NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 21, 2016 · 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 ... 30r, and 35 9,640 25.45% departures on 12l, ... noise oversight committee september 21, 2016

Audio recordings are made of this meeting

NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

Item 1: Review and Approval of July 20, 2016 Meeting Minutes


Item 2: Review of Operations Report Summary:

July and August 2016


MSP COMPLAINTS


July and August 2016 JULY AUGUST

10,183 11,442

JULY AUGUST

695 593

2015 2016JULY 11,664 10,878

AUGUST 12,475 12,035

0

2,500

5,000

7,500

10,000

12,500

15,000

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

2013 2014 2015 2016

CO

MP

LA

INT

S

JULY AUGUST

639 595

MSP COMPLAINT LOCATIONS

JULY AUGUST

17 20

AVERAGE COMPLAINT PER LOCATION



17

7

13

0

18

4 28

1 38

0

71

8

62

4

84

7

65

4

39

1

28

3

18

4

17

8

17

0

39

2

43

2

49

0 58

4 71

6 79

2

63

8

36

2

20

5

21

9

26

3

27

0 38

9

41

6 52

3

74

5 84

9

10

79

86

6

53

0

44

5

37

4

29

5 43

9

75

6

65

7

97

1

72

3

63

9

59

5

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

2013 2014 2015 2016

CO

MP

LA

INT

LO

CA

TIO

NS

TOTAL MSP AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS

2015 2016

271,177 276,724

YEAR – TO – DATE



2015 2016JULY 37,132 37,880

AUGUST 36,885 37,887

31,371

29,033

35,119

32,68633,409

35,542

37,13236,885

32,88733,969

31,89632,356

31,597

30,020

34,966

33,29334,331

36,750

37,880 37,887

28,000

30,000

32,000

34,000

36,000

38,000

40,000

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

AIR

CR

AF

T O

PE

RA

TIO

NS

2015 2016

Source: Metropolitan Airports Commission’s Finance Department Monthly Passenger and Operations Reports

JUNE JULY

3,352,178 3,533,877

MSP PASSENGERS


June and July 2016

JUN102

JUL101

6 0

6 5

7 0

7 5

8 0

8 5

9 0

9 5

1 0 0

1 0 5

1 1 0

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

PA

SS

EN

GE

RS

MSP AIRLINE PASSENGERS

A V E R A G E P A S S E N G E R P E R F L I G H T

FLEET MIX COMPOSITIONJULY & AUGUST 2016

DAYTIME COMPOSITIONJULY & AUGUST 2016



DAY70,16192.60%

NIGHT5,6067.40%

MANUFACTURED STAGE 3/441,183

59%

REGIONAL JET28,934

41%



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1 3 5 7 9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31 2 4 6 8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

JULY AUGUST

OP

ER

AT

ION

S

MSP NIGHT TIME OPERATIONS

(22:30 – 06:00)

SA

TU

RD

AY

JULY NIGHT TIME

Scheduled Actual

1,588 2,866



A S A S A S A S A S A S A S A S

22:30 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00

OTHER 254 126 82 20 5 3 136

AIR CARRIER 511 243 545 421 275 227 111 25 54 2 13 68 19 556 541

CARGO 3 1 15 8 36 37 52 65

0

200

400

600

800

1000

AUGUST NIGHT TIME

Scheduled Actual

1,478 2,530



A S A S A S A S A S A S A S A S

22:30 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00

OTHER 234 118 73 10 4 2 145

AIR CARRIER 456 251 519 443 252 198 69 6 36 14 61 6 414 464

CARGO 7 5 1 16 12 42 40 52 58

0

200

400

600

800

1000

RUNWAY 17 JULY AUGUST

CARRIER JET DEPARTURES (PROCEDURE COMPLIANCE)

6,199(99.4%)

6,423(99.3%)

Noise Abatement Procedures –

Runway 17 Departure

98.0%

98.5%

99.0%

99.5%

100.0%

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

RU

NW

AY

17

DE

PA

RT

UR

E

PR

OC

ED

UR

E C

OM

PL

IAN

CE

RUNWAYS 12L AND 12R JULY AUGUST

CARRIER JET DEPARTURES (PROCEDURE COMPLIANCE)

4,069(97.0%)

3,981(97.6%)


Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

EAG

AN

-M

END

OTA

HEI

GH

TS

CO

RR

IDO

R C

OM

PLI

AN

CE

CROSSING USAGE JULY AUGUST

NIGHT TIME(23:00 – 06:00)

219(39%)

259(47%)

DAY TIME(06:00 – 23:00)

3,850(38%)

3,722(36%)


Crossing-in-the-Corridor

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

JAN

MA

R

MA

Y

JUL

SE

P

NO

V

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

EA

GA

N -

ME

ND

OTA

HE

IGH

TS

C

RO

SS

ING

PR

OC

ED

UR

E U

SA

GE

Cross Day Cross Night


Runway Use System (RUS)

July Count Percent

Arrivals on 30L, 30R, and 35 9,640 25.45%

Departures on 12L, 12R, and 17 10,947 28.90%

Use of RUS High-Priority Runways 20,587 54.35%

August Count Percent

Arrivals on 30L, 30R, and 35 9,384 24.77%

Departures on 12L, 12R, and 17 11,256 29.71%

Use of RUS High-Priority Runways 20,640 54.48%

5,2

29

8,4

18

6,0

45

9,0

05

9,0

72

9,9

87

7,6

76

5,8

88

8,1

87

9,0

30

9,6

40

9,3

84

11

,65

6

9,1

75

10

,39

7

8,5

42

7,2

89

5,7

51

10

,46

3

11

,06

9

10

,36

9

10

,38

5

10

,94

7

11

,25

6

51.3% 51.8% 51.6%

54.2%

51.8%52.4% 51.9%

50.9%

54.1%52.8%

54.4% 54.5%

40%

42%

44%

46%

48%

50%

52%

54%

56%

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG

2016

RU

S P

ER

CE

NTA

GE

MS

P O

PE

RA

TIO

NS

USE OF MSP RUS HIGH-PRIORITY RUNWAYS

ARRIVALS 30L, 30R, 35 DEPARTURES 12L, 12R, 17 RUS

Noise Abatement Procedures –Runway Use System (RUS)

JULY ARRIVALS2

2.8

%

26

.2%

26

.4%

21

.3%

3.3

%

27

.6%

19

.4% 2

5.2

%

27

.1%

19

.9%

29

.6%

27

.7%

22

.8%

17

.4%

26

.2%

33

.8%

22

.4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

12L 12R 30L 30R 35

TOTAL MORNING TRANSITION EVENING TRANSITION NIGHT COUNT


JULY DEPARTURES

16

.5%

6.8

%

34

.5%

18

.2% 2

3.9

%

14

.7%

13

.0%

29

.4%

22

.2%

20

.6%

16

.7%

24

.8%

7.5

%

30

.7%

20

.3%25

.3%

22

.4%

6.8

%

22

.8%

22

.6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

12L 12R 17 30L 30R



AUGUST ARRIVALS

24

.3%

26

.2%

25

.7%

20

.6%

3.2

%

24

.3%

22

.7%

23

.4% 2

9.3

%

26

.6% 30

.6%

24

.5%

18

.3%

0.0

%

25

.8% 29

.9%

27

.4%

16

.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

12L 12R 30L 30R 35



AUGUST DEPARTURES1

7.0

%

6.3

%

36

.2%

16

.8% 2

3.6

%

16

.8%

14

.2%

34

.0%

16

.1%

19

.0%24

.6%

22

.9%

10

.4%

19

.8%

22

.2%2

9.7

%

29

.3%

6.4

%

19

.1%

15

.3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

12L 12R 17 30L 30R


Item 3: Aircraft Arrival Gear Extension

Gordon Goss – Chief Pilot Delta Air Lines

Timothy Bathke – Chief Pilot Sun Country Airlines


LANDING GEAR EXTENSION DETERMINATES:

• STABILIZED APPROACH CRITERIA

• SLOW/FAST ATC SPEED ASSIGN

• SLAM DUNK APPROACHES

• LOW VISIBILITY/BAD WX

STABILIZED APPROACH DISCUSSION

• STABLE APPROACHES ARE ICAO/INDUSTRY STANDARD

• STABLE APPROACH = SLOW APPROACH = SAFE APPROACH

• GARAGE ANALOGY

STABILIZED APPROACH CRITERIA(By 1000’ AGL = Approx 3 nm)

Visual Conditions

• Landing Gear Down – not in transit

• Flaps set at a Landing Flaps position

– Relatively high lift and high drag

• Airspeed at Touchdown Speed + 15 KIAS(mph)

• On nominal 3 degree glideslope

• Engines “spooled up” ready for go-around (approximately cruise power setting)

LOW VISIBILITY/BAD WX

• AIRCRAFT STABLE CLOSER TO 5-6 nm vs 3-4nm

• MINIMIZE DISTRACTIONS

• MOST APPROACHES REQUIRE VISUAL FOR LANDING

• ALLOWS DETERMINATION OF AIRSPEED VARIATION

• USUALLY NOT NOTICED FROM GROUND

Approach Procedure Profile

12R/12L ILS APPROACH CHARTS

SLOW SPEED ASSIGNMENT(> 6 NM from Rwy)

• Assigned speed 150 to 170 KIAS

– Speed MAY require Landing Flaps

– Aircraft type and weight dependent

• Landing Flap set with Landing Gear UP

– Landing Gear Warning Horn to prevent gear up landing

• Landing Gear Required to silence Warning

FAST SPEED ASSIGNMENT(180-190 KIAS to 5-6 NM)

• Less Prevalent Condition

• Higher Speed Carried Closer to Runway

• Aircraft Type Dependent

– DC-9/727 vs 757/A-320

• Landing Gear Used as Drag to Slow Quickly

SLAM DUNK APPROACHES

• AIRCRAFT BEGINS APPROACH HIGH AND FAST

• STABILIZED APPROACH CRITERIA STILL APPLIES

• AIRCRAFT IS ABOVE 3 DEGREE GLIDESLOPE

• LANDING GEAR USED WITH SPEEDBRAKES

• FLAP EXTENSION SPEED DEPENDENT

NOC QUESTIONS:What are Delta’s SOP re LANDING GEAR

EXTENSION?

• Fully extended no later than 1000 feet AGL. Given normal extension times usually start approximately 5-7 nm from Runway.

HAS THIS CHANGED RECENTLY?• No changes from Delta or even NWA

procedures

Q: ARE THERE GROUND LANDMARKS FOR GEAR EXTENSION?

A: No, A/C configuration is dependent upon the factors listed above, not a spot on the ground.

Q: DOES GEAR EXTENSION DIFFER FOR DIFFERENT RUNWAYS?

A: No. Except as listed above, the goal of approach standardization is to make all approaches as similar as

possible.

DISCUSSION OF RWY 12L/R APPROACH CONSIDERATIONS/QUESTIONS

Sun Country, Sun Country Airlines, Sun Country Vacations, the Compass logo, and Ufly are trademarks of MN Airlines, LLC d/b/a Sun Country Airlines.

MSP Base Chief PilotCaptain Timothy Bathke

NOC Presentation

Landing Procedure Considerations

• Safety driven– Internal data– Industry lessons learned

• Regulatory compliance– FAA Directive– Sun Country Policy

• Recent Stabilized Approach Emphasis

Procedural Considerations

– Safety• A decade long data driven initiative

– Stabilized Approach criteria met for each and every approach

• Positioning the airplane in the proper landing configuration (in addition to completing several other tasks) prior to 1000’ above the ground

• Approximately 4 miles from the runway

Sun Country Approach Profiles

• No significant changes in the past 2 years– Minor verbiage change– Approximately the same point over the

ground

“Standard” Operating Procedure

• Difficult to quantify– Multitude of variables

• Crew qualification• Weather conditions• Assigned approach speeds

– Number of Operations/Congestion– Direction of traffic flow

• Day vs. Night• Specific size of 737

Visual Weather Conditions

• Normally the landing gear is lowered approximately 5-7 miles from the runway

• This can vary with crew experience, flight conditions, weather, runway conditions, etc.

• The primary emphasis for our crews is the safety of our passengers and the community on the ground

SCA Approach Profiles

Instrument Weather Conditions

• Current procedure specifies lowering the landing gear 3 miles before the Final Approach Fix

• Conditions alter this slightly based primarily on aircraft weight and speed assigned by ATC

• The final approach point changes based on the specific runway in use

Approximate Final Approach Fix DistanceRunway 12R 7 nmRunway 12L 7 nmRunway 30L 6 nmRunway 30R 6 nm

Procedural Differences Between Runways

• The Sun Country profile for an Instrument approach is the same whether the runway is 12R or 35 in MSP, or any approach at any other airport

• Different types of instrument approaches can have slightly different profiles– The gear is lowered at essentially the same

distance from any runway

Ground based Reference Points

• Sun Country does not utilize ground based references

SE Ops versus NW Ops• Runways 12L/12R are typically used without the benefit of

35• Runways 30L/R/35 can handle a greater number of flights

– In a 2 runway configuration, there is an increased likelihood of congestion

– Slower speeds assigned further from the airport• Typically, once MSP Approach Control or MSP Tower assigns a

certain speed (170mph) we can only slow the airplane using landing gear – Doing so assures we maintain a stabilized and safe approach

• Depending on the distance from the airport, this could lead to level flight segments that potentially require higher power settings, thus increasing the noise.

Considerations

• Customer loyalty to the Hometown Airline is driving growth

• SCA Fleet Make-up – 2011

• 14 Aircraft– 2016

• 21 Aircraft (22 in March 2017, 23 and 24 in 2017)– Pilot Demographics

• 306 pilots• 60% increase in 5 years

– Increased training– Pilot candidate experience– Teaching and maintaining our high level of safety

Considerations

• RNAV STARs– There is not a negative impact on noise from

the implementation• Instrument approach procedures haven’t changed

as a result• Altitude at correlating navigation points is higher• 230 KIAS on downwind requires reduced engine

thrust settings, lowering noise footprint further– Shared benefits- reduced noise and a lower fuel

consumption

Questions?

MSP Base Chief Pilot Tim Bathke651-775-8973

Item 4: Study of MSP Runway 12L and 12R ArrivalsNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

In May, NOC directed MAC staff to conduct an analysis of MSP Runway 12L and 12R arrival activity over the cities to the northwest of the airport.

Direction was based on feedback from the 2nd Quarter Public Input Meeting in St. Louis Park

Item 4: Study of MSP Runway 12L and 12R ArrivalsM

ET

HO

DO

LOG

Y Collectively designed study objective and scope with residents.

Data analyzed from 2004 and 2013 through July 2016.

The following concerns were identified and evaluated:• Volume of arrival activity• Late-night and early-morning arrival activity• Arrival aircraft altitude trends• Frequency of arrival flights throughout the day• Arrival path changes

FIN

DIN

GS

• Increased arrival activity on Runways 12L and 12R between

2013 and 2015, although total number of arrivals to these

runways are lower than 2004

• Two factors leading to increases: southerly winds and new

separation standards for Converging Runway Operations

• Increased late-night and early-morning arrival activity

• There are peaks and valleys of activity throughout the day

• The peak hour of arrival activity occurs during the evening

• No substantive changes were found in aircraft altitudes

• Some spatial variations exist for flight segments prior to final

approach as a result of Area Navigation (RNAV) arrival

procedures

FIN

DIN

GS

Item 4: Study of MSP Runway 12L and 12R Arrivals

59

,72

0

40

,39

9

38

,66

4

45

,49

6

27

,79

0

58

,42

5

41

,92

1

41

,49

6

50

,88

8

32

,05

6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

2004 2013 2014 2015 2016*

AR

RIV

AL

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

AR

RIV

AL

OP

ER

AT

ION

S

RUNWAY 12L AND 12R ARRIVAL USAGERUNWAY 12L RUNWAY 12R

1,5

46

1,7

06

1,9

23 2

,90

6

1,7

132

,60

7 3,6

08

4,1

38 4,8

81

3,1

02

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2004 2013 2014 2015 2016*

AR

RIV

AL

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

NIG

HT

TIM

E A

RR

IVA

L O

PE

RA

TIO

NS

RUNWAY 12L AND 12R NIGHTTIME ARRIVAL USAGERUNWAY 12L RUNWAY 12R

OPERATIONS


0

2

4

6

8

1 0

1 2

1 4

1 6

1 8

2 0

2 2

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

2 0 0 4 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

DA

YS

IN

SO

UT

H F

LO

W

DAYS IN A SOUTH OR STRAIGHT SOUTH FLOW

M A X C O N S E C U T I V E D A Y S T O T A L D A Y S

* * C O U N T S I N C L U D E D A Y S W H E R E S O U T H F L O W O R S T R A I G H T S O U T H F L O W W A S U S E D M O R E T H A N 8 H O U R S

SOUTH FLOW DAYS


143 145153

184

116

173

210198

161

84

8 717 12

0

50

100

150

200

250

2004 2013 2014 2015 2016*

FLO

W D

AY

S

MSP RUNWAY CONFIGURATION FLOW DAYS

SOUTH NORTH MIXED A

* * N O R T H D E P I C T S B O T H N O R T H F L O W A N D S T R A I G H T N O R T H F L O W D A Y S* * S O U T H D E P I C T S B O T H S O U T H F L O W A N D S T R A I G H T S O U T H F L O W D A Y S

* * C O U N T S I N C L U D E D A Y S W H E R E T H E D O M I N A N T F L O W W A S U S E D A T L E A S T 8 H O U R S

SOUTH FLOW DAYS


0

2 5 0

5 0 0

7 5 0

1 , 0 0 0

1 , 2 5 0

1 , 5 0 0

1 , 7 5 0

2 , 0 0 0

2 , 2 5 0

2 , 5 0 0

J M M J S N F A J A O D F A J A O D F A J A O D F A J

2 0 0 4 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

AL

TIT

UD

E (

FF

ET

)

12R AVERAGE ARRIVAL ALTITUDE

2 M I L E S 4 M I L E S 6 M I L E S 8 M I L E S

0

2 5 0

5 0 0

7 5 0

1 , 0 0 0

1 , 2 5 0

1 , 5 0 0

1 , 7 5 0

2 , 0 0 0

2 , 2 5 0

2 , 5 0 0

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J

2 0 0 4 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

12L AVERAGE ARRIVAL ALTITUDE

2 M I L E S 4 M I L E S 6 M I L E S 8 M I L E S

ALTITUDE


TYPICAL SOUTH FLOW DAY

3.7

1.8

0.9

0.9

1.4

10

.1

12

.6

31

.8 38

.4

49

.3

47

.2

39

.1

42

.5

51

.3

40

.4

51

.0

45

.4

58

.7

39

.1

49

.2

46

.8

25

.6

11

.0

8.0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

MS

P A

RR

IVA

L O

PE

RA

TIO

NS

AVERAGE SOUTH FLOW ARRIVAL DAY IN 200412L 12R

4.4

1.3

0.9

1.2 2.3

10

.0

7.0

24

.3

40

.7

28

.1 36

.0

22

.3

34

.6

47

.9

31

.1

25

.6

49

.6

28

.0

54

.5

21

.8

38

.8

14

.0

13

.7

13

.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

MS

P A

RR

IVA

L O

PE

RA

TIO

NS


6.2

2.4

1.4

1.4 3.1

12

.5

7.4

33

.2 39

.6

23

.9

33

.3

22

.2

34

.2 41

.4

32

.9

20

.8

50

.1

25

.5

59

.1

24

.2

36

.3

18

.9

12

.1 17

.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

MS

P A

RR

IVA

L O

PE

RA

TIO

NS



MSP WIND CONDITIONS

Percent of Time Wind

Favored these 2004 2013 2014 2015 2016

South Flow 39.6 38.5 38.7 42.5 41.2

North Flow 44.5 43.7 47.4 42.3 43.3

Calm 8.3 9.8 7.5 7.4 7.5

Crosswind 7.5 8.0 6.4 7.8 8.0

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

8 0 %

9 0 %

1 0 0 %

2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 *

PE

RC

EN

T O

F T

IME

RUNWAY CONFIGURATION WHEN WINDS FAVOR SOUTH FLOW

S O U T H F L O W N O R T H F L O W M I X E D

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

8 0 %

9 0 %

1 0 0 %

2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 *

PE

RC

EN

T O

F T

IME

RUNWAY CONFIGURATION WHEN WINDS FAVOR NORTH FLOW

S O U T H F L O W N O R T H F L O W M I X E D


MSP WIND CONDITIONS

Percent of Time Wind

Favored these 2004 2013 2014 2015 2016

South Flow 39.6 38.5 38.7 42.5 41.2

North Flow 44.5 43.7 47.4 42.3 43.3

Calm 8.3 9.8 7.5 7.4 7.5

Crosswind 7.5 8.0 6.4 7.8 8.0

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

2013 2014 2015 2016*

PE

RC

EN

T O

F T

IME

RUNWAY CONFIGURATION DURING CROSSWINDS

SOUTH FLOW NORTH FLOW

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

2013 2014 2015 2016*

PE

RC

EN

T O

F T

IME

RUNWAY CONFIGURATION WHEN WINDS ARE CALM OR LIGHT

SOUTH FLOW NORTH FLOW


MSP AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV)

Item 5: Update on the Impacts of Converging Runway Operations (CRO)


Federal AviationAdministration

44September 21, 2016

MSP NOC Presentation

MSP ranked 16th busiest airport in the nation with over 400,000 operations per year.

Air Traffic Control primary duty is to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic to MSP and the surrounding airspace.

Safe – Ensuring aircraft separation and system safety in the air and on the ground

Orderly – Applying air traffic control rules to ensure system integrity –which in turn supports safety

Expeditious – Maintaining an efficient throughput of arrivals and departures, keeping demand and capacity in balance – again, this in turn supports safety

Noise Considerations - RUS Utilization






MSP NOC Presentation46

Arrival Departure Window (ADW)

Depicted on radar maps to assist

controllers with departure decision

making criteria




Rwy 30L

“ADW”




Rwy 30L

“ADW”




Land 30s & 35 Depart 30s




Land 30s Depart 30s




Land 12s Depart 12s and 17




Land 30s Depart 30s & 17




Land 35 Depart 12s




Item 6: Update on Turboprop Departures over Mendota Heights


Item 7: NextGen Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) Amendment Update


Environmental Process for MSP Arrival

Procedure Amendments

September 21, 2016

Agenda

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)• FAA environmental process• Process and status of environmental review for arrival

procedure amendments

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)

• Broad national policy to protect and enhance the quality of the human environment

• Requires Federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of their proposed actions prior to finalizing decisions

• Requires Federal agencies adopt their own procedures to supplement the regulations

FAA Environmental Policy

• FAA Order 1050.1F Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures Order 7400.2K Procedures for Handling Airspace

Matters • Describes how the FAA is to implement NEPA

specifically for FAA actions• Defines impact categories that require analysis

Sets thresholds of significant levels

Typical Environmental Process

MSP Arrival Procedure Amendments

Environmental Review

• Air Traffic Initial Environmental Review (IER) Appendix 5 from Order 7400.2K Considers Extraordinary Circumstances Ensures NEPA compliance

• Noise Screen Looks at the possible change in noise from current conditions

Noise Screen Methodology

• 28 days of radar track data were selected for the MSP analysis

June 14 -20, 2015October 18 - 24, 2015

December 13 - 19, 2015March 13 - 19, 2016

• Aircraft fleet mix• Day/night traffic ratios• Lowest point of an altitude range was used

Noise Screen Methodology

• Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) Baseline and Alternative tracks are run for comparison Produces three outputs

• Baseline noise exposure• Alternative noise exposure• Noise impact

Environmental Findings

• Completed the IER and Noise Screen No extraordinary circumstances identified No significant or reportable noise identified

• Significant if 1.5 dB increase at the DNL 65 dB noise exposure level

• Qualifies for a CatEx under 5-6.5 i Air traffic control procedures conducted at or above 3,000 feet

AGL

Final Environmental Steps

• Categorical Exclusion package sent to Central Service Center for signature by the Director

• Available to the public

Thank you!

Item 8: Runway Use System (RUS) EvaluationNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

The 2016 NOC Work Plan includes an item to evaluate the use of the FAA Runway Use System (RUS).

The RUS prioritizes arrival and departure runways to promote flight activity over less-populated residential areas as much as possible.

Item 8: Runway Use System (RUS) Evaluation

DEPARTURESRUNWAYS 12L AND 12RRUNWAY 17BALANCED USE OF RUNWAY 4/22RUNWAYS 30L AND 30R

ARRIVALSRUNWAYS 30L AND 30RRUNWAY 35BALANCED USE OF RUNWAY 4/22RUNWAYS 12L AND 12R

Runway Use System (2005-present)5 4 . 8 % 5 4 . 2 % 5 4 . 1 %

5 4 . 3 %

3 0 %

3 5 %

4 0 %

4 5 %

5 0 %

5 5 %

6 0 %

0

5 , 0 0 0

1 0 , 0 0 0

1 5 , 0 0 0

2 0 , 0 0 0

2 5 , 0 0 0

3 0 , 0 0 0

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

RU

S P

ER

CE

NT

AG

E

HIG

H P

RIO

RIT

Y R

UN

WA

Y O

PE

RA

TIO

NS

USE OF RUS HIGH-PRIORITY RUNWAYS

R U S O P E R A T I O N S R U S P E R C E N T


OPPOSITE FLOW

Maximizes RUS, however is used sparingly due to safety and capacity considerations.

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

HO

UR

S I

N O

PP

OS

ITE

CO

NF

IGU

RA

TIN

ON

HOW OFTEN IS THE AIRPORT IN AN OPPOSITE FLOW CONFIGURATION?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

CO

UN

T O

F H

OU

RS

IN O

PP

OSI

TE F

LOW

HOUR

WHEN IS THE AIRPORT IN AN OPPOSITE FLOW CONFIGURATION?Jan-August 2016


MIXED FLOW A

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

AU

G

SE

P

OC

T

NO

V

DE

C

JAN

FE

B

MA

R

AP

R

MA

Y

JUN

JUL

2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

HO

UR

S I

N M

IXE

D A

CO

NF

IGU

RA

TIN

ON

HOW OFTEN IS THE AIRPORT IN A 'MIXED A' CONFIGURATION?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

CO

UN

T O

F H

OU

RS

IN A

MIX

ED A

HOUR

WHEN IS THE AIRPORT IN A 'MIXED A' CONFIGURATION?Jan-August 2016

Utilizes the top arrival runway priority (30L and 30R) and the 2nd departure runway priority (17) with limited departures on Runways 30L and 30R.

Item 9: Consent Decree Amendment UpdateNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

In May 2015, the FAA replaced the Integrated Noise Model (INM) with the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT).

Section 8.1(d) of the 2007 Consent Decree states:“By March 1 of each year, MAC shall develop and make available to the public a noise contour report using the FAA’s Integrated Noise Model to reflect noise conditions for the prior calendar year…”

MAC staff is working with the parties of the Consent Decree to update the language to allow the use of the FAA-approved noise modeling software.

Item 10: Draft 2017 NOC Work PlanNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

Item 10: Draft 2017 NOC Work Plan

1. Review Residential Noise Mitigation Program2. MSP Noise Program Specific Efforts

a) 2016 Actual Noise Contour Report and First Amendment to the Consent Decree Noise Mitigation Program Eligibility

b) NextGen Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) Amendments Update

c) Investigate Noise-Reducing Landscaping Optionsd) Quantify Noise Reduction Benefits of Vortex

Generators on Airbus Aircraft Arrivals at MSPe) Evaluate Distant Noise Abatement Departure Profile

(NADP) Use at MSPf) Update on the FAA’s Survey to Re-Evaluate Noise

Measurement Methodsg) Develop a New or Append an Existing Monthly Report

h) to Evaluate the Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Turboprop Activity

i) Evaluate Steeper Glide Slopes for Aircraft Arrivalsj) Noise Program Communication Enhancement Plan

Implementationk) Improve MAC Noise and Operations Monitoring

System (MACNOMS) for Better User Experiencel) Annual MSP Nighttime Operations Assessmentm) Annual MSP Fleet Mix Assessmentn) Status of FAA Center of Excellence/ASCENT, TRB and

FICAN Initiatives

o) Consider/Evaluate a Fly Quiet Award Program to Reward MSP Aircraft Operators who Actively Participate in Noise Reduction Efforts

3. Continue to Review Input Received from Public Input Meetings as Possible Agenda Items

Item 11: Review of July 27, 2016 Public Input MeetingNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

On July 27, 2016 MAC Noise Program Office staff conducted the 3rd

Quarter 2016 Public Input Meeting.

One resident attended the meeting and also submitted the Public InputMeeting website form.

MAC staff had a focused discussion with the resident covering informationabout the FAA’s decision-making and consideration of community impactfrom aircraft overflights and the difference between the impact on thecommunity from MSP and from Denver International Airport.

Representatives from the FAA and the airlines were in attendance andjoined in the discussion.

While the questions were answered in person, staff also responded inwriting and posted them on the website under For Our Neighbors – PublicInput Meetings.

The next quarterly public input meeting will be October 26,2016, 7:00 p.m., at the MAC General Offices – LindberghRoom

Item 12: Public CommentNOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEESEPTEMBER 21, 2016

Item 13: Announcements

Next NOC meeting

November 16, 2016 @ 1:30 PM

MAC General Offices – Lindbergh Room

4th Quarter Public Input Meeting

October 26, 2016 @ 7:00 PM

MAC General Offices – Lindbergh Room


Documents

NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 21, 2016 · 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 ... 30r, and 35 9,640 25.45% departures on 12l, ... noise oversight committee september 21, 2016