This is the html version of the file http://www.landrum-brown.com/env/phl/Final/Apx%20E.pdf.
G o o g l e automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:e9svlZo0qlAJ:www.landrum-brown.com/env/phl/Final/Apx%2520E.pdf+BWINE+noise&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted:  bwine  noise 
Page 1
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-1
Appendix E
June 2002
APPENDIX E
NOISE ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The subsequent pages provide information on the alternative noise abatement
measures that were suggested for inclusion in the Philadelphia International Airport
Noise Compatibility Program (NCP). Each measure was evaluated for the anticipated
benefits and costs associated with its implementation. The alternatives were reviewed
with the membership of the Study Advisory Committee, as well as with aviation
professionals in an Aviation Technical Conference. The Technical Conference included
representatives of the Air Traffic Control division of the FAA, the Air Transport
Association, and the air carriers serving PHL, as well as the FAA ADO, the Airport, and
airport neighbors.
Based upon the comments received from the various attendees at the Technical
Conference and the consultant’s experience with the implementation of like measures at
numerous airports throughout the United States, recommendations for the acceptance
or discarding of each alternative were presented to the Study Advisory Committee prior
to the development of the final recommended NCP. Copies of all the materials used at
the Technical Conference, including letters of invitation, sign-in sheets, and meeting
workbooks are located in Appendix H, Public Involvement. Attached to the end of this
Appendix are materials relating to the assessment of noise abatement measures that
have a relationship to the concurrent Airspace Redesign Project. This includes relevant
portions of AIR 21, coordination letters sent by the FAA to Senator Biden, a
presentation handout from July 12, 2001, and FAA comments on the feasibility of
certain noise abatement measures that would potentially benefit northern Delaware.
Page 2
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-2
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-A (Became NA-1)
Exhibit: E-1
TITLE:
Departing Runways 9L/9R/17/35/8, Fly Runway
Heading Until Reaching 2,000’ AGL
DESCRIPTION:
− This is the current procedure for these runways.
− Modifications to the procedure are being
evaluated by the New York/New Jersey/
Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign
Project in an effort to enhance the efficiency of
operations throughout the Philadelphia/New
York airspace corridor.
BENEFITS:
Takes advantage of Delaware River to the east of
the airport and the generally compatible areas north
and south of the airport.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft maintain the heading until
reaching 2,000’ AGL (measure does not apply to
light aircraft less than 12,500 pounds).
− Different aircraft reach 2,000’ AGL at different
locations; therefore the next turn point is not
fixed and flights are dispersed over large areas.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
None.
EVALUATION METHOD:
Incorporated into the baseline noise contour
modeling.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
Retain current procedures, subject to potential
refinement by the findings of the FAA’s Airspace
Redesign Project in the future.
Page 3
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-3
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-B (Became NA-2)
Exhibit: E-1
TITLE:
Departing Runway 27L, Turn left to a 255 Degree
Heading Until Reaching 3,000’ AGL.
DESCRIPTION:
− This is the current procedure for this runway.
− Modifications to the procedure are being
evaluated by the New York/New Jersey/
Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign
Project in an effort to enhance the efficiency of
operations throughout the Philadelphia/New
York airspace corridor.
BENEFITS:
Takes advantage of the Delaware River to the west
of the airport by keeping initial stages of takeoff
over compatibly used areas.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft maintain the heading until
reaching 3,000’ AGL (measure does not apply to
light aircraft less than 12,500 pounds).
− Different aircraft reach 3,000’ AGL at different
locations; therefore the next turn point is not
fixed and flights are dispersed over large areas.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
None.
EVALUATION METHOD:
Incorporated into the baseline noise contour
modeling.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
Retain current procedures, subject to potential
refinement by the findings of the FAA’s Airspace
Redesign Project in the future.
Page 4
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-4
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-C (Became NA-3)
Exhibit: E-1
TITLE:
Departing Runway 27R, Turn left to a 240 Degree
Heading Until Reaching 3 DME, thence fly 255
Degree Heading to 3,000’ AGL.
DESCRIPTION:
− This is the current procedure for this runway.
− Modifications to the procedure are being
evaluated by the New York/New Jersey/
Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign
Project in an effort to enhance the efficiency of
operations throughout the Philadelphia/New
York airspace corridor.
