Environmental Aspects of Air Transportation · 2006. 9. 13. · A300B4-200 with CF6-50C2 A310-300 with CF6-80C2A2 12 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 560 - FALL 2006 Flight State Generation Take-off

1

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 560 - FALL 20061

Environmental Aspects of Air Transportation

Dr. Terry ThompsonSeptember 2006

Science and Technology to Achieve a Sustainable System

CENTER FOR AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

RESEARCH

Noise Local Air Quality Climate Environmental Management


Outline

Overview of Research Interests

Noise Metrics and Impact Calculations

Air Quality Metrics and Impact Calculations

Climate Change

Environmental Management Systems

Next Generation Air Transportation System

2


Overview of Environmental Research Interests

The Environmental Analysis (EA) Group addresses major aspects of the air-transportation system associated with effects on the physical and human environment. Topics studied in this area range from the underlying physics of acoustics and pollutant generation/evolution, through appropriate advanced techniques and tools for understanding the role of environmental considerations in planning and managing the air-transportation system.

Principal areas of interest:

- Aircraft-related noise and its effects in urban and rural settings- Local air quality and interface to broader atmospheric physics- Planning for mitigation of environmental effects- Balanced management of environmental and operational factors- Appropriate metrics and underlying physical and chemical phenomena- Nature and magnitude of potential environmental constraints- Multi-objective optimization to support operational and environmental goals- Market-based techniques for economically balanced management- Simulation, modeling, an decision-support tools in support of the above


Noise Metrics and Impact Calculation

3


Sound and Noise – The Basics

Sound waves are pressure oscillations in the atmosphere.

Sound perception is modulated by the structure of the humanhearing mechanism, which translates these oscillations intocomplex perceptual phenomena related to the frequencycontent and intensity of the sound waves.

Humans are sensitive to oscillations with frequency range of approximately 20 to 20,000 Hertz (cycles/sec), with a minimum intensity of about 10-12 watts/m2, or a pressure difference of 0.0002 dyne/cm2.

Human perception of loudness is highly non-linear, and the relationship between frequency, intensity, and loudness is quitecomplex.

To capture this non-linearity, sound spectra are usuallymodified by a weighting function (A-scale) that de-emphasizesportions of the spectra below 1,000 Hz and above 16,000 Hz.


Sound and Noise – The Basics (Cont’d)

All events have different durations; how will they be compared in impact?

SEL is the basic noise-level measure, and has a standard reference periodof one second.

Time (sec)

Sound Level(dB)

L(a) = 10 log10 (Measured_Level2 / Reference_Level2)

LAmax

LAmax – 10 dB

LAmax – 20 dB

100 20

Sound Exposure Level, SEL

A-weighted Sound Level, LA(t)

SEL = 10 log10 (1 / 1sec) ∫t1t2

10 LA(t)/10 dt

4


Noise Metrics (A-Weighted)

DNL - Day/Night Average Sound Level(63-72 dB in noisy urban area, 20-30 dB in wilderness)CNEL - Community Noise Equivalent Level

LAEQ - Equivalent Sound Level (24 hours)

LAEQD/LAEQN - Equivalent Sound Level Day/Night

A-weighted level of a one-second event equivalent in acoustic energy to the original event.

-SEL - Sound Exposure Level

Maximum A-weighted sound level for an event.

-LAMAX - Maximum Sound Level

Time that the noise level is above a user-specified A-weighted sound level

-TALA - Time Above a Sound-level Threshold


Noise Metrics (Tone-Corrected Perceived)

NEF - Noise Exposure Forecast

WECPNL - Weighted Equivalent Continuous Perceived Noise Level

EPNL - Effective Perceived Noise Level (multi-event)

PNLTM - Maximum PNLT Sound Level

TAPNL - Time Above a PNLT Threshold

5


Noise Metrics SummaryFrequencyWeighting

MetricType

MetricName

Event Weighting(day/eve/night)

AveragingTime (h)

