The U.S. Air Force is in the process of selecting bases to handle
the training and operational needs of the new F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter. These decisions should be announced in the next several months
and there’s a chance that Davis-Monthan (DM) Air Force
Base—having trained jet pilots for decades—will be
considered.
Despite that, serious questions are being raised about whether the
F-35 would be good for the community, since the plane is considerably
louder than the A-10 that has been flying over Tucson for many
years.
Hoping to see a continued infusion of federal dollars into the local
economy, the DM-50, a volunteer group of local business leaders and
concerned citizens who advocate for the base, in 2004 began pushing for
the F-35 to come to town.
Over the past several months, though, instead of lobbying for the
F-35, the DM-50 has been focusing on updating its vision statement.
“We’re formulating a vision of what the community would like to see
Davis-Monthan be in 25 to 30 years,” says the group’s president, Glen
Kerslake.
“We’re imagining ourselves in 2035, then looking back,” he explains
of the process. “That might include lobbying for the F-35,” he
adds.
Kerslake says the document should be completed in November and
comments and support will then be solicited from the community.
Meanwhile, the original list of approximately 200 potential bases
for the F-35 will be whittled down by the Air Force using criteria such
as proximity to gunnery ranges, cost and environmental concerns.
The latter—specifically noise and urban encroachment around
DM—are sticking points for inner city residents like Anne and
Robin Gomez. They have been working for the past five years on a
committee dedicated to balancing the needs of the base with those of
the community.
“The F-35 will affect an area five to 10 times as large as the
A-10,” says Robin Gomez, who served four years in the U.S. Navy, and
retired eventually from the Foreign Service. “We’ve been fighting for
noise and safety issues, and are not opposed to the base at all.”
The Gomezes have also been following the struggle in Valparaiso,
Fla., over the F-35 ever since nearby Eglin Air Force base was selected
as the initial operational site for the plane.
Using the Air Force’s own decibel (dB) levels and tables, a group of
retired engineers in Valparaiso quickly realized that this new mission,
if carried out as planned, would render half their community unlivable
by federal noise standards.
The F-35 produces noise in the 105 dB range during landings. Noise
like that is just quieter than the sound a power mower produces three
feet away from a listener and is also well above the level at which
sustained exposure may result in hearing loss.
In a somewhat similar landing situation, by comparison, where every
10 dB accounts for a doubling of volume, the A-10 reportedly produces
90 dB of noise.
Valparaiso is suing the Air Force for not properly disclosing in its
environmental impact study how the excessive noise of the F-35 would
affect community residents. Yet speaking to Mayor John Arnold, there’s
no question how much he values the mission of the base.
“We’d be proud to be known as Fighter Town U.S.A.,” says Arnold.
“Our concern has always been how much the Air Force plan would harm
Valparaiso. … We’re not trying to argue with the Air Force,” he says,
“but it’s the noise that concerns us.”
While officials in Phoenix are actively pushing for the F-35 to be
sent to Luke Air Force Base, so far Tucson’s elected leaders have said
little about a possible F-35 mission at DM.
Ward 4 councilmember Shirley Scott represents many of the people who
live off the southeast end of the DM runway and observes of her
constituents, “The bulk of Ward 4 usually has a pro-base position,
which is at variance with some others in the community.”
Scott also comments of the F-35 process and lobbying, “When the Air
Force makes a decision, it’s based on their own criteria. They’re happy
to take input, but ultimately decide on their own specifics.”
Kerslake shares that view. “There’s no specific effort to bring the
F-35 to DM,” he says of the group he leads. “We’re not actively
lobbying for the F-35.”
For her part, Anne Gomez is skeptical that Tucson will become a
serious contender for the plane. “Due to (land use) encroachment
issues,” she says, “I can’t imagine the Air Force would bring the F-35
to Tucson.”
If that’s the case, and with the A-10 due to be retired sometime in
the next 20 years, what will the future of DM become? Are there quieter
and less dangerous missions that could operate out of
Davis-Monthan?
As Arnold in Florida says of working with the Air Force, “It’s very
important to never stop communicating.”
No doubt a great deal of communication over the future of DM will
surface—as it has in the past—when the DM-50 invites the
public to comment on its vision plan.
Robin Gomez is happy to hear about that opportunity. “The update of
the DM-50 (vision statement) is complete news to us,” he says. “Maybe
they are beginning to get the message.”
