Jump to content

      













Photo

What is that big rumbling noise we hear in east Victoria?


  • Please log in to reply
150 replies to this topic

#21 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,907 posts

Posted 10 January 2015 - 12:01 PM

Where's Isitt and Helps on this issue? Didn't their ode state they have a duty to intervene? I'd like to see them up against the USAF.
  • Nparker likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#22 sebberry

sebberry

    Resident Housekeeper

  • Moderator
  • 18,317 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 10 January 2015 - 12:03 PM

They're not interested.  This predominantly affects Oak Bay and Saanich residents. 


Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network

Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams

 


#23 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,493 posts

Posted 10 January 2015 - 08:55 PM



#24 Wayne

Wayne
  • Member
  • 606 posts

Posted 13 January 2015 - 06:07 PM

I have noticed this rumbling more so in the last couple of weeks.  Seems more frequent and now includes the evening.



#25 KAS

KAS
  • Member
  • 124 posts
  • LocationVic West

Posted 13 January 2015 - 06:20 PM

I'd never heard them before, but now they're sounding as far west as Vic West.  



#26 LocalMom

LocalMom
  • Member
  • 439 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 13 January 2015 - 06:35 PM

It's pretty bad tonight, that's for sure. Hella loud near Playfair Park.

#27 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,994 posts
  • LocationGorge-Selkirk

Posted 13 January 2015 - 09:45 PM

These aircraft operate off USN carriers so the continuous sound wouldn't be surprising if it is in fact the Whidbey Island NAS; carriers, and their warplane/wings, operate 7x24x365 even during peacetime, therefore the training and exercises are designed to mimic operational conditions, i.e. flying day and night in good weather and bad.

 

I happened to be working at a facility in Pensacola in 2003 for my then-employer. Pensacola and surrounding area hosts several US military bases and installations including the USAF Blue Angels.

 

Purely by coincidence during my time there the US-led coalition invaded Iraq. For the week prior to that the USN conducted carrier and fleet simulation exercises including takeoff and landings - uninterrupted, non-stop 7x24 - right in Pensacola Bay. The "rumble" of the jet engines was ever-present and virtually non-stop for that entire period. As my hotel was right on Pensacola Beach I had a front seat view. Of course the sound *really* ratcheted up when one of the warplanes kicked in its after-burners and went supersonic. In that event, and if an aircraft from the NAS ever did likewise, you would be in no doubt as to the source.


Edited by AllseeingEye, 13 January 2015 - 09:46 PM.


#28 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:27 AM

These aircraft operate off USN carriers so the continuous sound wouldn't be surprising if it is in fact the Whidbey Island NAS; carriers, and their warplane/wings, operate 7x24x365 even during peacetime, therefore the training and exercises are designed to mimic operational conditions, i.e. flying day and night in good weather and bad.

 

I happened to be working at a facility in Pensacola in 2003 for my then-employer. Pensacola and surrounding area hosts several US military bases and installations including the USAF Blue Angels.

 

Purely by coincidence during my time there the US-led coalition invaded Iraq. For the week prior to that the USN conducted carrier and fleet simulation exercises including takeoff and landings - uninterrupted, non-stop 7x24 - right in Pensacola Bay. The "rumble" of the jet engines was ever-present and virtually non-stop for that entire period. As my hotel was right on Pensacola Beach I had a front seat view. Of course the sound *really* ratcheted up when one of the warplanes kicked in its after-burners and went supersonic. In that event, and if an aircraft from the NAS ever did likewise, you would be in no doubt as to the source.

 

When I was living down south we heard a sonic boom. According to the papers this resulted from the space shuttle re-entering the earth's atmosphere. It was crazy loud.

 

Pretty sure I heard the rumblings last night while out for a walk. Definitely had that jet engine at take-off sound to it.



#29 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,907 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:38 AM

Why isn't this an issue for all levels of government? I'm not so sure that subjecting residents of Canada with US military activity disturbances is kosher.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#30 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:58 AM

Why isn't this an issue for all levels of government? I'm not so sure that subjecting residents of Canada with US military activity disturbances is kosher.

 

LOL

 

Canada does the bare minimum in terms of national defence. We all but totally admit to behing happy to hide behind our big brother. You really think we could get away with asking the Americans to shut down one of their military bases in their sovereign territory?



#31 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,994 posts
  • LocationGorge-Selkirk

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:59 AM

Why isn't this an issue for all levels of government? I'm not so sure that subjecting residents of Canada with US military activity disturbances is kosher.

To be frank Mike my glib and not so tongue in cheek response is "because Canada is too lame and limp-wristed to spend anything on defence"; therefore if you expect to rely on Big Brother to come to your aid - and I am referring to rendering assistance in times of natural disaster as much as offering up a purely military response supporting Canadian military operations - then be prepared to suffer the consequences.