BENEFITS:
Takes advantage of Delaware River to the west of
the airport.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft maintain the heading until
reaching 3,000’ AGL (measure does not apply to
light aircraft less than 12,500 pounds).
− Different aircraft reach 3,000’ AGL at different
locations; therefore the next turn point is not
fixed and flights are dispersed over large areas.
− The measure is not used when airspace
separation between aircraft is required during
periods of peak operations, or when fast and
slow aircraft simultaneously depart the two
parallel runways.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
None.
EVALUATION METHOD:
Incorporated into the baseline noise contour
modeling.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
Retain current procedures, subject to potential
refinement by the findings of the FAA’s Airspace
Redesign Project in the future.
Page 5
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-5
Appendix E
June 2002
Click to view Exhibit E-1 Takeoff Corridors for Noise Abatement
Page 6
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-6
Appendix E
June 2002
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 7
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-7
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-D (Became NA-4)
Exhibit: E-2
TITLE:
Nighttime Preferential Runway Use Program
DESCRIPTION:
− This is the current procedure for the airport.
− Between midnight and 6:00 a.m., east
operations are to occur as follows: Depart
Runways 9L/R and land Runway 9R; Depart
Runway 17 and land Runway 35.
− Between midnight and 6:00 a.m., west
operations are to occur as follows: Depart
Runway 27L and land Runways 27L/R; Depart
Runway 17 and land Runway 35.
BENEFITS:
− Utilizes outboard runway (closest to the
Delaware River) for departures on the parallels.
− Utilizes the generally compatible area south of
the airport for crosswind arrivals and departures.
DRAWBACKS:
None.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
None.
EVALUATION METHOD:
Incorporated into the baseline noise contour
modeling.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
Retain current nighttime runway use program.
Page 8
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-8
Appendix E
June 2002
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 9
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-9
Appendix E
June 2002
Click to view Exhibit E-2 Preferential Nighttime Runway Use
Page 10
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-10
Appendix E
June 2002
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 11
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-11
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-E (Became NA-5)
Exhibit: E-3
TITLE:
Engine Run-up Restriction Procedures
DESCRIPTION:
− These are current run-up procedures in effect:
•
Engine run-ups are restricted to two (2)
centrally located sites on the airport.
→
Taxiway K at H facing east (preferred)
→
Taxiway P at W facing west
•
Engine run-ups require prior approval of
airport operations and must not exceed 20
minutes in duration.
•
Between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., run-ups
are conducted at the preferred run-up
location.
BENEFITS:
− Centrally located sites minimize the noise impact
of run-ups as much as possible without
constructing a barrier or berm.
− Provides for nighttime run-ups to occur at the
preferred site.
DRAWBACKS:
None.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
None.
EVALUATION METHOD:
Incorporated into the baseline noise contour
modeling.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
Retain current nighttime run-up program.
Page 12
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-12
Appendix E
June 2002
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 13
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-13
Appendix E
June 2002
Click to view Exhibit E-3 Existing Engine Run-up Procedures
Page 14
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-14
Appendix E
June 2002
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 15
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-15
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-F
Exhibit: E-4
TITLE:
Modify/Enhance Runway 27L Departure
Procedure for Aircraft Weighing More Than
12,500 Pounds
DESCRIPTION:
Utilize RNAV and traditional navigation techniques
to define a specific departure course for aircraft
weighing more than 12,500 pounds that maintains
the initial 240° heading until reaching a fixed
location, rather than initiating turns upon reaching
3,000 MSL
BENEFITS:
− Reduce direct overflights of Tinicum by
narrowing dispersion during the initial departure.
− Establishes a fixed and predictable turn location
− Enhances Air Traffic system with use of RNAV.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft equipped with RNAV capability.
− Reduces airspace capacity by reducing traffic
controller options for the separation of aircraft.
− Introduces additional delay by reducing capacity.
− Requires additional Air Traffic Controller training.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
− Cost of developing procedures and EA for
implementation of all recommended measures
(estimated at $400,000 to 600,000 based on
similar efforts in other areas).
− Cost of delay and loss of capacity from full
implementation estimated to be $3.54 million
annually based on 3-mile separations.
− Cost of controller training.
− Cost of Digital GPS equipment both on the
ground and on-board user aircraft.
EVALUATION METHOD:
INM modeling of anticipated flight path.
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
− Reduces overflights and noise impacts in
Tinicum when combined with NA-G.
- By 1 DNL to 2 DNL in the Tinicum area
- By 113 housing units
− Abatement benefits are not perceptible. Efforts
should be focused on mitigation.
− Not Recommended.
Page 16
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-16
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-G
Exhibit: E-4
TITLE:
Modify/Enhance Runway 27R Departure
Procedure for Aircraft Weighing More Than
12,500 Pounds
DESCRIPTION:
Utilize RNAV and traditional navigation techniques
to define a specific departure course for aircraft
weighing more than 12,500 pounds that maintains
the initial 255/240° heading until reaching a fixed
location, rather than initiating turns upon reaching
3,000 MSL. Procedure to be used if not conflicting
with 27L departures.
BENEFITS:
− Reduce (not eliminate) direct overflights of
Tinicum by defining a turn point that bypasses
rather than overflies the community and narrows
dispersion during the initial departure.
− Establishes a fixed and predictable turn location
− Enhances Air Traffic system with use of RNAV.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft equipped with RNAV capability.
− Establishes a single departure stream in west
flow operations when combined with Alternative
NA-F or NA-B.
− Reduces airspace capacity by reducing traffic
controller options for the separation of aircraft.
− Requires additional Air Traffic Controller training.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
− Cost of developing procedures (see NA-F).
− Cost of delay and loss of capacity from full
implementation estimated to be $479,000 or 38
hours annually based on 3-mile separations.
− Cost of controller training.
− Cost of Digital GPS equipment both on the
ground and on-board user aircraft.
EVALUATION METHOD:
INM modeling of anticipated flight path.
Page 17
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-17
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-G
Exhibit: E-4
(Continued)
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
− Reduces overflights and noise impacts in
Tinicum when combined with NA-F.
•
By 1 DNL to 2 DNL in the Tinicum Area
•
By 113 housing units
− Abatement benefits are not perceptible. Efforts
should be focused on mitigation.
− Not Recommended
Page 18
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-18
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-H
Exhibit: E-4
TITLE:
Modify/Enhance Runway 9L Departure
Procedure for Aircraft Weighing More Than
12,500 Pounds
DESCRIPTION:
− Utilize RNAV and traditional navigation
techniques to define specific departure course.
•
For left-turning aircraft, define a corridor that
overflies the generally compatible areas
along the Delaware River as it turns to the
north. This action may be considered by the
concurrent New York/New
Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace
Redesign Project.
•
For right-turning aircraft, define a corridor
that overflies the compatible corridor
between Camden and Gloucester Counties
in New Jersey.
BENEFITS:
− Reduce overflights of South Philadelphia and
heavier populated areas of Camden County,
New Jersey for left-turning aircraft.
− Reduce overflights of heavier populated areas of
Camden County, New Jersey for right-turning
aircraft.
− Enhances Air Traffic system with use of RNAV.
DRAWBACKS:
− Not all aircraft equipped with RNAV capability.
− Reduces Controller flexibility in efficiently moving
traffic during peak operating periods
− Additional Air Traffic Controller training.
COST TO IMPLEMENT:
− Cost of developing procedures (see NA-F).
− Cost of controller training.
− Cost of Digital GPS equipment both on the
ground and on-board user aircraft.
EVALUATION METHOD:
INM modeling of anticipated flight path.
Page 19
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P
ART
150 N
OISE
C
OMPATIBILITY
S
TUDY
F
INAL
Landrum & Brown Team
E-19
Appendix E
June 2002
Noise Compatibility Program Alternative NA-H
Exhibit: E-4
(Continued)
FINDINGS and
RECOMMENDATION:
− Up to a 1.0 DNL reduction near the eastern tip of
the 65 DNL when combined with NA-I.
− Retain current east traffic departure
procedures, subject to a review of efficiency by
the Airspace Redesign Project.
Page 20
P
HILADELPHIA
I
NTERNATIONAL
A
IRPORT
FAR P