From his perspective, Kerslake says about the DM-50, “We want to
make sure our third largest employer stays here. That means taking into
account (land use) encroachment and noise, but we don’t want to lose
DM.”
This article appears in Oct 22-28, 2009.
It seems most people who whine about the noise moved to Tucson long after Davis Monthan was established. Do they remember the sonic booms of the 1950’s? We no longer see supersonic flights (broken windows?) in the Tucson area, but those who still complain should never have moved to Tucson. Most people over 55 I know call the flights “The Sound of Freedom” and never complain. When I was in my 20’s I lived just northwest of the DM runway and worked “swing shift”…..getting to bed at 2:00 AM. The training flights (& what I assume were touch and go landings) started earlier in the morning than they do now, and I felt somewhat robbed of sleep. Obviously, I survived.
I came to Tucson in 1948. Just about the time the Air Force was established. You need to do your homework on the noise levels of the F-35. It can be 121 dB on take-off to the SE. This is a lot loader than anything you have heard in the past. I think that the D-M 50 is right in thinking about the future of a base in the middle of an urban area. It is only a matter of time until a developer buys the State Trust Land to SE of the base and D-M will be closed in on all four sides. It’s time to think about lobbying for Federal money to buy this land and protect the base from closure. Another alternative might be moving some of high-performance jet training to the Gila Bend Air Force Auxillary Field.
There are answers, but calling people whiners just creates deadlock and a divided community.
Many thanks to Molly and Dave for publishing information about this. Write to:
David Martin
HQ AETC/A7PP
266 F St. West
Randolph AFB, TX 78150
telephone 210–652–1962.
Along with your own thoughts and opposition to the F-35, here are some points you may want to make in a letter to Mr. Martin:
1. Since the possible bedding down of the F-35 would affect the Tucson community for more than 30 years, we need at least a of week of flyovers using the proposed flight path so that we can hear how loud it actually is.
2. A “tied-down” test is misleading and doesn’t tell how loud the F-35 will be when it flys over the City.
3. We hear that the noise of the F-35 would spread to 4 times the area of the F-16 and would be twice as loud. Do you have a map showing the proposed noise contours?
4. Since live ordnance can’t be loaded at TIA, how does the Air Force plan to handling the question of live ordnance at a municipal airport?
5. Why is Safford, San Carlos, and Bisbee included in this EIS when the F-35s are proposed to be assigned to TIA?___________________________________________________________________________________________ that AT LEAST 50% of the Tucson people are opposed to the city being destroyed by this.
Quality of life issues didn’t exist back in the fifties and concern for the environment, human rights or many other enlightened ideas were in their infancy. The population was also a lot less dense in the area. As I recall, some of the residential streets just east of Alvernon weren’t even paved until the fifties.
Perhaps there are some over fifty who would prefer to return to those days, but it’s doubtful. If it meant that planes were also limited to 1950’s technology with anti-sonic boom rules, there might be more consensus for such a plan.
This is no city for the F-35. It’s too loud. The snowbird pilots and the regular A-10 pilots already cannot keep to the designated flight paths–and they’re not even under combat stress. Adding the F-35, adds to the danger as well as real and measurable health consequences.
It is not the sound of freedom. It is the escalating sound of a rude and inconsiderate neighbor who believes that whatever they want is okay until there is a large coalition who says no.
Unlike the slower and highly maneuverable A-10’s, the fighters need to fly wider and faster to turn… covering more of the city. Fighter jet engines are louder, too. Runways and takeoffs are comparatively longer. Compared to the prop planes and long-winged jets of “the fifties,” these are thunderous space-hogs.
Back in the day — and it’s worth noting that we are no longer in the 50’s (that was then, and the situation is different now) — the “city” was miles away from the flight line, and the planes could easily take off and land inside of the base airspace. Now, houses “encroach” on the flight path, because the approaches have expanded over more of the city.
Also, back in the day, there wasn’t a traffic conflict to speak of between the TIA and DMAFB… driving more overflights from DM to the center of town. As citizens who must live in the city, we are not suddenly ‘whining’ about the base — we have more cause to be upset, because DM treats the city airspace differently than previous generations were subjected to. When you add on the notion that the overflights will become *twice as loud* … it’s not we who have changed. It’s DM.
There will be no sound of freedom to hear if we are all deaf. That is what the f35 does. It causes deafness in people, animals etc. Shame on us. At least the Dutch care.