 

Refuse to spend more than $1.49 annually on your armed forces which, as mentioned would be key to assisting civil authority in the event of a major earthquake for example; refuse to have more than bare bones surveillance capability over the largest (3 ocean) coastline on the planet; refuse to fund more than a pitiful excuse for a navy and the requisite naval capability to defend at the very least your own territory - now barely able to patrol the BC coast, let alone engage in full blown naval exercises with your allies, as you are obligated to do by treaty BTW; refuse in the case of BC to have even one regular army unit within 1000 kilometers of the west coast (remember the PPCLI's were moved to Edmonton from Victoria 20+ years ago); refuse to properly fund even the Coast Guard thereby more often than not hoping/praying/expecting the USCG is available to bail out sailors particularly in BC which they do more often than not.....

 

.....bundle all that together and - in effect - put the onus on your neighbor to shoulder the bill, and you get what you get.

 

That all said the US is still do what its going to do naturally as a superpower regardless what Canada does. That does not IMO however excuse or negate the responsibility of this country to, at the very bare minimum, have our own capability to proficiently overfly, patrol and conduct surveillance over our own sovereign territory via decently funded naval, air and ground forces.


Edited by AllseeingEye, 14 January 2015 - 09:03 AM.


#32 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 7,171 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:12 AM

To be frank Mike my glib and not so tongue in cheek response is "because Canada is too lame and limp-wristed to spend anything on defence"; therefore if you expect to rely on Big Brother to come to your aid - and I am referring to rendering assistance in times of natural disaster as much as offering up a purely military response supporting Canadian military operations - then be prepared to suffer the consequences.

 

Refuse to spend more than $1.49 annually on your armed forces which, as mentioned would be key to assisting civil authority in the event of a major earthquake for example; refuse to have more than bare bones surveillance capability over the largest (3 ocean) coastline on the planet; refuse to fund more than a pitiful excuse for a navy and the requisite naval capability to defend at the very least your own territory - now barely able to patrol the BC coast, let alone engage in full blown naval exercises with your allies, as you are obligated to do by treaty BTW; refuse in the case of BC to have even one regular army unit within 1000 kilometers of the west coast (remember the PPCLI's were moved to Edmonton from Victoria 20+ years ago); refuse to properly fund even the Coast Guard thereby more often than not hoping/praying/expecting the USCG is available to bail out sailors particularly in BC which they do more often than not.....

 

.....bundle all that together and - in effect - put the onus on your neighbor to shoulder the bill, and you get what you get.

 

That all said the US is still do what its going to do naturally as a superpower regardless what Canada does. That does not IMO however excuse or negate the responsibility of this country to, at the very bare minimum, have our own capability to proficiently overfly, patrol and conduct surveillance over our own sovereign territory via decently funded naval, air and ground forces.

 

CFB Chilliwack was the last full unit based in BC. That one shut down 1997. It is still an ASU (Area Support Unit). I'm not too concerned about that, we have both an air wing and naval wing here on Vancouver Island, which is more than most of the country has.



#33 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:15 AM

The noise is probably coming from Naval Outlying Field Coupeville, where the US Navy practices low level flying over the water.

During these exercises they could be as little as 25 miles from Victoria.

 

NOLF Coupeville, also known as OLF Coupeville, was commissioned for use by the US Navy in 1943 and currently supports day and night

Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) operations by the US Navy EA-18G Growler and EA-6B Prowler electronic warfare aircraft based out of NAS Whidbey Island.

Such operations allow Naval Aviators and crew to fly in patterns as well as practice touch-and-go landings, simulating carrier landings and take offs.

During these practice runs, jet aircraft approach the runway and touch down, immediately taking off again and looping around the field

to prepare for another landing and take off. Each aircraft makes multiple touch-and-go landings during these training events.

While performing the touch and go maneuvers, the practicing aircraft fly at appropriate altitudes and speeds in addition to flying at or near sea level.

OLF Coupeville is seen by the Navy as an ideal airfield for this type of carrier training due to its remote location and low ambient lighting,

allowing pilots and crew to have the optimum experience for replication of landing aboard an aircraft carrier.

http://en.wikipedia....ield_Coupeville

 



#34 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,907 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:22 AM

Well hold on a second, the new runway or whatever change they made on Whidbey has had an environmental review to assess impacts. And clearly people are being disturbed by the activities. I don't hear this rumble and don't live near the water, but I'd be pretty chocked if US military operations suddenly changed and started impacting my life.

