Compiled by the editorial staff of eVTOL.com


Lawmakers cite noise, emissions in bid to ban helicopters over NYC

A new bill aims to ban nonessential helicopter traffic over New York City, with lawmakers citing concerns over noise and exhaust as well as safety.

helicopter ban targets Uber Copter
Uber’s helicopter rideshare service, Uber Copter, was called out by lawmakers as an example of the type of non-essential helicopter travel they hope to ban from the skies over New York City. Uber Photo

U.S. Representatives Carolyn B. Maloney, Jerrold Nadler, and Nydia M. Velazquez announced the “Improving Helicopter Safety Act of 2019” on Oct. 26. The bill would prohibit “nonessential” helicopters from flying over any U.S. city with a population of over 8 million people and with a population density of over 25,000 people per square mile — a definition apparently tailored to apply only to New York City.

Many private and commercial transportation and sightseeing flights would be banned under the bill, which carves out exceptions for law enforcement, medical, emergency response, and other “essential” flights in the public interest. Helicopters would be permitted to “fly through the shortest, most direct routes possible to access or depart from airports.” Military aircraft would not be affected.

In announcing their proposed helicopter ban, the lawmakers pointed to several recent accidents, including the fatal crash of a private helicopter on a Midtown building in June, the ditching of a Blade-branded helicopter in the Hudson River in May, and a March 2018 accident in which five FlyNYON passengers on a doors-off helicopter photo flight drowned in the East River.

“My colleagues and I have called on the FAA numerous times to impose additional regulations that would make New York City airspace safer, but we have yet to see sufficient measures be taken,” stated Maloney. “The bottom line is, the risks that commuter, charter, and tourism helicopter flights pose to New Yorkers far outweigh the benefit to the very small number of people who use them. There is absolutely no margin for error when you fly over somewhere as densely populated as New York.”

Although safety was identified as the primary impetus for the bill, Nadler and Velazquez also cited “incessant noise pollution” as another reason for banning helicopter flights over the city. Local and state politicians who voiced support for the bill highlighted environmental concerns as well. “In addition [to] the near-constant noise that some communities in the flight path experience, [helicopters] are uber polluters spewing carbon into our environment and they are dangerously unregulated,” stated New York State Assembly Member Linda B. Rosenthal.

The bill’s prospects are unclear. However, its existence suggests that urban air mobility proponents who are seeking to prove out their concepts with helicopters — including Uber, Blade, and Airbus — will face increasing pushback from communities as their helicopter operations increase.

“The use of helicopters for non-essential travel has proven time and again to pose a serious threat to the safety and quality of life of the residents of New York City,” stated New York City Council Member Mark Levine. “With the rise of app-based flights, this problem will only get worse.”

Council Member Margaret S. Chin specifically called out Uber Copter, stating, “With Uber operating a new service at the heliport to bring premium customers to and from JFK airport, we refuse to stand idly by and allow private companies to treat our skies above our homes, schools, and hospitals in the same way they choke our streets.”

Although Uber, Blade, and Airbus all aim to deploy quieter, cleaner eVTOL aircraft as they become available, those intentions were not acknowledged in the announcement of the Improving Helicopter Safety Act. Lawmakers’ comments also indicate that the increasing use of helicopters for urban air mobility is reinforcing the image of aerial commuting as an option only for the wealthy — in stark contrast to the democratization of aviation that many eVTOL developers hope to achieve.

“The copters promise the wealthy and well connected speedy and stress-free commutes with scenic views, but what about the effects on the rest of us?” Rosenthal emphasized.

Join the Conversation

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar
  6. Avatar


  1. Of course they would.. The three stooges from NYC.
    … Think they should address the crime rate, shootings, and trash, before going sky high !

    1. Crime rate and shootings in NYC are way lower than cities half its size. Just like the 3 congresspersons who proposed this asinine bill, you have not done your homework before spouting off.

      1. For all those that are advocates for helicopter charters/tourism, you should try living under their flight paths. In fact , it should be a requirement that if you operate such a business you must own home under one of your flight . paths. Let me know what you think.

  2. What a joke!!! They are worried about “uber polluters spewing carbon into our environment” then go after the airplanes landing at JFK, LaGuardia, Newark, Teterboro. A single 737 emits more carbon in one take off then almost all of the Helicopters combined in one year.

  3. Emissions may/can/will go away with electrics, but the noise issue is real and is much much harder to mitigate, especially during the takeoff and landing portions of flight where they’re closest to the ground and to the places where people want to go/be. For all the potential in electric votols, this will remain the linchpin issue, even beyond airspace, regulations and safety.

  4. Remember an election year is coming up and we’re going to hear a lot more from politicians needing votes. It’s just the beginning.

    There’s a need for better regulation but it will come from aviation professionals working with the FAA as soon as the FAA can handle the sheer amount of volume they face. We’re at an impasse I feel.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.