Texas.
To the south and east of me, large portions of that ranch still remain.
Livestock are grazed on it, there are oil and gas wells scattered all over it, and no utilities anywhere near it.
It was not feasible to develop it any further than what it is.

I am just off of the highest ridge for dozens of miles in any direction, which makes it a fantastic site for a wind farm.
So that’s what happened.

Do I want to see hundreds of blinking red lights from my porch?
No, but I understand that’s part of the bargain with buying the land that we bought.

If we’re going to get into property rights, and personal entitlement, what about the family that is owned this ranch land for decades and decades?
They have property rights as well.
If they want to sign a lease for windmills, it is their prerogative.
Same as they signed leases with oil companies for exploration, drilling, and production that has paid them handsomely for the last 80 years.

The only time I hear the windmills closest to me is when I am directly downwind from them, and the wind speeds are between 15 and 25 mph.
Lower winds don’t create any noise.
Higher winds create too much ambient noise, and it washes out the “whoosh, whoosh, whoosh” from the windmill blades.
None of it is intrusive, and I can’t hear it at all inside my house.
When outside, I have to stop and be quiet to hear it.

I understand someone who has owned their property for many years and the windmills spring up all around them and create an eyesore.
There is nothing uglier to me than a solar farm.
I get that.
But I sort of subscribe to an notion my dad offered when I was a kid - if you don’t want windmills on that property, then buy it.

Once you own it, you can do whatever you please.

But you don’t get to demand what other people do with their property, and that everyone else sacrifices safety so you don’t have to see as many blinking lights from your porch.

 

[Juan Tumani]

The guys who regularly fly 600 feet or below are the crop dusters.
This is Kansas.
Crop dusters everywhere during much of the year.

Helicopters are legal to 500 feet.

Of course, I would say both of these groups of pilots are well aware of low altitude flying hazards.

It’s the guys that find themselves down there where they shouldn’t be that would pay the ultimate price unnecessarily.

I think most would prefer some kind of warning when I'm "Crop Dusting".

 

[MenaceMartin]

Terrible idea. Sure, the wind turbines aren't exactly at an altitude frequently visited by aircraft, but I've seen enough air crash investigations to know that pressure altimeters and even radio altimeters can fail. Redundancies are fundamental in aviation. There is no redundancy for disabling a vital visual warning.

Laws of probability... if something has the smallest potential to happen, you have to assume it will happen. And it will, eventually.

 

[pnuggett]

Fukkin' wind farms.

 

[LtDave32]

Well, if you’re less than 600 feet above the ground, you probably don’t know it.
And the first clue you might get could be a blinking red light.

Great answer, sir.

People need to think beyond their nose.

 

[six-string]

Can't the wind farms install anti-aircraft guns?
Stop those pesky planes from getting in the way.

 

[Roberteaux]

Lights atop structures to avoid collisions are a very good idea. I'm having a hard time imagining why a small red beacon would be such a terrible distraction for those on the ground.

As to minimum safe altitudes?

I simply abide by Federal Aviation Regulations § 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes-- and figure that people who do not fly aircraft, are not in the business of regulating civil aviation, and have basically next-to-no expertise in the field of aviation may (of course) treat us to their personal opinions...

But that their personal opinions shouldn't be considered as a statement coming from somebody who actually knows WTF he or she is talking about.

I'm not going to bother talking about instrument flight during daylight hours when the skies are so occluded as to call for instrument flight as a primary method of navigation. If we can't figure out why an obstruction that might be dangerous to low-flying aircraft-- whether that aircraft is being operated in accordance with FARs or is in an emergency situation or not-- should be lighted, then I'm sure as hell not gonna waste my time trying to express the reason the FAA came up with certain regs either.

As a CFI-A, I was instrument-rated. However, most people are *not* instrument rated-- or even in possession of a private pilot ticket-- and with that being the case I'd consider it a waste of my time to bother addressing people who are not licensed pilots to begin with.

Unless, of course, somebody wants to PAY ME to talk about it, like they paid back when I was actively training private pilots.

--R

 

[VictorB]

Uh oh...

 

[DavGrape]

Yes, indeed. Maybe.