This has nothing to do with protection. It has to do with poor planning.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#35 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,994 posts
  • LocationGorge-Selkirk

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:24 AM

CFB Chilliwack was the last full unit based in BC. That one shut down 1997. It is still an ASU (Area Support Unit). I'm not too concerned about that, we have both an air wing and naval wing here on Vancouver Island, which is more than most of the country has.

Good point I completely forgot about CFB Chilliwack (out of sight, out of mind!) , thanks for that.



#36 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:50 AM

Well hold on a second, the new runway or whatever change they made on Whidbey has had an environmental review to assess impacts. And clearly people are being disturbed by the activities. I don't hear this rumble and don't live near the water, but I'd be pretty chocked if US military operations suddenly changed and started impacting my life.

This has nothing to do with protection. It has to do with poor planning.

 

The airport has been there since 1943, long before most of us were born.

We need to be careful what we ask for when we complain about the noise, especially since those aircraft are also our "protection".

Victorians don't very much complain when the US Navy brings one of their aircraft carriers here for a visit, and leaves their aircraft at Whidbey Island.



#37 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,907 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 09:55 AM

Yes its been there for quite a while but didn't we just discuss that changes were made either to operations or the runway?

"Protection" doesn't equate to bending over. Is that what we are, just a bunch of pansies unwilling to raise a hand because of fear of not being "protected?" And quite frankly the only protection this coast has ever needed came and went in WWII -- even the Cold War was more about optics than a serious threat to the west coast of this country.

Canada is a buffer to the US. They're not protecting "us," they're protecting themselves. It just so happens that we have a few enclaves on land over which they'll retaliate should there be any threat to their security.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#38 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 10:16 AM

Yes its been there for quite a while but didn't we just discuss that changes were made either to operations or the runway?

"Protection" doesn't equate to bending over. Is that what we are, just a bunch of pansies unwilling to raise a hand because of fear of not being "protected?" And quite frankly the only protection this coast has ever needed came and went in WWII -- even the Cold War was more about optics than a serious threat to the west coast of this country.

Canada is a buffer to the US. They're not protecting "us," they're protecting themselves. It just so happens that we have a few enclaves on land over which they'll retaliate should there be any threat to their security.

 

We have a prime example right here in Victoria with people buying condos on the harbour and then complaining about the noise, so I think we can all live with the US base 30 miles away.


  • AllseeingEye likes this

#39 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,994 posts
  • LocationGorge-Selkirk

Posted 14 January 2015 - 10:20 AM

Yes its been there for quite a while but didn't we just discuss that changes were made either to operations or the runway?

"Protection" doesn't equate to bending over. Is that what we are, just a bunch of pansies unwilling to raise a hand because of fear of not being "protected?" And quite frankly the only protection this coast has ever needed came and went in WWII -- even the Cold War was more about optics than a serious threat to the west coast of this country.

Canada is a buffer to the US. They're not protecting "us," they're protecting themselves. It just so happens that we have a few enclaves on land over which they'll retaliate should there be any threat to their security.

There are many BC sailors who would disagree given the multitude of times a rescue helicopter or ship with "USCG" stamped on it came to the rescue in the absence of our own CG resources Mike. Granted that comes under the heading of assistance and support rather than protection per se, but the point is they have the resources to bear and we do not, nor increasingly do we appear particularly predisposed to fund them. 

 

Re: the protection game you are looking at it through far too narrow a lens viewing it solely from a military "guns and bombs and planes" standpoint. There are also complex mutual reciprocal binding treaties that come into play and that obligate one or both nations to assist the other under certain conditions i.e. NORAD, NATO.

 

Consider lastly one of the underlying reasons during the height of the cold war why a "serious threat" to this or any Canadian coast was, ultimately, minimal: they sat and continue to sit squarely under the protection of the US nuclear umbrella. It really matters not that their motivation above all is defence of the homeland: so you want to threaten the Canadian West (or East) Coast and - absolutely, by extension - threaten and impact us as well in the US? Okay....I will see your threat and raise you the 30,000 nuclear warheads in my arsenal not to mention the largest nuclear and conventional navy and air force in the solar system that back them up. Your move.....draw anyone?


Edited by AllseeingEye, 14 January 2015 - 10:36 AM.

  • Bingo likes this

#40 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,907 posts

Posted 14 January 2015 - 10:45 AM

The entire west is, largely, under the protection of the United States. From Lichtenstein to Brandon, Manitoba, we are all under the US umbrella.

 

Canada has literally handed over access to its natural resources to US interests. We've given a lot to get "protection" from the US, protection that the US would extend to just about any nation that is willing to give them the resources that they want.

 

@Bingo, we're talking about new changes. We're not talking about something that has been going on for 70 years.


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users