SEL 1 1 1

DNL 1 1 10 24CNEL 1 3 10 24LAEQ 1 1 1 24LAEQD 1 1 0 15LAEQN 0 0 1 9

LAMAX 1 1 1

TALA 1 1 1

ExposureBased

Maximum Level

Time Above Threshold

A-Weighted

EPNL 1 1 1

NEF 1 1 16.7 24WECPNL 1 3 10 24

PNLTM 1 1 1

TAPNL 1 1 1

ExposureBased

Maximum Level

Time Above Threshold

Tone-CorrectedPerceived


Core Noise Calculation

Engine type and numberFive-dimensional state along each segment of flight trajectoryDistance to observerOrientation with respect to observer(for on-ground segments)

----

Information required:STARTX, Y, Z, V, THR

Objective is calculation of total noise dosage at each observer location.

Observer on ground

ENDX, Y, Z, V, THR

X

Y

Z

a

b c

Total noise impact at given observer = 10 log10 (1/T) ΣflightsΣsegments 10SEL(i)/10

T = dosage period (e.g., 24 hours)

6


Calculating Average Annual DNLSampling of 30-60 days of radar tracks throughout the yearprovides « annualized » average 24-hour set of flights and trajectories.

Noise/power/distance data provides SEL as function of enginepower setting and distance (slant range) from aircraft to observer.

DNL at jth observer fromDNLj = 10 log10 (1/T) { Σday_flightsΣsegments 10SEL(ij)/10 + Σnight_flightsΣsegments 10[SEL(ij)+10]/10 }

Calculate SEL for all segments of eachflight at each point

Calculate DNL atall points due to all flights

Create annualaverage day of traffic

2CF650 Arr 10000 lbs 106.2 dB @ 200 ft; 43.3 dB at 25000 ft25000 lbs 109.8 dB @ 200 ft; 53.9 dB at 25000 ft

Dep 25000 lbs 109.8 dB @ 200 ft; 53.9 dB at 25000 ft40000 lbs 113.0 dB @ 200 ft; 63.3 dB at 25000 ft

A300B4-200 with CF6-50C2A310-300 with CF6-80C2A2


Flight State Generation

Take-offClimbAccelerateCruise/climb

Equations from from SAE AIR 1845 generate aircraft state for different segment types:Aircraft type

Operation typeTrip lengthFlight proceduresAltitude controls at

specified nodesAirport temperatureAirport altitudeRunway data

Flight State GenerationUsing SAE AIR 1845

Equations

Aircraft state on each segment

γ = sin-1 ( 1.01 { [ NengTavg / (W/δam)avg ] – R} )

ambient pressure ratio relative to standard-day sea-level value

gross takeoff weight

number of engines

drag/lift ratio

Tavg = (1/2) [ (Fn/δam)h2 – (Fn/δam)h1 ]

(Fn/δam)h = E + FVc + Gah +Gbh2 + HTam

climb angle

average correctednet thrust

corrected net thrust per engine

LevelDescendLandDecelerate

----

----

ambient air temperature

altitudeairspeed(calibrated)

E, F, Ga, Gb, and H are engine-specificparameters dependent on segment type

net thrust per engine

INITIAL CLIMB

7


Annualization Example - ORDAnnualization can also be done by assigning all traffic in the average day (or the day/night portions) to each of the runway configurations used throughout the year.

Then the annual exposure is obtained by combining the noise exposures due to different configurations according to proportional use throughout the year.

ABXWIFR1Dual 5IFR2NO1 (04R/04L)NO2 (22R/22L)NO3 (32R/32L)NO4 (09R)NO5 (14R/14L E-wind)

NT1NT2NT3NT4NT5

18.20 %12.8031.2020.508.502.001.900.7350.980.980.7351.47

20.00%20.0020.0020.0020.00

100%

100%

AnnualizedExposure

DAY:

NIGHT:


Comparison of Baseline and Alternative(s)

EACH POPULATION CENTROID HAS TWO DNL EXPOSURE VALUESFOR: (1) BASELINE SCENARIO, (2) ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO N.

