AMB NFPMS Report - Department of Defence
[pic]
Department of
Defence
| |
|RAAF Base Amberley |
|NOISE AND FLIGHT PATH MONITORING SYSTEM |
|Q4 2012 REPORT |
| |
Disclaimer
This report contains a summary of data collected over the specified period and is intended to convey the best information available from the NFPMS at the time. The system databases are to some extent dependent upon external sources and errors may occur. All care is taken in preparation of the report but its complete accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The Department of Defence and the NFPMS project contractors do not accept any legal liability for any losses arising from reliance upon data in this report which may be found to be inaccurate.
The NFPMS does not provide “Aircraft noise levels” as defined in AS2021-2000.
Department Of Defence
RAAF Base Amberley – Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System
Q4 2012 Report
DOCUMENT CONTROL PAGE
Production (GHD Pty Ltd):
|Version |Author/Editor |Format/Layout |Proofing |Released by |Date |
| | | | | | |
Technical Content Validation (as applicable):
|Version |GHD Pty Ltd |Date |Bruel & Kjaer EMS (Australia)|Date |
| | | |Pty Ltd | |
|1.0 |G. Bennett |1 Oct 2013 | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Final Validation (Bruel & Kjaer EMS (Australia) Pty Ltd):
|Version |Editing |Proofing |Content |Released by |Date |
| | | | | | |
DoD − Acceptance:
|Final Version |Project Manager |Date |
| | | |
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
RAAF Base Amberley
Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System
Q4 2012 REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Defence has engaged Brüel & Kjær (Australia) Pty Ltd to install, maintain and operate a Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System (NFPMS) at RAAF Base Amberley, Queensland. The aim of the NFPMS project is to provide Defence and the local community with easily understandable information about aircraft noise associated with military operations. This report provides detailed information on the aircraft movements and aircraft noise events recorded by the automated NFPMS during Quarter 4 2012.
Aircraft Activity in Quarter 4 2012
The report shows that aircraft activity during Quarter 4 2012 was lower than the previous quarter, with a total of 3,159 movements being recorded. Of these, the NFPMS recorded 724 arrivals, 711 departures and 1,724 circuit movements. Runway 15 was the dominant runway accounting for 50.4% of arrivals, 52.3% of departures and 49.5% of the circuit movements. Runway 22 was the least used runway accounting for 0.7% of the total movements.
The chart to the right shows the movements on each runway and helipad during Quarter 4.
Aircraft Noise in Quarter 4 2012
Aircraft noise recorded by the NFPMS in Quarter 4 2012 was consistent with that generated by military aircraft in previous quarters. As expected, the Noise Monitors Terminal (NMT) closest to the runway (Yamanto) recorded the highest number of noise events and, therefore, the most total aircraft noise energy across the period.
The table below outlines key noise indicators recorded at each noise monitoring terminal:
|NMT: |Quarterly Average |N70 |
|Willowbank Cemetery |54.7 dB(A) |6.7 /day |
|Kholo Gardens |38.9 dB(A) |0.6 /day |
|Walloon State School |49.5 dB(A) |6.7 /day |
|Yamanto COC |57.1 dB(A) |9.5 /day |
BLANK PAGE
RAAF Base Amberley
NOISE AND FLIGHT PATH MONITORING SYSTEM
Q4 2012 REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
Executive Summary v
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RAAF Base Amberley Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System 1
1.2 RAAF Base Amberley 1
1.3 The NFPMS Components 9
2. Aircraft Operations 13
2.1 Aircraft Movements 13
2.2 Aircraft Flight Tracks 17
3. Assessment of Aircraft Noise 65
3.1 Introduction to Aircraft Noise 65
3.2 Factors Affecting the Propagation of Aircraft Noise 69
3.3 Noise Environment at RAAF Base Amberley 71
ANNEXES
A. Glossary
B. Aircraft Movement Details
C. Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise
LIST OF FIGURES PAGE
Figure 1 – Regional Location Plan 3
Figure 2 – Runway Layout and Base Environs 7
Figure 3 – NFPMS Components 9
Figure 4 – A Community Based NMT 10
Figure 5 – Aircraft Movements by Category – Quarter 4 2012 14
Figure 6 – Runway Usage – Quarter 4 2012 16
Figure 7 – Track Density Plot – All Aircraft Movements – Quarter 4 2012 17
Figure 8 – Aircraft Flight Tracks – All Aircraft Flight Tracks – Quarter 4 2012 19
Figure 9 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 15 23
Figure 10 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 33 27
Figure 11 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 04/22 31
Figure 12 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 15 35
Figure 13 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 33 39
Figure 14 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 04/22 43
Figure 15 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 15 47
Figure 16 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 33 51
Figure 17 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 04 55
Figure 18 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 22 59
Figure 19 – Helicopter Flight Tracks – all Runways 63
Figure 20 - NMT Location Plan 73
LIST OF TABLES PAGE
Table 1 – Aircraft Movements by Category – Quarter 4 2012 13
Table 2 – Quarterly Aircraft Movements by Category 15
Table 3 – Runway Usage – Quarter 4 2012 16
Table 4 – Average 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise – Quarter 4 2012 75
Table 5 – Annual Average 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise 75
Acronyms
|Acronym/Term |Definition |
|1SQN |No. 1 Squadron Royal Australian Air Force |
|6SQN |No. 6 Squadron Royal Australian Air Force |
|33SQN |No. 33 Squadron Royal Australian Air Force |
|36SQN |No. 36 Squadron Royal Australian Air Force |
|ACG |Air Combat Group |
|ADF |Australian Defence Force |
|AFDW |Airfield Defence Wing |
|AGL |Above ground Level |
|ALG |Air Lift Group |
|AMB |RAAF Base Amberley |
|AMB NFPMS |RAAF Base Amberley Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System |
|AMSL |Above Mean Sea Level |
|ANEC |Australian Noise Exposure Concept |
|ANEF |Australian Noise Exposure Forecast |
|ANEI |Australian Noise Exposure Index |
|ANOMS 8 |Airport Noise and Operations Management System 8 |
|ARP |Aerodrome Reference Point |
|B&K |Brüel & Kjær EMS (Australia) Pty Ltd |
|dB |Decibels |
|dB(A) |Decibels with A-weighting |
|DNL |Day Night Average Sound Level |
|EPNL |Effective Perceived Noise Level |
|GHD |GHD Pty. Ltd |
|IFR |Instrument Flight Rules |
|ILS |Instrument Landing System |
|INM |Integrated Noise Model |
|LAeq |Equivalent A – weighted noise level |
|LAmax |Maximum A – weighted sound pressure level |
|LTFW |Light Tactical Fixed Wing aircraft |
|NA |Number Above |
|NEF |Noise Exposure Forecast |
|NFPMS |Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System |
|NMT |Noise Monitoring Terminal |
|SEL |Sound Exposure Level |
|SPL |Sound Pressure Level |
|SRG |Surveillance and Response Group |
|SSR |Secondary Surveillance Radar |
|TAAATS |The Australian Advanced Air Traffic System |
|TACAN |Tactical Air Navigation |
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
INTRODUCTION
1 RAAF Base Amberley Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System
1 The objective of the RAAF Base Amberley Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System (AMB NFPMS) project is to monitor and record flight information and the noise levels of aircraft operations. The system provides detailed information on aircraft noise events and assists the Department of Defence (Defence) to communicate details of the flying activities to the community.
2 In July 2008, Defence engaged Brüel & Kjær EMS (Australia) Pty Ltd (B&K) as the prime contractor to install, maintain and operate a noise and flight path monitoring system at RAAF Base Amberley, Queensland. B&K EMS has engaged GHD Pty Ltd (GHD) as sub-consultants to provide technical services and advice.
3 This report details the aircraft operations, flight paths and noise recorded by the community-based Noise Monitoring Terminal (NMT) locations for the period 1 October to 31 December 2012. Consistent with the reporting of aircraft noise at other Australian Airports, the report includes the 24 hour LAeq and LAmax values. The N70 and N85 average daily values are also reported.
2 RAAF Base Amberley
Location
1 RAAF Base Amberley is located within the boundaries of the City of Ipswich at the western edge of the Brisbane Metropolitan Area. Ipswich is the pre-eminent centre within South East Queensland's western growth corridor and is situated approximately 90 km east of Toowoomba and 40 km south-west of Brisbane. As illustrated Figure 1 – Regional Location Plan, the Base is situated adjacent to the Cunningham Highway within the boundaries of the City of Ipswich (population of 154,153 in 2008). RAAF Base Amberley is situated immediately to the west of the suburbs of Leichhardt, Churchill, Yamanto and Loamside and to the south of the Township of Walloon. The townships of Rosewood, Thagoona, Jeebropilly, Ebenezer and Willowbank are to the west of the Base.
2 The main Base occupies an area of approximately 1,660 ha forming approximately seven percent of the City’s developed area. A series of attached properties support operations at the Base and expands the total Defence properties in the area to approximately 2,550 ha.
