IMO if you knowingly purchase a residence under a flight path, you lose any privilege of complaining about the noise.
It's not just about knowingly purchasing a home under a flight path, it's also about the commitments made by airports and airlines. For example, an excessive noise event may be caused by a pilot not following a proper noise abatement procedure. And while airplanes have gotten quieter over the last 30 years, delivery companies frequently purchase older aircraft that may not be as quiet. As those freight operations scale up, they can create more noise than anticipated. Finally, the use of GPS assisted takeoff and landings can create issues - previously aircraft were more spread out in their takeoff and landing patterns, which would mean more people are exposed to (relatively) less noise. With the increased accuracy of GPS navigation, flight patterns and much narrower, so the concentration of aircraft on a flight pattern means fewer people are experiencing more noise.
I totally support pulling up pilots who break the noise abatement rules. If these devices were used as intended, we could expect sudden occasional spikes in reports to pin point a flight where the pilot strayed too low etc., but I expect that these devices will mostly be used by irate people who just keep stabbing the button several times a day every time they cannot hear their television clearly.
In fact, the article makes it clear that this is exactly the case:
' “Oh, the joy, the sheer pleasure of pushing that button and seeing the complaints mount up,” she wrote in response to a reporter’s query. “We are over 115,000 complaints for BWI, more than 35,000 in just the past 30 days! So now when MAA wants to know ‘which flight bothered you,’ I have a real answer! ALL OF THEM.” '
Sure, noise complaints can be valid. Even saying "all the flights bother me" may, in some cases, indicate a real problem with the noise abatement procedures at the airport. In 99% of cases, however, noise complaints are simply NIMBYism, or people for whom any amount of noise is too much. Everyone wants to fly somewhere on vacation, or order cheap products from China online and have them delivered by air within a few days. Aviation is necessary, and airplanes need to land somewhere, but too many people are unwilling to tolerate even a small amount of discomfort to allow that. It doesn't matter that there's literally nowhere you can put an airport where the planes wouldn't fly over someone's house, as long as it's not _their_ house...
For every legitimate complaint caused by changes in approach procedures or the use of new navigation technology, there are 10,000 that can be summed up with "flying a hundred tons of steel through the air generates sound, more news at 11!" All it achieves is drown out the real problems in a sea of pointless griping.
It's not just about knowingly purchasing a home under a flight path, it's also about the commitments made by airports and airlines. For example, an excessive noise event may be caused by a pilot not following a proper noise abatement procedure. And while airplanes have gotten quieter over the last 30 years, delivery companies frequently purchase older aircraft that may not be as quiet. As those freight operations scale up, they can create more noise than anticipated. Finally, the use of GPS assisted takeoff and landings can create issues - previously aircraft were more spread out in their takeoff and landing patterns, which would mean more people are exposed to (relatively) less noise. With the increased accuracy of GPS navigation, flight patterns and much narrower, so the concentration of aircraft on a flight pattern means fewer people are experiencing more noise.