CRITERIA TO DETERMINE MINIMUM THRESHOLD OF DNL CHANGE(RELATIVE TO BASELINE DNL):

Baseline DNL Change in Exposure (Minimum) References

< 45 dB

45 - < 50 dB

50 - < 55 dB

55 - < 60 dB

60 - < 65 dB

> 65 dB

EECP EIS, Air TrafficNoise Screening Procedure,

FICON (See S. Fidell, J. Ac.Soc.Am. 114(6), 2003)FAA Order1050.1Dand FICON

SCENARIOS ARE COMPARED IN TERMS OF POPULATIONRECEIVING INCREASES OR DECREASES IN EACH EXPOSURE BAND.

-

± 5 dB

± 5 dB

± 5 dB

± 3 dB

± 1.5 dB

8


Visualization of Scoring Criteria

45

50

450

0

BASELINE DNL (dB)

ALTERNATIVEDNL(dB)

5040

55

55

INCREASE

60

NOCHANGE

65

60

65

DECREASE

40

DECREASENOCHANGE

INCREASENO

CHANGE

CENTROID YPOPULATION = 46BASELINE = 62 dBALTERNATIVE = 47 dB

CENTROID YPOPULATION = 46BASELINE = 62 dBALTERNATIVE = 47 dB

CENTROID XPOPULATION = 19BASELINE = 41 dBALTERNATIVE = 56 dB

CENTROID XPOPULATION = 19BASELINE = 41 dBALTERNATIVE = 56 dB

3 dB

3 dB

INCREASE

DECREASE

1.5 dB


45

50

450

0

BASELINE DNL (dB)

ALTDNL(dB)

40

40

NOCHANGE

NOCHANGE

INCREASE

0

55

65

60

50 55 60 65

NOCHANGE

DECREASE

TOTAL

Above65 dB

DEC INC

(TOTAL = )

70

70

TOTAL ABOVE 65 dB:Baseline =

Alternative =

(TOTAL = )

(TOTAL = )

HORIZONTAL GRAY BOXENCLOSES TOTAL ABOVE65 dB FOR ALTERNATIVE

PART OF BOX TO LEFTOF NO-CHANGE ZONEENCLOSES INCREASESABOVE 65 dB.

PART OF BOX TO LEFTOF VERTICAL 65 dB LINESHOWS “NEWLY IMPACTEDABOVE 65 dB”

9


45

50

450

0

BASELINE DNL (dB)

ALTDNL(dB)

40

40

3 dB

3 dB

1.5 dB

1.5 dB

0

55

65

60

50 55 60 65

TOTAL

Above65 dB

DEC INC

70

70

TOTAL ABOVE 65 dB:Baseline =

Alternative =

YELLOW

ORANGE

RED

PURPLE

BLUE

GREEN


Impact Table, Impact Graph, and Change Map

10


Air-Quality Metrics and Impact Calculation


Local Air Quality – The Basics

Aircraft emit a complex mixture of air pollutants.

Major pollutants related to local air quality are CO, NOx, SOx, unburnt HCs, and PM (particulate matter).

Emissions of CO2 and water vapor have atmospheric effects, and contribute to global warming.

Atmospheric chemistry and physics of these emissions are very complex.

Effects of the different pollutants on flora, fauna, and humanhealth are complex and not fully understood.

Quantification of impacts usually done at « inventory » levelgiving net amounts of pollutants at an airport based on annuallanding/takeoff cycles.

Quantification can be carried to « dispersion » level givingspatio-temporal concentrations of pollutants.

11


Regulatory Aspects

Clean Air Act and amendments (1963, 1970, 1977, 1990) have resulted in a broad regulatory framework.

EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set primary and secondary standards to protect public health(primary) and public welfare (secondary).

States are required to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for monitoring and controlling each pollutant in the NAAQS to EPA. EPA has approval authority.


Regulatory Aspects (Cont’d)

National Environmental Protection Act tasks Federal agencieswith preparation of various environmental analyses:

- Environmental Assessment (EA) provides analysis and documentation supporting wheter to prepare an EnvironmentalImpact Statement, or a Finding of No Significant Impact.

- Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a detailed document required of all Federal actions likely to have significantenvironmental impact.

- Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is a document, based on the EA, determining that the Federal action will not have significantenvironmental impacts.

- Record of Decision (ROD) is required to record a Federal agency’sdecision on a proposed major Federal action, as well as the alternatives considered.

- Conformity Determination states whether and how a Federal action conforms to the SIP with regard to NAAQS.

12


Combustion Products

Commercial jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Although a mixture of different hydrocarbons, it can be approximated as a paraffin(CnH2n+2), usually C10H22.

Main combustion process:

aCnH2n+2 + bO2 + 3.76bN2 cH2O + dCO2 + 3.76bN2 + heat

C10H22 + 15.5O2 + 3.76(15.5)N2 11H2O + 10CO2 + 3.76(15.5)N2 + 10.6 kcal/g (19.08 kBTU/lb)

The above is for complete combustion in the gaseous phase, and the process inside real engines is considerably more complex. Typical emission rates for jet aircraft (grams per kg fuel consumed) at cruise are:

CO23200

H2O1300

NOx9-15

SOx0.3-0.8

CO0.2-0.6

HxCy0-0.1

Particulates0.01-0.05

Main combustionproducts

Produced at high T and P in combustion chamber; depends on operating conditions

Due to incomplete burning of fuel; producedat non-optimal operating conditions duringlanding, taxi, take-off and climb-out

Unburned

Due to sulphur impurities in fuel


National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

Give concentration limits for given sampling period.

Areas or regions violating these limits are designated to be «non-attainment areas ».

0.5 ppm (1300 ug/m3)3-hour-------

-------24-hour0.14 ppm

-------Annual (Arithmetic Mean) 0.03 ppmSulfur Oxides

Same as Primary 8-hour 0.08 ppmOzone

24-hour65 ug/m3

Same as PrimaryAnnual (Arithmetic Mean)15.0 µg/m3Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

24-hour150 ug/m3

Same as PrimaryAnnual (Arithmetic Mean)50 µg/m3Particulate Matter (PM10)

Same as PrimaryAnnual (Arithmetic Mean)0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3)Nitrogen Dioxide

Same as PrimaryQuarterly Average1.5 µg/m3Lead

None1-hour35 ppm (40 mg/m3)

None 8-hour9 ppm (10 mg/m3) Carbon Monoxide

Secondary Stds.Averaging TimesPrimary Stds.Pollutant

13


Inventory Modeling

Low-altitude methodology is well established, and is based on times in operational mode, fuel rates, and emission indices:

Pollutant mass per flight = Neng * tmode * fuelflowmode * EImode

Pollutant inventory = Σall_flights (pollutant mass per flight)

Determining inventory above 3000 feet uses a more complex technique, and is not yet settled with regard to methodology.

- Boeing Method 2 uses fuel flow at altitude and modifies the standard ICAO emission indices

approach, climbout, takeoff, taxi/idle NOx, SOx, HC, CO, PM


Dispersion ModelingEPA’s AERMOD is primary model for air transport.

General stack sources; Complex terrainGaussianComplexe Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithmes for Unstable Situations (CTDMPLUS)

Pollutant transport over water and coastal areasGaussianOffshore and Coastal Dispersion Model (OCD)

Urban ozone modeling3-D numericalUrban Airshed Model (UAM)

General stack sources; Complex terrainGaussianIndustrial Source Complex Model (ISC3)

General stack sourcesGaussianGaussian-Plume Multiple Source Air Quality Algorithm (RAM)

General stack sourcesGaussianClimatological Dispersion Model (CDM)

Highway emissionsGaussianCALINE3

General stack and line sources Complex terrainGaussianAERMOD

ApplicabilityTypeModel Name

14


Dispersion Modeling (Cont’d)Gaussian approach

σy and σz vary with x.


Dispersion Modeling

More complex Euler-Lagrangian approaches exist, addressing flow, momentum, ...

Source: MetPhoMod

15


Some Underlying Data - 1

0,1000000,0000001,0000004,3000003,10000025,9000004CFM56-7B20

0,9130000,0000001,00000020,5000000,1000000,6000003CFM56-7B20

0,7610000,0000001,00000017,4000000,1000000,5000002CFM56-7B20

0,2740000,0000001,0000009,5000000,1000003,2000001CFM56-7B20

FUEL_KG/SPART_EISOX_EINOX_EIHC_EICO_EIMODEENG_NAME

• Different pollutant production rates for engines by mode of operation (one engine fromabout 470 in EDMS 4.1) (modes: 1=approach; 2=climbout; 3=takeoff; 4=taxi/idle)

• Different pollutant production rates for APUs (data from EDMS 4.1 apu_ef.dbf; total of about 30 APUs)

0,0000000,2100101,7284300,0777000,78335026,00APU TSCP700-4B (142 HP)

0,0000000,2100101,7284300,0777000,78335026,00APU TSCP 700 (142 HP)

0,0000000,3479001,8543600,0974103,00941026,00APU GTCP 660 (300 HP)

0,0000000,2431202,7740900,0486200,45951026,00APU GTCP331-500 (143 HP)

0,0000000,1215201,1557300,0522500,50190026,00APU GTCP331-200ER (143 HP)

0,0000000,1215201,1557300,0522500,50190026,00APU GTCP 331 (143 HP)

PART_kg/hSOX_kg/hNOX_kg/hHC_kg/hCO_kg/hT_minAPU TYPE


Some Underlying Data - 2• Different fuel rates by altitude and mode

(data from BADA; about 90 aircrafttypes).

B772__ 160 122.5 252.6 25.0

B772__ 140 99.1 263.5 26.1

B772__ 120 99.0 274.6 27.1

B772__ 100 98.9 281.2 28.2

B772__ 80 98.8 292.3 29.3

B772__ 60 98.7 303.4 30.3

B772__ 40 93.1 311.7 31.4

B772__ 30 93.0 315.0 31.9

B772__ 20 XXX 319.1 32.5

B772__ 15 XXX 321.9 32.7

B772__ 10 XXX 324.4 129.4

B772__ 5 XXX 327.2 130.3

B772__ 0 XXX 330.1 131.5

Altitude(FL)

Fuel Rate (kg/min)Cruise Climb Descent

B772__ 410 100.2 119.0 11.7

B772__ 390 102.5 129.5 12.7

B772__ 370 105.8 140.1 13.8

B772__ 350 110.1 150.9 14.9

B772__ 330 115.4 161.9 15.9

B772__ 310 120.0 172.8 17.0

B772__ 290 120.4 183.2 18.1

B772__ 280 120.6 188.4 18.6

B772__ 260 121.1 199.0 19.7

B772__ 240 121.4 209.6 20.7

B772__ 220 121.8 220.2 21.8

B772__ 200 122.0 231.0 22.9

B772__ 180 122.3 241.7 23.9

16


Design Issues

Engine design cannot be optimized for all of the pollutants, anddesign tradeoffs form an active area of research and development.

NOx

CO

Combustor Operating Temperature

Concentration

NOx

Air/Fuel Ratio

Particulates

ProductionRate

0


Design Issues (Cont’d)

Significant progress has been made in reducing noise.

Main approaches to noise reduction include:

- Lower jet velocity (however, this can lead to greater fuel burn)

- Lower speed of rotating components, especially fan- Avoid flow distortion into the fan (cannot be avoided on

takeoff)- Avoid interference patterns via selection of numbers of

rotor and stator blades.

- Large axial gap between rotors and stators- Tuned acoustic liners in intake, bypass duct, and nozzle of core

17


Aviation and Climate


Aviation and Climate – The BasicsGlobal climate concerns are driven by green-house gas concentrations (CO2, O3, CH4) and O3 depletion.

- CO2 molecules absorb outgoing UV radiation, and lead to warming of the troposphere (i.e., from sea level to about 10km altitude).

- O3 depletion in the stratosphere (10-45km altitude) leads to increased intensity of UV radiation harmful to plant and animal life.

Aviation effects are very complex, and depend on species emitted, altitudes, atmospheric conditions, chemicalreactions, etc.

Formation of contrails and contribution to cirrus cloud cover may also be a concern.

18


Aviation and Climate – The Basics (Cont’d)

Overall, climate change is fundamentally related to the global carboncycle, and to perturbations caused by fossil-fuel consumption.


Environmental Management and Optimization

19


Environmental Management

As environmental constraints grow, there is likely to be increased pressure to manage environmental effects.

This will be a complex balance of operational factors and environmental impacts in both noise and emissions.

Routing

A/D ProfilesNoise

Emissions Fleet Mix

Taxi Times Taxi Queues

Scheduling


Background and Motivation

Capability to satisfy demand at NGATS projected levels is likely to be limited by noise, air-quality, and other environmental constraints.

Combination of operational and technology enhancements will be required to reduce impact of capacity limitations.

Operational reductions can be sought across a spectrum of interlinked factors (tracks, profiles, aircraft state, taxi behavior, schedule, fleet mix, etc.).

How can we manage these factors to approach an optimum balance among different environmental and operational objectives?

20


EMS Timescale Focus

Focusing on the months to hours timescale.

Seeking synergy in techniques with longer-timescale planning domains.

DECADES YEARS MONTHS HOURS

NGATS CONCEPT

DEVELOPMENT

AIRPORTAL & AIRSPACE PLANNING

TACTICAL DECISION SUPPORT

DESIRABLE SYNERGY IN TECHNIQUES

EMS FOCUS


EMS Process Overview

Source: California EPA

Traditional view is process-oriented, but decision-support technology will be needed.

EMS DECISION SUPPORT

OR TECHNOLOGY NEEDED

21


Major Factors Contributing to Environmental Impacts

RoutingTrack location relative to other traffic and population concentration directly affects noise/emission dosage.

ProfilesAircraft altitude, speed, and power state affect both noise and emission dosage.

ScheduleSome noise metrics (e.g., DNL) are dependent on time of day.

Fleet compositionAirframe/engine combinations have different noise and emissions characteristics, and thus different marginal impacts.

Taxi behaviorTaxi time and queuing affect emissions and fuel-usage metrics.


Noise Metrics– Quantify sound exposure at point locations, usually in DNL (dB)– Very sensitive to track location, altitude, aircraft type, state, time

of day

Emissions Inventory Metrics– Quantify total amount of pollutants produced in period– Criteria pollutants are CO, HC, NOx, SOx, PM(x)– Not sensitive to lateral track location– Sensitive to altitude, aircraft type, state

Emissions Dispersion Metrics– Quantify concentration in time period– Pollutant concentrations modeled at point locations– National Ambient Air Quality Standards sets threshold

concentrations– Sensitive to track location, altitude, aircraft type, state

Environmental and Operational Metrics

22


EMS Decision Support Schematic

Source: Metron Aviation


Sample Scenario: Centennial Airport

Radar data from 1997. (~1300 flight operations)

Population data from 2000 census (~2.8 million persons)

Tracks grouped into 34 distinct flows

20,000 variants of 2,240 backbones were generated by varying the spatial placement

Terrain data was included

Variants are generated so that they all satisfy the operationalconstraints (e.g. feasible profile) Noise and emissions dispersion calculated for all baseline tracks and

all variants


23


Sample Scenario Benefits Estimation

2 4 6 8 10 12 14-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

% Decrease in Weighted-SEL X Population from Baseline

% D

ecre

ase

in P

ollu

tant

Con

cent

ratio

n X

Popu

latio

n fr

om B

asel

ine

Initial Benefits in Reducing Noise and Emission Metrics from the Baseline Case

Emissions reduction range = [0%,26%]

Noise reduction range = [4%,13%]

Slope jump: ~20% emission reduction~12% noise reduction



Next Generation Air Transport and the Environment

24


Next Generation Air Transport System

Table 0-1. NGATS Goals and Objectives

Retain US Leadership in Global Aviation

• Retain role as world leader in aviation • Reduce costs for Aviation • Enable services tailored to traveler and shipper

needs • Encourage performance based, harmonized

global standards for US products and services

Expand Capacity

• Satisfy future growth in demand and operational diversity

• Reduce transit time and increase predictability • Minimize the impact of weather and other

disruptions

Ensure Safety

• Maintain aviation’s record as safest mode of transportation

• Improve the level of safety of the US Air Transportation system

• Increase safety of worldwide air transportation system

Protect the Environment

• Reduce significant noise and local emissions impacts on absolute basis

• Develop sufficient knowledge and metrics to address particulate matter, hazardous air pollutants and climate issues

• Facilitate development and implementation of cost-effective technology, operations, and policy approaches to allow capacity growth while protecting the environment.

Ensure our national defense

• Provide for the common defense while minimizing civilian constraints

• Coordinate a national response to threats • Ensure global access to civilian airspace

Secure the Nation

• Mitigate new and varied threats • Ensure security efficiently serves demand • Tailor strategies to threats, balancing costs and

privacy issues • Ensure traveler and shipper confidence in

system security

Source: NGATS Concept of Operations (Draft), May 2006


NGATS and Environment (Cont’d)

Environmental Stewardship Environmental stewardship is performed in the context of the NGATS objectives. Capacity increases will be done in ways that are consistent with environmental protection goals. New technology, procedures, and policies in the NGATS reduce significant impacts from noise, local emissions, and contamination. NGATS environmental compatibility is achieved through a combination of improvements in aircraft design, aircraft performance and operational procedures, land use around airports, better aircraft de-icing procedures and innovative policies and approaches in communicating and managing environmental impacts at the airport level. Intelligent flight planning, coupled with improved flight management capabilities, enables more fuel-efficient profiles throughout the flight envelope as well as reduce noise approaches and departures in the terminal area. Reinvigorated research and development and refined technology implementation strategies – balancing near term technology development and maturity needs with long-term cutting edge research - help to keep pace with changing environmental requirements.

Research Issue: Given the long-lead time for integration of new technology into existing aircraft fleets and the significant weakness in airline balance sheets, should financial incentives be used to accelerate the introduction of environmental technology improvements in aircraft?


25



Key development issues:


1. How are airspace flexibility needs balanced with environmental and noise-reduction goals?

2. What type of NEPA review will be required to provide information to public impacted by RNP routes that permit dynamic reprogramming of usage in both the en route and arrival/departure airspace?

3. What level of flexibility in airspace structure (e.g., routes and boundaries) is needed to achieve operational goals, including efficiency, capacity, and environmental goals? To what extent can the selection of predetermined structures support operational needs?

4. How can “Super-density Operations in Terminal Airspace” be made compatible with the process for environmental analysis and review of proposed airspace re-design?



Relevant policy issues:


1. What policies will be in place to determine what flights are given priority when demand exceeds available capacity of a NAS resource?

- For example, is there a definition of “equity” with respect to the distribution of delays?

- Market mechanisms?

- Is preference given to “early filers” over those not giving advance notice?

- Are incentives provided for equipage with certain capabilities beyond what is required for access to the airspace or airport?

- Are incentives or preference given based on less environmental impacts?

2. Should financial incentives be used to accelerate the introduction of environmental technology improvements in aircraft?

26


Background Reading

Penner, J., et al, Aviation and the Global Atmosphere, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1999.

Seinfeld, J., and Pandis, S., Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Wiley, 2006.

Godish, T., Air Quality, CRC, 2004.

Perkins, H., Air Pollution, McGraw-Hill, 1974.

McGraw-Hill Handbook on Acoustics and Noise Control, 1976.

Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (especially 1992 report on airport noise analysis)

Flack, R., Fundamentals of Jet Propulsion with Applications, Cambridge, 2005.

Cumpsty, N., Jet Propulsion, Cambridge, 2003.


Noise Local Air Quality

Climate Environmental Management

Documents

Environmental Aspects of Air Transportation · 2006. 9. 13. · A300B4-200 with CF6-50C2 A310-300 with CF6-80C2A2 12 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 560 - FALL 2006 Flight State Generation Take-off