Use and Activity
3 The primary role of RAAF Base Amberley is to be the home base and to provide full operational and maintenance support for the precision strike element of the Air Combat Group (ACG) and the strategic airlift elements of the Air Lift Group (ALG). The following squadrons are based at RAAF Base Amberley:
a. No. 1 Squadron (1SQN) operating Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft
a. No. 6 Squadron (6SQN) operating Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft
b. No. 36 Squadron (36SQN) operates 6 Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft
c. No. 33 Squadron (33SQN) who will soon be operating the KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft
4 RAAF Base Amberley is staffed by over 4,000 personnel, including ADF members, civilian Defence employees and civilian contractors. RAAF Base Amberley contributes 5,164 direct and indirect jobs and $487.1 million to the Queensland economy (SGS Economics & Planning, June 2008, The Economic Contribution of Five Defence Air Bases).
INSERT
Figure 1 – Regional Location Plan
BLANK PAGE
6 RAAF Base Amberley also supports operations by ADF Military aircraft from other Bases as well as Foreign Military Aircraft. Visiting Military Aircraft to RAAF Base Amberley may include the following:
a. Lockheed AP-3C Orion
b. Boeing B737 Wedgetail (AEW&C)
c. Boeing B737 Business Jet (BBJ)
d. Beechcraft King Air 350
e. Sikorsky UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopter
f. Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules
g. Boeing C-17A Globemaster
h. Airbus KC-30A MRRT
i. Bombardier CL604 Challenger
j. General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon
k. Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet
l. BAE Systems Hawk Mk127
m. Bell OH-58 Kiowa Helicopter
n. MRH-90 Multi Role Helicopter
o. Pilatus PC-9/A
p. ARH (Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter) Tiger
7 Details on the above aircraft are available on the Defence website (.au).
8 The Base also supports periodic short term deployments by overseas military forces and operations by civil aircraft.
9 The aircraft movements in this report are categorised as follows:
a. Military Jet
i) Military Fast Jet
ii) Military Other Jet
b. Military Propeller
c. Military Helicopter
d. Civil Jet
i) Civil Heavy Jet
ii) Civil Medium Jet
iii) Civil Light Jet
e. Civil Propeller
i) Civil Medium Propeller
ii) Civil Light Propeller
f. Civil Helicopters
g. Unknown.
10 The unknown aircraft type’s movements are those which occur when no record of the details of the aircraft type is recorded, although the NFPMS records the flight track and associated aircraft noise.
Runway Layout
11 Figure 2 – Runway Layout and Base Environs, illustrates that RAAF Base Amberley has a dual runway configuration with the main runway orientated in the 1480 Magnetic direction. The cross runway is orientated in the 430 Magnetic direction. The main runway is 3,048 metres long and 45 metres wide and can support all the current operations. The cross runway is 1,524 metres long and 45 metres wide and has limited capabilities.
12 Figure 2 also illustrates the orientation of the runways in relation to the surrounding environs. The use of each runway is dependent on the wind direction at the time and other operational considerations. When Runway 15 is used, aircraft will approach from the north-west and depart to the south-east. Similarly when Runway 33 is used, aircraft will approach from the south-east and depart to the north-west. When Runway 04 is used, aircraft will arrive from the south-west and depart to the north-east over Ipswich. When Runway 22 is used, aircraft will arrive from the north-east over Ipswich and depart to the south-west.
13 At present, the cross runway is mainly used for training of C-17A Globemaster pilots on short runway techniques and for operations of light aircraft in cross wind conditions. During bombing camps, the cross runway is used as an Ordnance Loading Area (OLA) and at that time is not available for use as a runway.
14 The Base is located at 91 feet (28 metres) Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL).
INSERT
Figure 2 – Runway Layout and Base Environs
BLANK PAGE
3 The NFPMS Components
1 The Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System (NFPMS) is a state of the art automated system which is installed, maintained and operated by B&K. The purpose of the NFPMS is to monitor record and report on the noise exposure from aircraft operations on the community in the vicinity of the Base or associated flying training areas. The NFPMS utilises permanent noise monitoring stations on the Base and temporary noise monitoring stations in the community. The system collects data on aircraft operations associated with the Base and reports the noise exposure at particular locations in the community.
2 Through the air traffic control radar system, the NFPMS acquires flight track data and operational information on aircraft operating in and out of the airfield and within a defined radius of the airfield.
3 The NFPMS provides Defence with the ability to capture data on the aircraft operations (arrivals/departures/circuits), flight tracks and aircraft noise events.
4 The NFPMS is made up of a number of components, including:
a. Noise Monitoring Terminals (NMTs)
b. Flight Operations Interface
c. Radar Data Logger
d. ANOMS 8 Data Server
5 Figure 3 shows the components of the NFPMS and their relationships.
Figure 3 – NFPMS Components
[pic]
Noise Monitoring Terminals
6 NMTs are self-contained, robust, unattended noise data monitoring terminals, designed for remote installation in all weather environments. NMTs can be deployed in either a fixed (permanent) or portable configuration. NMTs collect noise data, store it for extended periods, as well as transmitting it via wireless technology to central processing systems for further analysis. The recording zone around each NMT will vary according to the noise signature of the aircraft type, configuration, altitude, speed and environmental conditions. NMTs can be mains or solar powered and only require periodic maintenance.
7 An example of a portable community based NMT is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4 – A Community Based NMT
[pic]
Flight Operations Interface
8 The NFPMS includes a Flight Operations Interface which can be used to enter details of aircraft types, call signs, etc. from the Airservices Australia’s The Australian Advanced Air Traffic System (TAAATS) and/or directly from the Air Traffic Control (ATC) flight strips. This data is used to identify the aircraft type for each flight track.
Radar Data Logger
9 Flight Track information is collected through the Radar Data Logger. The Radar Data Logger continuously batches radar data and securely transmits it to the ANOMS 8 server over an encrypted virtual private network (VPN) via the internet. The Radar Data Logger has the ability to filter and/or delay the transmission of radar data and has been designed to meet US FAA security requirements.
ANOMS 8
10 ANOMS 8 is the heart of NFPMS. ANOMS 8 supports and integrates a range of data sources, including the NMTs noise data, radar plots and aircraft movement data to create a comprehensive view of airfield operations and the noise environment. ANOMS 8 allows the operator to comprehensively analyse the recorded aircraft noise events, generate standard reports and present that data. ANOMS 8 complies with the specifications set out in ICAO Annex 16, Environmental Protection, and complies with all international aircraft noise measurement standards.
Limitations of the NFPMS
11 As with any remote monitoring system, the NFPMS has some limitations.
12 A fundamental issue in terms of the identification of an aircraft noise event is the correlation of the noise event recorded by the NMT to an aircraft movement. There are many noise events which occur on a daily basis at NMT locations in the community which are not associated with an aircraft movement. Adjacent motor vehicle movements and bird calls can give rise to noise levels similar to or greater than aircraft operations. As the intent of the NFPMS is to report on the noise contribution of aircraft operations, it is important that noise events are correctly correlated to aircraft movements.
13 During periods of maintenance or power outage at the NMT, no noise events are recorded.
14 Atmospheric conditions such as temperature inversion or high wind conditions can affect the propagation of the aircraft noise so that the noise level at the NMT is reduced to a level where it may not be correlated to an aircraft movement.
15 The flight tracks are collected from radar plots from the Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR). The SSR picks up the position of the aircraft by the transponder return signal transmitted by the aircraft. For operational reasons the transponder may be set to Stand-by during flight, resulting in no record of the aircraft movement or flight track being recorded. In other cases the aircraft may turn so that the transponder faces away from the radar. This could cause the flight track to seemingly suddenly end.
16 In some cases, the flight tracks do not connect exactly on to the runway threshold due the rotation of the radar head and the height of the radar above the airfield often missing some segments of the flight track.
17 Military operations include multiple aircraft formations with as many as four aircraft in a formation. Only the lead aircraft in a formation will have its transponder turned on resulting in only one aircraft noise event being detected. The formation flying will lead to an underestimate of the total aircraft movements being reported by the NFPMS.
18 During periods of radar outage, due to power failure or maintenance, there are no records of aircraft movements.
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Aircraft Operations
1 Aircraft Movements
1 Table 1 details the number of aircraft movements which were identified by the AMB NFPMS by aircraft type. These totals include arrivals, departures and circuit movements.
