Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T23:33:02.594Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advanced noise abatement departure procedures: custom-optimised departure profiles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

S. J. Hebly  and
H. G. Visser
S. J. Hebly*
Affiliation:
National Aerospace Laboratory, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
H. G. Visser*
Affiliation:
Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
*
sander.heblij@nlr.nl
h.g.visser@tudelft.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents the concept of custom-optimised departure profiles, as an advanced form of noise abatement departure procedures. This concept relies on fixed routes in combination with individually optimised vertical departure profiles. Although the use of fixed ground tracks results in some loss in environmental performance, the high degree of complexity associated with free routing is eliminated as well, leading to a concept that does not appear to be incompatible with today’s Air Traffic Control (ATC) principles. By using a primitive form of trajectory negotiation between airline and ATC, selected flights can be allowed to perform an optimised departure without interfering with non-participating traffic. Apart from the concept itself, this paper also describes the departure profile optimisation tool, which is based on a previously developed trajectory optimisation framework called NOISHHH. Finally, in a numerical example, a current standard ICAO-A procedure is compared with two optimised profiles for a Boeing 737 departure from Amsterdam Airport. Fuel burn, noise impact and the required flight time to a specified point are compared for the three departure profiles. It is shown that the custom-optimised departure profiles have the potential to both reduce fuel burn as well as noise exposure, relative to the ICAO-A procedure.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 119 , Issue 1215 , May 2015 , pp. 647 - 661
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Erkelens, L.J.J.Advanced Noise Abatement Procedures for Approach and Departure, AIAA-2002-4858, AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Monterey, California, USA, 5-8 August 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Davison Reynolds, H.J., Reynolds, T.G. and Hansman, R.J.Human factors implications of continuous descent approach procedures for noise abatement, Air Traffc Control Quarterly, 2006, 14, (1), pp 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Visser, H.G. and Wijnen, R.A.A.Optimisation of noise abatement departure trajectories, J Aircr, 2001, 38, (4), pp 620–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Visser, H.G.Generic and site-specifc criteria in the optimisation of noise abatement trajectories, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2005, 10, (5), pp 405–419.Google Scholar
5.Hartjes, S., Visser, H.G. and Hebly, S.Optimisation of RNAV noise and emission abatement standard instrument departures, Aeronaut J, 2010, 114, (1162), pp 757–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Prats, X., Puig, V., Quevedo, J. and Nejjari, F.Multi-objective optimisation for aircraft departure trajectories minimising noise annoyance, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2010, 18, (6), pp 975–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Torres, R., Bes, C., Chaptal, J. and Hiriart-Urruty, J.B.Optimal, environmentally-friendly departure procedures for civil aircraft, J Aircr, 2011, 48, (1), pp 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Vormer, F.J., Mulder, M., van Paassen, M.M. and Mulder, J.A.Optimization of fexible approach trajectories using a genetic algorithm, J Aircr, July-August 2006, 43, (4), pp 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Braakenburg, M.L, Hartjes, S., Visser, H.G. and Hebly, S.Development of a Multi-Event Trajectory Optimization Tool for Noise-Optimised Approach Route Design, AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Technical Forum, Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA, 20–22 September 2011.Google Scholar
10. SESAR Consortium, The ATM Target Concept – D3, EUROCONTROL, Brussels, Belgium, 2007.Google Scholar
11.Ekins, P. and Speck, S.Proposals of environmental fiscal reforms and the obstacles to their implementation, J Environmental Policy and Planning, 2000, 2, (2), pp 93–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Hogenhuis, R.H., Hebly, S.J. and Visser, H.G.Optimization of RNAV Noise Abatement Approach Trajectories, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers – Part G, J Aerospace Engineering, 2011, 225, (5), pp 513–521.Google Scholar
13.Visser, H.G., Hebly, S.J. and Wijnen, R.A.A.Management of the Environmental Impact of Airport Operations, Nova Science Publishers, Hauppage, New York, USA, 2009.Google Scholar
14. Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise, Sleep Disturbance caused by Aviation Noise, 1997.Google Scholar
15. Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise, FICAN Recommendation for use of ANSI Standard to Predict Awakenings, 2008.Google Scholar
16. American National Standards Institute, ANSI/ASA S12.9-2008/Part 6: Methods for Estimation of Awakenings with Outdoor Noise Events Heard in Homes, 2008.Google Scholar
17. Federal Aviation Administration, Noise Abatement Departure Procedures, AC 91-53A, 1993.Google Scholar
18. LVNL, Integrated Aeronautical Information Package, http://www.ais-netherlands.nl/Google Scholar
19.Hebly, S.J. and Visser, H.G.Impact of Environmentally Optimised Departures on Runway Capacity, AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Technical Forum and Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium (ANERS), Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA, 2009.Google Scholar
20.Huem, R.-G., König, R., Friehmelt, H., Isermann, U. and Boguhn, O.The Infuence of Modern Noise-Simulation-Tools on the Design of Future Noise-Abatement-Approach-Procedures, AIAA 2004-5242, AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Providence, Rhode Island, USA, 16-19 August 2004.Google Scholar
21.Lopes, L.V. and Burley, C.L.Design of the Next Generation Aircraft Noise Prediction Program: ANOPP2, AIAA 2011-2854, 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Portland, Oregon, USA, 5-8 June 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Hartjes, S., Visser, H.G. and Pavel, M.D.Helicopter Noise Abatement Arrival Trajectories, AHS-70-2014-0122, AHS 70th Annual Forum and Technology Display, Montréal, Canada, 20-22 May 2014.Google Scholar
23.Arntzen, M., Heblij, S.J. and Simons, D.G.Weather-dependent airport noise contour prediction concept based on ray tracing, J Aircr, 2014, 51, (5), pp 1351–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar