Back

In Their Own Words: Noise Complaint Data Reveals Impacts of Military Aviation

Huang, C.-H. S.; Kuehne, L. M.; Jacuzzi, G.; Olden, J. D.; Seto, E.

2026-04-16 occupational and environmental health
10.64898/2026.04.14.26350904 medRxiv
Show abstract

Military aviation training noise remains understudied despite its widespread impacts across urban, rural, and wilderness areas. The predominance of low-frequency noise and repetitive training can create pervasive noise pollution, yet past research often fails to capture the full range of health and quality-of-life effects. This study analyzed two complaint datasets related to Whidbey Island Naval Air Station noise: U.S. Navy records (2017-2020) and Quiet Skies Over San Juan County data (2021-2023). We analyzed and mapped sentiment intensity from noise complaints relative to modeled annual noise exposure, developed a typology to classify impacts, and modeled the environmental and operational factors influencing complaints. Findings revealed widespread negative sentiment and anger, often beyond the bounds of estimated noise contours, suggesting that annual cumulative noise models inadequately estimate community impacts. Complaints consistently highlighted sleep disturbance, hearing and health concerns, and compromised home environments due to shaking, vibration, and disruption of daily life. Residents also reported significant social, recreational, and work disruptions, along with feelings of fear, helplessness, and concern for childrens well-being. The number of complaints were strongly associated with training schedules, with late-night sessions being the strongest predictor. A delayed response pattern suggests residents reach a frustration threshold before filing complaints. Overall, our findings demonstrate persistent negative sentiment and diverse impacts from military aviation noise. Results highlight the need for improved noise metrics, modeling and operational adjustments to mitigate the most disruptive effects.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.