Table 1 – Aircraft Movements by Category – Quarter 4 2012
| |Aircraft Movements |
|Aircraft Types |October 2012 |November 2012 |December 2012 |Total for the Quarter |
|Military Jet | | | | |
| Military Fast Jet |86 |157 |124 |367 |
| Military Other Jet |266 |268 |108 |642 |
| Military Propeller |89 |90 |22 |201 |
| Military Helicopter |12 |32 |20 |64 |
|Civil Jet | | | | |
| Civil Heavy Jet |37 |0 |0 |37 |
| Civil Medium Jet |9 |4 |0 |13 |
| Civil Light Jet |0 |0 |0 |0 |
|Civil Propeller | | | | |
| Civil Medium Propeller |0 |0 |0 |0 |
| Civil Light Propeller |76 |140 |37 |253 |
| Civil Helicopter |40 |20 |20 |80 |
|Unknown | | | | |
| Fixed Wing |729 |584 |129 |1,442 |
| Helicopter |32 |22 |6 |60 |
|All Aircraft Categories |1,376 |1,317 |466 |3,159 |
2 There were 3,159 recorded aircraft movements at RAAF Base Amberley in Quarter 4 2012. Of the total aircraft movements, 1,274 (40.3 %) were by military aircraft and 383 (12.1%) were by civil aircraft.
3 The NFPMS has been unable to identify the aircraft types responsible for 1,502 (47.6%) of the total aircraft movements. The majority of these movements appear to be civilian light aircraft undertaking flying training when the control tower was not staffed.
4 Figure 5 illustrates the aircraft movements by Category for Quarter 4 2012. A detailed breakdown of movements by aircraft types can be found in Annex B – Aircraft Movement Details.
Figure 5 – Aircraft Movements by Category – Quarter 4 2012
[pic]
5 Table 2 shows a comparison of total (Civil/Military) aircraft movements by aircraft category for the last 4 quarters and the combined total for the 12 months period.
Table 2 – Quarterly Aircraft Movements by Category
| |Aircraft Movements |
|Aircraft Category |Q4 2012 |Q3 2012 |Q2 2012 |Q1 2012 |Rolling 12 Months |
|Military Jet | | | | | |
| Military Fast Jet |367 |1,374 |1,012 |1,069 |3,822 |
| Military Other Jet |642 |987 |973 |519 |3,121 |
|Sub-total: |1,009 |2,361 |1,985 |1,588 |6,943 |
|Military Propeller |201 |307 |172 |139 |819 |
|Military Helicopter |64 |82 |65 |37 |248 |
|Civil Jet | | | | | |
| Civil Heavy Jet |37 |20 |35 |0 |92 |
| Civil Medium Jet |13 |8 |22 |26 |69 |
| Civil Light Jet |0 |0 |1 |0 |1 |
|Sub-total: |50 |28 |58 |26 |162 |
|Civil Propeller | | | | | |
| Civil Medium Propeller |0 |0 |0 |0 |0 |
| Civil Light Propeller |253 |445 |637 |150 |1,485 |
|Sub-total: |253 |445 |637 |150 |1,485 |
|Civil Helicopter |80 |105 |120 |125 |430 |
|Unknown | | | | | |
| Fixed Wing |1,442 |2,334 |1,580 |1,732 |7,088 |
| Helicopter |60 |137 |97 |58 |352 |
|Sub-total: |1,502 |2,471 |1,677 |1,790 |7,440 |
|All Aircraft Categories |3,159 |5,799 |4,714 |3,855 |17,527 |
Runway usage
6 Table 3 shows the aircraft movements by runway during Quarter 4 2012. Circuit operations will create 2 or more movements depending on how many times the aircraft undertakes touch and goes on the runway.
Table 3 – Runway Usage – Quarter 4 2012
|Runway |Arrivals |Departures |Circuit Movements |Total |
|Rwy 04 |27 |9 |204 |240 |
|Rwy 15 |365 |372 |854 |1,591 |
|Rwy 22 |2 |6 |14 |22 |
|Rwy 33 |298 |290 |622 |1,210 |
|H |32 |34 |30 |96 |
|Total |724 |711 |1,724 |3,159 |
[pic]
7 Runway 15 was the dominant runway accounting for 50.4% of arrivals, 52.3% of departures and 49.5% of the circuit movements. Runway 22 was the least used runway accounting for 0.7% of the total movements. Runways 04/22 are primarily used for circuit work by civil aircraft for cross wind training.
8 Runways 15/33 accounted for 88.7% of the aircraft movements, while Runways 04/22 were used for 8.3% of the aircraft movements. The helipads accounted for the remaining 3.0% of the aircraft movements.
9 Figure 6 shows the split of total aircraft movements to runways and helipads.
Figure 6 – Runway Usage – Quarter 4 2012
[pic]
2 Aircraft Flight Tracks
Aircraft Flight Track Density Plot
1 Track density plots are maps of the surrounds of the Base which show the pattern of the aircraft flight tracks. The system analyses the number of aircraft movements which pass over a grid 18 metres by 18 metres. As the density of aircraft flight tracks increase the colour of the flight tracks changes.
2 All Aircraft Movements. Figure 7 – Track Density Plot – All Aircraft Movements shows the track density plot for all aircraft movements for all runways at RAAF Base Amberley during Quarter 4 2012. The track density plot shows the dominance of Runways 15/33 and the shape of the circuit patterns on Runways 15/33.
Figure 7 – Track Density Plot – All Aircraft Movements – Quarter 4 2012
[pic]
Aircraft Flight Tracks Plots
3 Figure 8 – Aircraft Flight Tracks – All Aircraft shows the flight track plots for all aircraft (civil and military) movements at RAAF Base Amberley for the Quarter 4 2012. Arrivals are depicted with red flight tracks, departures with blue flight tracks and circuits with green flight tracks.
4 The majority of the arrivals were from the north and the south while departures were predominately to the south, west, north-west and north.
5 Although difficult to see, circuits appear on both sides of the main runway representing both left and right circuits which were evenly spread. The green tracks to the west were local area movements to the training areas west of the Base but the NFPMS reports these movements as circuits because they commence and end on the same runway.
INSERT
Figure 8 – Aircraft Flight Tracks – All Aircraft Flight Tracks – Quarter 4 2012
BLANK PAGE
Aircraft Arrival Flight Tracks
8 Aircraft arrival flight track plots to Runway 15, Runway 33 and Runway 04/22 for the Quarter 4 2012 period are shown in the following Figures:
a. Figure 9 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 15
b. Figure 10 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 33
c. Figure 11 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 04/22
9 The flight tracks have been colour coded according to the height of the aircraft in feet above the airfield during the aircraft approach at the runway. Red designates an altitude of the aircraft up to 500 feet, orange for an altitude of between 500 and 1,000 feet, yellow for an altitude of between 1,000 and 2,500 feet and light green for an altitude above 2,500 feet. These plots of the flight tracks have been generated from the aircraft movement data recorded during the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
10 Refer to Annex B – Aircraft Movement Details, Table B2 – Aircraft Types – Arrivals – Quarter 4 2012 for details of the aircraft departure movements.
11 Figure 9 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 15 shows that of the total of 365 arrivals to Runway 15, which consisted of 222 arrivals by military aircraft, 16 arrivals by civil aircraft and 127 arrivals by unknown aircraft types. The majority of these arrivals were from the north-east and the south-west, with the balance from the north, south and the south-east.
12 There were 140 initial and pitch approaches and 229 straight-in approaches to Runway 15 (See Reference A, Figure 9).
13 The initial and pitch approaches were conducted by the Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft (78), a BAe Hawk Mk127 and aircraft that had been identified as unknown aircraft types (61). All of these initial and pitch approaches pitched to the western side of Runway 15 (See Reference B, Figure 9). All these arrivals were split between arriving from the south-east, south, west and the north-east.
14 The majority of straight-in approaches by military aircraft were conducted by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft (14), Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft (49), Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft (31), Beechcraft 350 King Air aircraft (12) and Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules aircraft (13). There were another 20 straight in approaches by other military aircraft types and 2 arrivals by military helicopters.
15 The civil aircraft arrivals consisted of 8 arrivals by Boeing 707-330 aircraft, 3 by civil helicopters and 5 arrivals by civil light propeller aircraft. The balance of the unknown aircraft types (66) conducted a straight in approach to Runway 15.
INSERT
Figure 9 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 15
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
17 Figure 10 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 33 shows a total of 298 arrivals to Runway 33, which consisted of 176 arrivals by military aircraft, 11 by civil aircraft and 111 by unknown aircraft types. These aircraft generally arrived from the north-east, south, east, south-east and the west, and a smaller number of arrivals from the north.
18 The arrivals from the north, north-east and east generally tracked to the north of the Base before turning to track along the western side of the base, and then turned left for an approach to Runway 33.
19 There were 127 initial and pitch approaches and 171 straight-in approaches to Runway 33 (See Reference A, Figure 10).
20 The initial and pitch approaches were conducted by the Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft (57), 3 BAe Hawk Mk127 aircraft, a Pilatus PC/9A aircraft and aircraft that had been identified as unknown aircraft types (66). All of these initial and pitch approaches pitched to the western side of Runway 15 (See Reference B, Figure 10). All these arrivals were split between arriving from the west and the north-east, with a small number arriving from the south and south-east.
21 The majority of straight-in approaches by military aircraft were conducted by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft (8), Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft (21), Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft (21), Beechcraft 350 King Air aircraft (31) and Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules aircraft (13) and Boeing 737 AEW&CC/BBJ aircraft (5). There were another 14 straight in approaches by other military aircraft types and 2 arrivals by military helicopters.
22 The civil aircraft arrivals consisted of 8 arrivals by Boeing 707-330 aircraft and 3 by civil light propeller aircraft. The balance of the unknown aircraft types (45) conducted a straight in approach to Runway 33.
INSERT
Figure 10 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 33
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
23 Figure 11 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 04/22 shows a total of 27 arrivals to Runway 04 and a total of 2 to Runway 22. Of the 27 arrivals to Runway 04, the majority of the aircraft arrived from the west with a small numbers from the east and the south-east.
24 There were no arrivals by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet or Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft to Runways 04 or 22.
25 There were 1 arrival each by a Pilatus PC-9/A aircraft and a UH-60 Black/Sea Hawk helicopter and 2 arrivals by civil light propeller aircrafts to Runway 04. There were also 23 arrivals by unknown aircraft types to Runway 04.
26 There was an arrival by a Beechcraft 350 King Air aircraft and a civil light propeller aircraft to Runway 22. There were no arrivals by unknown aircraft types to Runway 22.
INSERT
Figure 11 – Flight Tracks for Arrivals to Runway 04/22
BLANK PAGE
Aircraft Departure Flight Tracks
29 Aircraft departure flight track plots from Runway 15, Runway 33 and Runway 04/22 for the Quarter 4 2012 period are shown in the following Figures:
a. Figure 12 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 15
b. Figure 13 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 33
c. Figure 14 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 04/22
30 These flight tracks have been colour coded according to the height of the aircraft in feet above the airfield during the aircraft departure from a runway. Red designates an altitude of the aircraft up to 500 feet, orange for an altitude between 500 and 1,000 feet, yellow for an altitude of between 1,000 and 2,500 feet and light green for an altitude above 2,500 feet. These plots of the flight tracks have been generated from the aircraft movement data recorded during the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
31 Refer to Annex B – Aircraft Movement Details, Table B3 – Aircraft Types – Departures – Quarter 4 2012 for details of the aircraft departure movements.
32 Figure 12 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 15 shows a total of 372 departures from Runway 15, which consisted of 244 departures by military aircraft, 16 by civil aircraft and 112 by unknown aircraft types. The majority of the aircraft departures were split between departures to the south, west and the north. The remaining departures were to the south-east and north-west.
33 The departures to the south generally maintained runway heading (See Reference A, Figure 12) or undertook a right-hand turn (See Reference B, Figure 12) and exited the area.
34 The departures to the west generally turned and tracked over the areas of Willowbank and Purga when exiting the area (See Reference C, Figure 12).
35 The departures to the north-east, after take-off from Runway 15, either turned right and overflew Thagoona and Walloon when tracking to their destination (See Reference D, Figure 12) or turned left and overflew the suburbs of Ipswich to track to their destination (See Reference E, Figure 12).
36 There were 89 departures by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft, of which 51 departed to the west, 19 to the north, 8 to the east and 11 to the south and south-east. There were also 51 departures by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft that tracked to the south, north-west and north-east.
37 There were also 25 departures by Beechcraft 350 Super King Air aircraft, 16 by Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules, 44 by Airbus KC-30A MRRT and 6 departures by Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ aircraft. There were also 12 departures by other military aircraft and 1 departure by a military helicopter.
38 The civil aircraft departures consisted of 7 by Boeing 707-300 aircraft, 5 by civil medium jet, 2 by civil light propeller and 2 civil helicopters.
INSERT
Figure 12 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 15
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
39 Figure 13 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 33 shows a total of 290 departures from Runway 33, which consisted of 171 departures by military aircraft, 14 by civil aircraft and 105 by unknown aircraft types. The majority of the aircraft departures were to the north, north-west, west and to the south. The remaining departures were mainly to the east and south-east.
40 The departures to the north and north-east either maintained runway heading or turned and tracked in a north-easterly direction, overflying the areas of Ironbark, Blacksoil and Pine Mountain (See References A and B, Figure 13).
41 The departures to the west generally tracked over the areas of Haigslea and Mount Marrow, before exiting the local area (See Reference C, Figure 13).
42 There were 62 departures by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft, of which 26 departed to the west, 19 to the north, 4 to the east and 13 to the south and south-east. There were also 33 departures by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft that tracked to the south, north-west, north-east, east and west.
43 There were also 10 departures by Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft, 12 by Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ aircraft, 13 by Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules and 18 departures by Beechcraft 350 King Air aircraft from Runway 33 during this quarter. There were also 18 departures by other military aircraft and 5 departures by a military helicopter.
44 The civil aircraft departures consisted of 11 by Boeing 707-300 aircraft, 1 by civil medium jet and 2 civil helicopters.
INSERT
Figure 13 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 33
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
47 Figure 14 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 04/22 shows a total of 9 departures from Runway 04 and 6 departures from Runway 22. The majority of the aircraft departed to the east and south-east.
48 The departures to the east from Runway 04 generally overflew the suburbs of Ipswich to exit the local area (See Reference A, Figure 14).
49 There were no departures by F/A-18F from Runways 04 or 22 and 2 departures by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft from Runway 22 during the Quarter 4 reporting period.
50 There were 2 departures by other military aircraft and 7 departures by unknown aircraft types from Runway 04. There were 3 departures by other military aircraft and 1 departures by an unknown aircraft types from Runway 22.
INSERT
Figure 14 – Flight Tracks for Departures from Runway 04/22
BLANK PAGE
Circuit Flight Tracks
52 Aircraft circuit flight track plots from Runway 15, Runway 33, Runway 04, and Runway 22 for the Quarter 4 2012 period are shown in the following Figures:
a. Figure 15 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 15
b. Figure 16 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 33
c. Figure 17 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 04
d. Figure 18 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 22
53 These flight tracks have been colour coded according to the height of the aircraft in feet above the airfield as the aircraft undertakes the circuit training. Red designates an altitude of the aircraft up to 500 feet, orange for an altitude between 500 and 1,000 feet, yellow for an altitude between 1,000 and 2,500 feet and light green for an altitude above 2,500 feet. These plots of the flight tracks have been generated from the aircraft movement data recorded during the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
54 The aircraft undertaking circuit training fly at a height of 1,500 feet. There were a significant number of circuit movements by unknown aircraft types during the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period. Many movements would have been by civilian aircraft undertaking flying training, including during periods when the control tower was not staffed.
55 The circuit flight track plots also include local area flying training as the NFPMS records these flights of a complete arriving and departure operation as a circuit.
56 Refer to Annex B – Aircraft Movement Details, Table B4 – Aircraft Types – Circuit Movements – Quarter 4 2012 for details of the aircraft circuit movements.
57 Figure 15 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 15 shows the flight tracks of the 854 recorded aircraft circuits on Runway 15 at RAAF Base Amberley, which consisted of 194 circuits flown by military aircraft, 240 by civil aircraft and 420 by unknown aircraft types. Figure 15 also shows the flight tracks of training flights that have also conducted a circuit during their flight at RAAF Base Amberley which the NFPMS has classified this flight as a circuit.
58 There were 28 circuits flown by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft on Runway 15 during the quarter. These were all right-hand circuits that tracked on the western side of the Base (See Reference A, Figure 15), some of which included a training segment in their flight.
59 There were 78 circuits flown by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft on Runway 15, 13 circuits by Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft and 37 by Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ aircraft. There were also 8 circuits flown by other military aircraft and 30 flown by military helicopters. These circuits involved both left-hand circuits that overflew the suburbs of Ipswich (See Reference B, Figure 15) and right-hand circuits to the western-side of the Base (See Reference C, Figure 15) and some also included a training segment during their flight.
60 There were 2 circuits flown by civil medium jet, 204 circuits flown by civil light propeller aircraft, 34 circuits by civil helicopters and 420 circuits flown by unknown aircraft types on Runway 15. These circuits generally involved left-hand circuits that overflew the suburbs of Ipswich (See Reference D, Figure 15) and right-hand circuits to the west of the Base (See Reference A, Figure 15).
INSERT
Figure 15 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 15
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
63 Figure 16 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 33 shows the flight tracks of the 622 recorded aircraft circuits on Runway 15 at RAAF Base Amberley, which consisted of 217 circuits flown by military aircraft, 3 by civil aircraft and 402 by unknown aircraft types. Figure 16 also shows the flight tracks of training flights that have also conducted a circuit during their flight at RAAF Base Amberley which the NFPMS has classified this flight as a circuit.
64 There were 23 circuits flown by Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft on Runway 33 during the quarter. These were left-hand circuits to the western side of the Base (See Reference A, Figure 16), some of which included a training segment in their flight.
