FAA Says Proposed Massachusetts Wind Turbine Too Tall | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-12.01.25

AirborneNextGen-
12.02.25

Airborne-Unlimited-12.03.25

Airborne-FltTraining-12.04.25

AirborneUnlimited-12.05.25

AFE 2025 LIVE MOSAIC Town Hall (Archived): www.airborne-live.net

Mon, Jan 11, 2010

FAA Says Proposed Massachusetts Wind Turbine Too Tall

Planned Structure Is 5.5 Miles From New Bedford Regional Airport

One of two wind turbines proposed by the city of Dartmouth, Massachusetts could interfere with air navigation, the FAA has told the city. The FAA said that the planned 462 foot structure "exceeds obstruction standards and/or would have an adverse physical or electromagnetic interference" for aircraft approaching new Bedford Regional Airport.

According to Southcoast Today, the FAA recommends lowering the overall height of the structure to 417 feet from blade tip to base, or, if an independent analysis of the terrain meets with FAA approval, reducing the structure to 428 feet.

The FAA ruling applies only to the north turbine. The agency is still considering the south structure. Dr. Ronald DiPippo, chairman of the town's Alternative Energy Committee, told the paper the height of the pole to the hub would have to be reduced 35 feet to meet the 428 foot maximum. Select Board Chairman Joseph L. Michaud said the town will conduct a site survey and attempt to win FAA approval the taller tower. He said he expects the south turbine to be approved at 462 feet because it is further from the airport.

DiPippo said the town expects to save over $500,000 in the first year in energy costs by constructing the two turbines on land the municipality owns. But, he said, that would have been about $100,000 more if the taller tower could have been built.

The paper reports that the council members are not entirely surprised the FAA came back proposing changes. "We figured there would be some adjustments to the project," Michaud said. "It's not a major adjustment and it should be more favorable with the people who have concerns about the height."

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Aero-FAQ: Dave Juwel's Aviation Marketing Stories -- ITBOA BNITBOB

Dave Juwel's Aviation Marketing Stories ITBOA BNITBOB ... what does that mean? It's not gibberish, it's a lengthy acronym for "In The Business Of Aviation ... But Not In The Busine>[...]

NTSB Prelim: Rutan Long-EZ

The Pilot Attempted Several Times To Restart The Engine And Diverted To Long Beach Airport/Daughtery Field On October 20, 2025, about 1603 Pacific daylight time, an experimental am>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (12.05.25): Hazardous Weather Information

Hazardous Weather Information Summary of significant meteorological information (SIGMET/WS), convective significant meteorological information (convective SIGMET/WST), urgent pilot>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (12.05.25)

"The latest development underscores the government of Malaysia’s commitment in providing closure to the families affected by this tragedy..." Source: From statements made by >[...]

Airborne-Flight Training 12.04.25: Ldg Fee Danger, Av Mental Health, PC-7 MKX

Also: IAE Acquires Diamond Trainers, Army Drones, FedEx Pilots Warning, DA62 MPP To Dresden Tech Uni The danger to the flight training industry and our future pilots is clear. Dona>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC