United’s Test of 767s at Burbank Hotly Criticized by Homeowners

Homeowners and anti-noise groups Saturday criticized a flight demonstration by United Air Lines for Federal Aviation Administration officials at Burbank Airport Friday, saying it could open the door to more commercial jet flights from the airport.

The critics want the airport’s operations reduced.

United has requested permission to begin daily flights between Burbank and Chicago on May 1, using Boeing 767 aircraft, which are larger than any commercial passenger-carrying plane now using the airport. Opponents of United’s plan have questioned the safety of flying the big jetliner out of the medium-sized airport, which is currently involved in a dispute with the FAA because the terminal is too close to the runways.

“The purpose of the demonstration was to show the FAA that this airplane could operate safely at Burbank, given the size of the runways and the proximity of the terminal,” said Victor J. Gill, spokesman for the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.

Richard Close, president of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn., complained, “Any such test has the effect of laying the groundwork for more commercial operations, and that’s unacceptable to us on the basis of noise and safety.”

‘We Have Too Many’

Close said the homeowners group, a coalition of six East Valley groups opposed to airport expansion, believes “the real issue is why we need more flights. We don’t need United Air Lines in that airport. We already have too many airlines.”

With the recent addition of TWA, eight airlines now fly from Burbank. Airport foes complain of noise, pollution and safety concerns.

“We want to see the operations throttled back,” said Gerald Silver, president of Homeowners of Encino.

The 767 flew from San Francisco to Burbank, where it made several landings and takeoffs from different directions and conducted a simulation of a missed landing approach as FAA inspectors watched from the ground and from inside the aircraft, Gill said.

As an extra handicap, the plane was flying with 30,000 pounds more than its normal 220,000-pound loaded weight, he added.

Airport officials in February asked the FAA to rule on whether it was safe to fly the 767 from Burbank. Instead of addressing the 767 question, the FAA responded by ordering the airport to implement a number of safety-related changes in operations immediately while the airport authority considers plans for a new terminal.

Ordered to Move Terminal

The airport is under orders from the FAA to move its terminal, built in 1930, because it is too close to the runway to meet modern safety standards.

After witnessing Friday’s demonstration, FAA officials gave no indication whether they would approve use of the 767, or whether United can begin the flights May 1 as scheduled, Gill said.

If the FAA approves use of the plane, the airport authority will then vote on the matter, said Robert Garcin, the authority president.

The commission has agreed that the 767 meets noise standards. But the aircraft’s wingspan is 157 feet, considerably larger than the 109-foot wingspan of the DC-9-80, the largest passenger aircraft now serving Burbank Airport. The DC-9-80 carries 140 to 150 passengers and the 767s would carry 197 passengers.

The airport is used by larger planes than the DC-9-80, military planes and jetliners--not in passenger service--from the neighboring Lockheed Corp.

The airport’s runways are 150 feet wide, narrower than the wingspan of the 767.

Garcin acknowledged that the 767 could create aircraft parking problems and will “have some difficulties in negotiating the taxiways and other aircraft that are parked there. It’s got those problems with turning around and parking and not sticking out on the runway.”

Opponents of United’s plans maintain there is a danger that the wide wings would collide with the wings of other planes.

“The closer the wing tips are to each other, obviously, the more potential there is for them touching,” Garcin said. However, he said, “The 767 wing is higher, so that if indeed you were to take a situation where the plane is immediately next to the DC-9-80 in a parked condition, the 767 wing would be passing over. It would not be on the same horizontal level and there would be no collision.”

Could Be Parked Elsewhere

Garcin said some problems could be eliminated by parking the planes at a remote terminal to which passengers would be taken by bus.

“Generally, it’s safe for operating at that airport. That’s my non-professional layman’s attitude about the 767. If the FAA does not believe it creates a safety hazard, than it can use the airport, as far as I’m concerned,” Garcin said.

“Not to permit it to fly could well be discriminatory, and the federal court would tell us to fly,” he said, referring to federal court rulings that limit the power of airport operators to prevent airlines from competing for business.

But another commissioner, Margie Gee, former president of the Burbank Anti-Noise Group, said that allowing the 767 to fly out of Burbank Airport is “like trying to take a size-20 figure and fit it into a size-12 dress.

“It’s amazing to me that the FAA has spoken its concern about the cramped facilities we have,” she said, and yet supporters of the United plan “turn around and said it’s perfectly OK to bring in this monster plane.”