65 There were 143 circuits flown by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft, 5 by Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft and 23 by Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ aircraft. There were also 13 circuits flown by other military aircraft and 10 flown by military helicopters. These circuits involved both right-hand circuits that overflew the suburbs of Ipswich (See Reference B, Figure 15) and left-hand circuits to the western-side of the Base. Some of these circuits included a training segment during their flight.
66 There were 3 circuits flown by Boeing 707-300 aircraft and 402 circuits flown by unknown aircraft types on Runway 33 which generally involved right-hand circuits that overflew the suburbs of Ipswich (See Reference B, Figure 15) and left-hand circuits to the west of the Base (See Reference A, Figure 15).
INSERT
Figure 16 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 33
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
68 Figure 17 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 04 shows the flight tracks of the recorded aircraft circuits on Runway 04 at RAAF Base Amberley, which consisted of 24 circuits flown by military aircraft, 46 by civil aircraft and 126 by unknown aircraft types. Figure 17 also shows the flight tracks of training flights that have also conducted a circuit during their flight at RAAF Base Amberley which the NFPMS has classified this flight as a circuit.
69 There were no circuits flown by the Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet or Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft on Runway 04.
70 The circuits flown were predominately left-hand circuits which tracked to the northern side of Runway 04 (See Reference A, Figure 17). There were also a smaller number of right-hand circuits which tracked to the southern side of Runway 04 and a circuit on Runway 15/33 which is attributed a helicopter that departed from Runway 04. Some of these circuits included a training segment during their flight.
INSERT
Figure 17 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 04
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
72 Figure 18 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 22 shows the flight tracks of the 14 recorded aircraft circuits on Runway 22 at RAAF Base Amberley, which consisted of 3 circuits flown by military aircraft, 3 by civil helicopters and 8 by unknown aircraft types. Figure 18 also shows the flight tracks of training flights that have also conducted a circuit during their flight at RAAF Base Amberley which the NFPMS has classified this flight as a circuit.
73 There were no circuits flown by the Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet on Runway 22. There were, however, 3 circuits flown by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft on this runway.
These circuits were flown to the northern and southern sides of Runway 22. The circuits flown by civil helicopters also included conducting circuits on Runway 04/22. Some of these circuits included a training segment during their flight.
INSERT
Figure 18 – Circuits Tracks for Runway 22
BLANK PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Helicopter Flight Tracks All Runways
75 Figure 19 – Helicopter Flight Tracks all Runways illustrates all recorded helicopter (both military and civil) flight tracks to and from the helicopter landing areas at RAAF Base Amberley for the Quarter 4 2012 period.
76 There were 144 helicopter operations this quarter, which consisted of 64 operations by military helicopters and 80 by civil helicopters with the majority of their arrivals and departures to/from a runway or a designated helicopter landing pad. The majority of their circuit training were conducted on a runway.
77 The majority of the helicopter arrivals were from the north and the west for either an instrument approach to Runway 15 or to Runway 33. The balance of the arrivals were from the east and west.
78 The majority of the helicopter departures were to the north and north-west. There were also some from the south, east and west.
INSERT
Figure 19 – Helicopter Flight Tracks – all Runways
BLANK PAGE
Assessment of Aircraft Noise
1 Introduction to Aircraft Noise
1 Noise is described as unwanted sound. The two main components of a sound event are the loudness and pitch. The loudness is related to the energy of the sound wave and pitch is related to the frequency of the sound.
2 The human ear relates the loudness to the Sound Pressure, which is an easy parameter to measure with a noise measurement instrument. The loudness of actual sound levels is made by comparison to a standard pressure of 2x10-5 Pascals (Newtons per square metre) taken at a reference frequency of 1,000 Hz. This sound pressure has been set as the lower threshold of hearing; with the upper threshold of the hearing pressure range being 1,000 Pa, where permanent damage would be done to the eardrum. Because of this very large range of sound pressures, a logarithmic scale was developed which for typical noise events, consolidated the range of sound pressures from 0 to 140 dB. This expression of the level of sound is referenced as the Sound Pressure Level (SPL) and is measured in decibels (dB).
3 Within the human auditory system, the pitch, or technically the frequency, determines the interpretation of the loudness. At equal sound pressures, low frequencies are perceived as less loud than middle frequencies in the 1,000 to 4,000 Hz range. At frequencies above 4,000 Hz, sensitivity decreases.
4 The human ear of a young person corresponds to a frequency range of 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz. This is called the audible range. One general trend is that as people age they are less able to hear the higher frequencies, so that the high frequency limit may be reduced to 15,000 Hz or in extreme cases down to 10,000 Hz.
5 The human ear is better equipped to hear the mid frequency ranges and therefore people find noises in this frequency band more annoying. The “A” filter approximates the sensitivity of the ear and relates the relative loudness of the various noises at different frequencies to the human’s ear response to those noises. The “A weighted” decibel scale, referenced as dB(A) has generally been adopted as the relevant parameter for the measurement of community and has been adopted for aircraft noise, due primarily to the simple nature of obtaining an A-weighted noise level.
6 There are a large number of descriptors which have been developed to describe aircraft noise. These include:
a. single event descriptors which can be measured or calculated by a noise monitoring instrument
b. equal energy parameters which accumulate a number of noise events over time and need to be calculated
7 Refer to Annex A – Glossary for a description of the common acoustic parameters used in the measurement of the community’s exposure to aircraft noise.
8 Two commonly used single event noise descriptors of aircraft noise are the “maximum” A-weighted sound pressure level (LAmax) and the “equivalent” A-weighted noise level (LAeq).
9 The LAmax and LAeq metrics for an actual single aircraft overflight are illustrated in the following diagram. The LAeq for the aircraft noise event is the “equivalent” noise level that has the same total sound energy as the actual varying measured sound pressure level over the aircraft movement. The LAeq value will normally be less than the LAmax value.
[pic]
12 The above diagram illustrates that, as in this case, the noise from an aircraft overflight often has two peaks with only the higher peak being the LAmax value.
13 Other single event noise parameters commonly used in reporting aircraft noise include the Sound Exposure Level (SEL) and the Effective Perceived Noise Level (EPNL).
14 Equal energy noise descriptors include the “equivalent” A-weighted noise level averaged over a specified time (LAeq,T), the Australian Noise Exposure Forecast (ANEF), the Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF), and the Day Night Level (DNL). These parameters need to be calculated and cannot be directly measured by a noise monitor.
15 Numerous studies around the world have shown that the equal energy indices are more related to people’s reaction to aircraft noise than single event parameters such as the LAmax, or SEL.
16 Australian Standard AS 2021-2000, “Acoustics – Aircraft noise intrusion – Building siting and construction” requires that land use planning around Australian civilian airports and military airfields be based on an endorsed ANEF. The ANEF is produced using the USA’s Federal Aviation Administration’s Integrated Noise Model (INM) which calculates the future noise exposure over a 24 hour period based on the averaged aircraft movements over the annual operational period of the aerodrome, i.e. the total number of aircraft movements divided by the number of operational days in a year.
17 AS 2021-2000 identifies in Section A2.4:
"In many cases the military flying activities conducted at Defence airfields may be limited to weekdays. Consequently, a daily movement average based on 365 days of activity per year, as assessed for civil aerodromes, may not be appropriate when producing the ANEF for military airfields and joint Defence/civil airports. When military flying activities at an airfield are expected to occur for less than 365 days per year, average daily movement numbers for military aircraft may be assessed on the basis of average aircraft movements during operating days only."
18 AS2021 does not identify the determination of an average day for a mixed use aerodrome. As the intent of an ANEF map for a military aerodrome is to identify the noise impact of military operations, which tend to produce higher noise levels than for civilian operations at the same aerodrome, the average daily operations used for the ANEF must be different to a domestic or international civilian airport.
19 The future exposure to aircraft noise is illustrated as ANEF contours drawn on a map of the environs around the aerodrome. The contours show increasing aircraft noise exposure from 20 ANEF to 40 ANEF. These ANEF contour numbers are not related to any value of the single event noise parameters and cannot be directly measured.
20 In addition to an ANEF, there is an Australian Noise Exposure Index (ANEI). The ANEI is produced using the INM and is a calculation of the noise exposure of actual aircraft operations from a previous year (as distinct from a forecast of future operations). The ANEI has the same units as the ANEF and is the average daily aircraft noise exposure around the aerodrome for that year. As the ANEI represents the predicted noise exposure for operations in the past, any comparison with existing aircraft noise levels can only relate to an ANEI rather than a future ANEF.
21 For the insulation of buildings within the 20 ANEF contour, the Australian Standard AS2021-2000 utilises the “Aircraft noise level” as the highest external level determined for each aircraft operation and mode. The “Aircraft noise level” is location specific. The maximum levels in Tables C4, C5 and C6 provide an arithmetic average, the minimum and the maximum of the range of aircraft maximum levels recorded for the different aircraft types. The aircraft maximum levels in Tables C4, C5 and C6 are not “Aircraft noise levels” as defined in AS2021-2000.
22 The inquiry by the Senate Select Committee on Aircraft Noise in Sydney (Falling on Deaf Ears - 1995) found that the ANEF System was not generally understood and recommended that the ANEF be supplemented by additional acoustic metrics.
23 Whilst not required by AS 2021-2000 for measuring noise exposure, the LAeq,T parameter may be used as a supplementary acoustic for the measurement of aircraft noise exposure in Australia. The LAeq,T parameter is the summation of all the LAeq values for each aircraft operation, logarithmically averaged over a period of time typically 16 or 24 hours. The LAeq may also be referenced as Leq. A 24 hour LAeq is often referenced as Leq 24.
24 Many acoustic studies around the world have confirmed that there is a direct relationship with the 24 hour LAeq parameter and people’s reaction to aircraft noise, with one study in the UK (The Aircraft Noise Index Study - 1985) identified a step in people’s reaction at a LAeq of 57 dB(A). Based on this report, the UK Government adopted the LAeq parameter as a measure of aircraft noise and used 57 dB(A) as the approximate value where there is general community annoyance from aircraft noise. Evidence from the study showed that people become moderately disturbed at LAeq 65 dB(A) and were considered highly disturbed at LAeq 70 dB(A).
25 The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that, for transportation activities, the noise exposure should be measured in terms of the average 24 hour LAeq and recommends an external 55dB(A) as the value where people start to became annoyed with aircraft noise.
26 The Leq and some derived parameters are used by many other countries around the world as the simplest means of measuring people’s reaction to aircraft noise. Most of Europe use the WHO LAeq recommendations. Canada uses the NEF system which is similar to the ANEF system but with a different night weighting. The USA and New Zealand use the DNL system which is a LAeq with a night weighting from 10 pm to 7 am.
27 Airservices Australia has reported (refer to pages 7-8 of the Q2 2005 NFPMS report for RAAF Base Williamtown) that an order of magnitude estimate for comparison with the ANEI value can be obtained by subtracting 35 dB(A) from the average 24 hour LAeq value. The WHO external noise recommendation of 55 dB(A) would therefore approximate an ANEI value of 20. An average 24 hour LAeq value of 60 dB(A) would approximate an ANEI value of 25 being the “unacceptable” limit for residential housing under AS 2021-2000. Similarly for comparison purposes, a LAeq value of 65 dB(A) would approximate ANEI 30 and LAeq 70 dB(A) would approximate ANEI 35.
28 Because the equal energy parameters are not easily understood, additional supplementary parameters have also been used to further describe aircraft noise. The LAmax metric is the most common supplementary aircraft noise parameter used around the world. The WHO recommends that for aviation operations, in addition to the LAeq, additional descriptors such as LAmax should also be reported.
29 In 2000, the then Australian Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) suggested the Number Above (NA) parameter also be used as an additional indicator of the community’s exposure to aircraft noise. This parameter provides an average daily number of aircraft noise events above a certain LAmax dB(A) level. The N70 parameter represents the daily average number of aircraft noise events greater than a LAmax of 70 dB(A), N85 for average aircraft noise events greater than 85 dB(A) etc. DOTARS recommended that the N70 parameter be used as 70 dB(A) is the LAmax level where speech communication can be disrupted by aircraft noise. The benefit of the NA parameter is yet to be quantified as the relationship between a particular NA value and people’s annoyance or disturbance has not been established.
30 This quarterly report on the noise exposure of existing aircraft operations on the local community documents the quarterly average 24 hour LAeq value. The NA parameters of N70 and N85 are also documented.
2 Factors Affecting the Propagation of Aircraft Noise
1 The noise level measured at each NMT can vary considerably between similar operations by the same aircraft type. The variation can be in excess of a sound pressure level of 10 dB(A) – a doubling of the subjective loudness of a particular sound.
2 The factors affecting the measured noise level at a particular location include the following:
a. thrust setting of the aircraft
b. attitude
c. configuration of the aircraft
d. flight track flown
e. distance of the monitor to the aircraft position
f. environmental (weather) considerations
3 The thrust setting of the engines of the aircraft is probably the most important consideration as this represents the noise power at the source. The thrust setting will be dependent on payload, range, configuration, pilot technique, weather conditions (particularly wind and temperature) and whether the aircraft is accelerating, decelerating or in a constant power setting. This is particularly important for military aircraft, which may use afterburner power which may significantly increase the noise level.
4 The attitude of the aircraft can also affect the propagation of the noise level from the aircraft. The noise level can be dependent on whether the aircraft is climbing, descending, banking or in level flight. Banking, in particular, can shield the noise output from the engines from the observer.
5 The configuration of the aircraft such as flap settings and exposed undercarriage alter the power setting and can affect the noise generated by the aircraft. The lowering of flaps and undercarriage will usually result in an increase in aircraft noise from disturbed air flow, turbulence or additional engine thrust when compared with the situation of no flaps or exposed undercarriage.
6 The flight track flown and the distance of the noise monitor from the actual aircraft position also have a bearing on the recorded noise level. The noise is dissipated through the atmosphere in proportion to the square of the distance. A doubling of the distance will result in a decrease in the noise level by approximately 6 dB(A).
7 Environmental considerations affecting the propagation of aircraft noise through the atmosphere include the following:
a. atmospheric absorption
b. wind
c. temperature gradient
d. lateral attenuation
8 Atmospheric absorption influences the propagation of aircraft noise and hence the impact on the community. Temperature and humidity affect the absorptive properties of the atmosphere; this in turn affects change in the rate of the attenuation, which is not the same over the audible frequency spectrum. For example, over distances lower frequency sounds are less attenuated than higher frequency sounds. Cloud cover affects how aircraft noise is reflected and carried through the atmosphere. For example, cloud cover tends to reflect aircraft noise and therefore on a cloudy day aircraft noise will be carried over a longer distance.
9 Wind direction and strength can also impact on the propagation of the aircraft noise through the atmosphere. The propagation of noise from source to receiver will vary whether the receiver is upwind, downwind or crosswind from the source. Similarly, the strength of the wind can increase or decrease the sound depending on the relative positions of the source and the receiver.
10 Temperature gradient, particularly where there is an occurrence of temperature inversion, will also impact on the noise received at a monitor from a particular aircraft operation. Depending on the conditions existing at the time the sound waves may be dispersed upwards, downwards, towards or away from the receiver.
11 Lateral attenuation is described as being the absorption of aircraft noise from the ground, diffraction and directivity effects. Lateral attenuation is considered as excess attenuation, whereas by the same token the noise may be reflected from water bodies; expanses of hard surfaces etc. and cause an increase in the noise level thereby reducing the attenuation.
12 Weather data for RAAF Base Amberley is collected by the Amberley Meteorological Office. The relevant monthly weather data can be compared with the long term average over the last 60 years to determine whether there have been any abnormal weather conditions. Detailed weather information for RAAF Base Amberley for the previous 14 months is available on the internet at the following site:
.
3 Noise Environment at RAAF Base Amberley
NMT Locations
1 Four NMTs have been located outside the Base within communities in the vicinity of the airfield. These NMTs have been installed at the following locations which are illustrated on Figure 20 - NMT Location Plan:
a. Willowbank Lawn Cemetery (Willowbank Cemetery)
b. Kholo Botanical Gardens, Muirlea (Kholo Gardens)
c. Walloon Primary School (Walloon PS)
d. Christian Outreach Centre, Yamanto (Yamanto COC)
2 The recording zone around each NMT will vary according to the noise signature of the aircraft type, altitude, speed and environmental conditions.
3 Figure 20 - NMT Location Plan shows graduated shading with a radius of up to 3.5 km from each NMT. Analysis of the ANOMS 8 Data Server revealed that an aircraft with a high noise signature such as a Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet can register a noise event at a NMT as far away as 3.5 km whereas less noisy aircraft such as light civil aircraft needed to be much closer to the NMT to register a noise event.
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
INSERT
Figure 20 - NMT Location Plan
BLANK PAGE
24 Hour Average LAeq
5 Table 4 shows the monthly and quarterly average 24 hour LAeq of all correlated aircraft noise events recorded at each of the 4 NMTs at RAAF Base Amberley, including those by unknown aircraft types for the Quarter 4 2012. The average 24 hour LAeq value is the logarithmic average of all the recorded aircraft noise events. The logarithmic averages are calculated by converting the daily LAeq values to the equivalent acoustic energy and then averaging the acoustic energy over the total time period. The resultant average acoustic energy is then converted back to a LAeq value (in dB(A)). A more detailed breakdown of the 24 hour LAeq for each day of each month for each NMT can be found in Annex C – Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise, Tables C1 to C3.
Table 4 – Average 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise – Quarter 4 2012
|NMT |October 2012 |November 2012 |December 2012 |Average for the Quarter |
|Willowbank Cemetery |57.1 |53.0 |52.2 |54.7 |
|Kholo Gardens |39.2 |38.1 |39.3 |38.9 |
|Walloon PS |52.3 |48.7 |43.9 |49.5 |
|Yamanto COC |58.4 |57.8 |53.8 |57.1 |
6 Table 5 summarizes the 24 hour average LAeq of all correlated aircraft noise events recorded for each of the 4 NMTs for Quarter 4 2012 and each of the preceding 3 quarters. This table includes all recorded noise events including those by unknown aircraft types.
Table 5 – Annual Average 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise
|NMT |Q4 2012 |Q3 2012 |Q2 2012 |Q1 2012 |
|Willowbank Cemetery |54.7 |53.8 |55.9 |52.2 |
|Kholo Gardens |38.9 |47.5 |41.2 |40.0 |
|Walloon PS |49.5 |50.8 |51.3 |50.5 |
|Yamanto COC |57.1 |59.1 |58.1 |55.8 |
7 The highest average 24 hour LAeq reading of 57.1 dB(A) for Quarter 4 2012 was recorded at the Yamanto COC NMT location. The lowest average 24 hour LAeq reading of 38.9 dB(A) for Quarter 4 2012 was recorded at the Kholo Gardens NMT location. The average 24 hour LAeq at the NMT locations for Quarter 4 2012 are consistent with the historic data over the last 12 months and the difference in number of movements recorded during the last 12 months.
Average LAmax
9 Tables 6 to 8 summarise the aircraft noise events recorded by the RAAF Base Amberley NFPMS or the community NMTs. These tables include all recorded noise events including those by unknown aircraft types. The average LAmax value is the arithmetic average (mean) of all the events. A more detailed breakdown of aircraft noise events by NMT can be found in Annex C – Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise, Tables C4 to C7.
10 Table 6 details the average LAmax for the community NMTs for arrivals at RAAF Base Amberley.
Table 6 – Average LAmax – Arrivals – Quarter 1 2012
|Aircraft |Rwy |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|KC-30A |15 |- |67.4 |72.5 |69.8 |
|B350 |15 |- |- |71.3 |- |
|B737 |15 |71.7 |65.5 |68.5 |67.7 |
|C-130 |15 |72.7 |69.5 |74.3 |- |
|C-17A |15 |- |65.8 |76.6 |72.5 |
|F/A-18F |15 |79.4 |75.0 |77.6 |72.4 |
|BAe Hawk |15 |- |- |70.6 |- |
|B350 |22 |- |- |- |77.0 |
|KC-30A |33 |73.2 |- |73.9 |70.2 |
|B350 |33 |68.3 |62.5 |- |- |
|B737 |33 |74.3 |- |- |- |
|C-130 |33 |71.6 |- |77.0 |74.9 |
|C-17A |33 |74.3 |- |74.2 |71.6 |
|F/A-18F |33 |77.9 |65.8 |73.4 |83.0 |
|BAe Hawk |33 |- |- |- |68.0 |
For more details, refer to Annex C – Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise Events, Tables C4 to C7.
3.3.9 Table 7 details the average LAmax for the community NMTs for departures movements at RAAF Base Amberley.
Table 7 – Average LAmax – Departures – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft |Rwy |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|B350 |04 |67.3 |- |- |- |
|KC-30A |15 |77.8 |67.1 |74.4 |73.3 |
|B350 |15 |72.2 |- |71.8 |66.7 |
|B737 |15 |- |- |- |72.6 |
|C-130 |15 |71.5 |66.4 |- |70.5 |
|C-17A |15 |76.6 |67.9 |74.9 |73.7 |
|F/A-18F |15 |83.2 |62.4 |72.8 |91.5 |
|BAe Hawk |15 |- |- |- |78.9 |
|B350 |22 |69.9 |- |- |- |
|C-17A |22 |74.0 |- |76.6 |79.2 |
|KC-30A |33 |70.4 |- |76.9 |80.9 |
|B350 |33 |- |62.1 |74.2 |- |
|B737 |33 |73.8 |68.9 |78.3 |- |
|C-130 |33 |73.5 |63.3 |74.6 |- |
|C-17A |33 |69.3 |68.1 |76.4 |73.9 |
|F/A-18F |33 |72.3 |71.6 |78.1 |76.6 |
|BAe Hawk |33 |75.4 |- |84.8 |70.7 |
For more details, refer to Annex C – Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise Events, Tables C4 to C7.
3.3.10 Table 8 details the average LAmax for the community NMTs for circuit movements at RAAF Base Amberley.
Table 8 – Average LAmax – Circuits – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft |Rwy |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|KC-30A |15 |71.2 |67.5 |77.9 |75.2 |
|B350 |15 |- |67.9 |72.5 |- |
|B737 |15 |72.8 |- |73.2 |70.0 |
|C-17A |15 |75.8 |66.1 |76.2 |72.3 |
|F/A-18F |15 |82.6 |- |79.5 |85.8 |
|C-17A |22 |71.3 |64.2 |73.2 |74.6 |
|KC-30A |33 |77.0 |- |- |- |
|B350 |33 |69.3 |- |72.8 |- |
|B737 |33 |74.2 |70.8 |74.1 |73.1 |
|C-17A |33 |76.5 |68.8 |75.6 |69.9 |
|F/A-18F |33 |77.4 |72.0 |77.7 |81.7 |
For more details, refer to Annex C – Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise Events, Tables C4 to C7.
NA Noise Events
3.3.11 Table 9 details the impact of noise events from all aircraft in terms of N70 and N85 for Quarter 4 2012. There were 92 days in the quarter so the average number of aircraft noise events per day is simply the total number of events divided by 92.
Table 9 – N70 and N85 Noise Events for All Aircraft for Quarter 4 2012
| |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|Total N70 Events |619 |55 |615 |870 |
|Average N70 Events |6.73 |0.60 |6.68 |9.46 |
|Total N85 Events |90 |1 |40 |294 |
|Average N85 Events |0.98 |0.01 |0.43 |3.20 |
Note – Average N70 and N85 events calculated based on 92 days in the quarter.
23 Table 10 details the impact of noise events from known military aircraft movements in terms of N70 and N85 for the Quarter 4 2012. Some military aircraft movements may be classified in the unknown category and therefore are not included in Table 10. There were 54 operational days for military aircraft during the quarter so the average number of aircraft noise events per day is simply the total number of noise events from military aircraft movements divided by 55.
Table 10 – N70 and N85 Noise Events for Military Aircraft for Quarter 4 2012
| |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|Total N70 Events |315 |24 |283 |418 |
|Average N70 Events |5.72 |0.44 |5.14 |7.66 |
|Total N85 Events |46 |1 |17 |132 |
|Average N85 Events |0.84 |0.02 |0.31 |2.44 |
Note – Average N70 and N85 events calculated based on 55 military operating days in the quarter.
25 Table 11 details the noise events from known civil aircraft movements in terms of N70 and N85 for Quarter 4 2012. Some civil aircraft movements may be classified in the unknown category and therefore are not be included in Table 11. There were 92 days in the quarter so the average number of aircraft noise events per day is simply the total number of noise events from civil aircraft movements divided by 92.
Table 11 – N70 and N85 Noise Events for Civil Aircraft for Quarter 4 2012
| |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|Total N70 Events |21 |9 |26 |20 |
|Average N70 Events |0.23 |0.10 |0.28 |0.22 |
|Total N85 Events |1 |0 |0 |1 |
|Average N85 Events |0.01 |0.00 |0.00 |0.01 |
Note – Average N70 and N85 events calculated based on 92 days in the quarter.
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Annex A
Glossary
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Print this page on blue paper
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Glossary
24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise
The average 24 hour LAeq Aircraft Noise level is the logarithmic average of all the recorded aircraft noise events over a 24 hour period.
Aircraft Movement
An aircraft arriving or departing a runway.
ANEF
Australian Noise Exposure Forecast. A single number index for predicting the future cumulative exposure to aircraft noise in communities near aerodromes during a specified time period, typically averaged over one year.
ANEI
Australian Noise Exposure Index. A single number index for predicting the exposure to aircraft noise in communities near aerodromes during a specified previous time period, typically averaged over one year.
Arrival
An aircraft entering the local area and landing on a runway.
dB
The Sound Pressure Level (SPL) expressed on a logarithmic scale.
dB(A)
The A-weighted dB which is frequency adjusted to replicate the sound detected by the human ear.
Departure
An aircraft taking off from a runway and leaving the local area.
Circuit
A procedure where an aircraft departs the runway, circles the airfield and then lands. One circuit operation includes two circuit movements. Often circuit operations include a number of touch-and–goes where the number of aircraft movements will be greater than two, depending on the number of touch–and–goes completed.
EPNL
The Effective Perceived Noise Level (EPNL) is the tone adjusted noise level in dB. For an aircraft noise event it is the perceived noise level of a continuous reference sound which in the same total time would convey the same summated noise annoyance to a listener. The EPNL is the descriptor used for the certification of aircraft noise and is used for the production of ANEFs.
LAmax
LAmax is the single event maximum A-weighted sound level reached during an aircraft movement.
LAmax low value
This is the lowest LAmax value in a range of LAmax values for particular operations.
LAmax high value
This is the highest LAmax value in a range of LAmax values for particular operations.
LAmax average value
This is the arithmetically average of a range of LAmax values from the LAmax low value to the LAmax high value for particular operations.
LAeq
The “equivalent noise level” (LAeq) is the energy equivalent noise level measured in A-weighted decibels (dB(A)). It is a time-averaged sound level; a single-number value that expresses the time-varying sound level for the specified period as though it were a constant sound level with the same total sound energy as the time-varying level. Consequently the LAeq is the constant noise level that if continued over the sample period would have the same energy as the actual varying, measured sound level. The time period needs to be specified and can be one hour, 24 hours or the operational hours of the Base.
Number Above (NA)
The NA contour for an airport represents the number of noise events occurring at a greater level than a particular dB(A) level over a specified time period. The greatest numbers of occurrences are closer to aircraft flight tracks and the airport runway, and decreases as the distance from the vicinity of these is increased. The N70 is the number of aircraft noise events above 70 dB(A) for an average day. The 70 dB(A) is seen as a critical threshold value as it is equivalent to a single internal noise event of 60 dB(A), assuming that the aircraft noise is attenuated by approximately 10dB(A) by the fabric of a house with open windows. An aircraft noise event of 60 dB(A) in a domestic dwelling will likely interfere with a conversation or listening of a radio or television. An aircraft noise level of 70 dB(A) outside would require a person to raise their voice noticeably.
The N70 is a good indication of aircraft noise because it represents the way in which aircraft noise is generally perceived and experienced. The N70 contour is scalar, and as the number of flights on a flight track doubles, the N70 event occurrence doubles. However like other noise metrics, the N70 contour can give the impression that no aircraft noise occurs outside the contours, which is not the case.
Other NA parameters are often produced such as the N80, N85, N90, N95 and N100. The N85 parameter is important as 85 dB(A) is the noise level which represents the practical limit where residential building noise insulation can reduce the internal noise to an acceptable level.
A Noise and Flight Path Monitoring Systems (NFPMS) gathers the noise information with respect to the monitoring site. The measured NA values provide information that is more trusted by some people, and also provides a tool for checking the accuracy of the predicted NA contours. However the NA values only provide information very near the noise monitoring terminals, and the data should be treated with caution as sound pressure levels can change significantly over relatively short distances.
Sound Exposure Level
The Sound Exposure Level (SEL) is an A-weighted noise level logarithmically summed over the noise event and referenced to a duration of one second.
Secondary Surveillance Radar
A Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) provides data on aircraft positions to air traffic control by interrogating a transponder on the aircraft. The target aircraft’s transponder responds to the interrogation by transmitting a coded reply signal.
The Australian Advanced Air Traffic System
The Australian Advanced Air Traffic System (TAAATS) is an integrated air traffic management system which provides air traffic services over most of Australia’s airspace from two centres located at Melbourne and Brisbane.
Touch-and-Go
A procedure whereby an aircraft lands and takes off without coming to a stop.
Track Density
A plot of accumulated flight tracks counted over an 18 metre by 18 metre grid.
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Annex B
Aircraft Movement Details
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Print this page on blue paper
BLANK PAGE
Aircraft Movement Details
Aircraft Movements
Table B1 contains a detailed breakdown of total aircraft movement by aircraft types during the Quarter 4 2012 period.
Table B1 – Aircraft Movements by Type – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft Category |Aircraft Type |Number of Movements |
|Military Fast Jet | | |
| |British Aerospace Hawk Mk127 |8 |
| |Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet |359 |
|Military Other Jet | | |
| |Airbus KC-30A MRRT |124 |
| |Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ |93 |
| |Bombardier CL-604 Challenger |4 |
| |Israel 1124 Westwind |29 |
| |Learjet 35/45 |12 |
| |Boeing C-17A Globemaster |380 |
|Military Propeller | | |
| |Beechcraft 350 King Air |98 |
| |Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules |61 |
| |Lockheed P-38 Lightning |28 |
| |Pilatus PC-9/A |14 |
|Military Helicopters | | |
| |Boeing CH-47D Chinook |6 |
| |Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger |4 |
| |NH Industries - NH90 |17 |
| |UH-60 Black Hawk/Sea Hawk |37 |
|Civil Heavy Jet | | |
| |Boeing 707-300 |37 |
|Civil Medium Jet | | |
| |Boeing 737 Series |4 |
| |Boeing 757-200 |7 |
| |Cessna Citation 3/6/7 |2 |
|Civil Light Jet | | |
| | |0 |
|Civil Medium Propeller | | |
| | |0 |
|Civil Light Propeller | | |
| |Beech Duchess76 |77 |
| |Beech Super King Air 350 |30 |
| |Beechcraft 55/58 Baron |14 |
| |Cessna 150 |17 |
| |Cessna 182 Skylane |4 |
| |Cessna 182 Skylane Retractable Gear |4 |
| |Cessna Skyhawk 172/Cutlass/Mescalero |23 |
| |Cessna T303 Crusader |3 |
| |Diamond DA42 Twin Star |10 |
| |Jabiru J450 |1 |
| |Partenavia P.68 |24 |
| |Piper PA-28 Cherokee/Warrior/Arrow |16 |
| |Piper PA-32 Lance 2 / Saratoga |2 |
| |Piper Tomahawk |24 |
| |Vans RV7 |4 |
|Civil Helicopter | | |
| |Agusta AB 412 |4 |
| |Agusta AW139 |27 |
| |AS-365 Dauphin 2 |4 |
| |Eurocopter BK 117 |2 |
| |Sikorsky S-76 Spirit |43 |
|Unknown | | |
| |Unknown aircraft type |1,502 |
|Total | |3,159 |
Table B2 contains a detailed breakdown of aircraft arrival movements by aircraft types to each of the four runways and to the helipads during Quarter 4 2012.
Table B2 – Aircraft Types – Arrivals – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft Type |Rwy 04 |Rwy 15 |Rwy 22 |Rwy 33 |H |Total |
|Military Fast Jet | | | | | | |
|British Aerospace Hawk Mk127 |0 |1 |0 |3 |0 |4 |
|Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet |0 |92 |0 |65 |0 |157 |
|Military Other Jet | | | | | | |
|Airbus KC-30A MRRT |0 |31 |0 |21 |0 |52 |
|Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ |0 |10 |0 |5 |0 |15 |
|Bombardier CL-604 Challenger |0 |0 |0 |1 |0 |1 |
|Israel 1124 Westwind |0 |5 |0 |9 |0 |14 |
|Learjet 35/45 |0 |5 |0 |1 |0 |6 |
|Boeing C-17A Globemaster |0 |49 |0 |21 |0 |70 |
|Military Propeller | | | | | | |
|Beechcraft 350 King Air |0 |12 |1 |31 |0 |44 |
|Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules |0 |13 |0 |13 |0 |26 |
|Pilatus PC-9/A |1 |2 |0 |4 |0 |7 |
|Military Helicopters | | | | | | |
|Boeing CH-47D Chinook |0 |2 |0 |0 |2 |4 |
|Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger |0 |0 |0 |0 |1 |1 |
|UH-60 Black Hawk/Sea Hawk |1 |0 |0 |2 |4 |7 |
|Civil Heavy Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing 707-300 |0 |8 |0 |8 |0 |16 |
|Civil Medium Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing 737 Series |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Boeing 757-200 |0 |1 |0 |2 |0 |3 |
|Civil Light Propeller | | | | | | |
|Civil Light Propeller sub-total |2 |2 |1 |1 |0 |6 |
|Civil Helicopter | | | | | | |
|Agusta AW139 |0 |1 |0 |0 |0 |1 |
|Sikorsky S-76 Spirit |0 |2 |0 |0 |11 |13 |
|Unknown | | | | | | |
|Unknown Aircraft Type |23 |127 |0 |111 |14 |275 |
|Total |27 |365 |2 |298 |32 |724 |
The unknown aircraft types made up 38% of the total arrivals. The majority of the unknown arriving aircraft used beacon code 1200 which is normally used for training flights by general aviation aircraft.
Table B3 contains a detailed breakdown of aircraft departure movements by aircraft types from each of the four runways and from the helipads during Quarter 4 2012.
Table B3 – Aircraft Types – Departures – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft Type |Rwy 04 |Rwy 15 |Rwy 22 |Rwy 33 |H |Total |
|Military Fast Jet | | | | | | |
|British Aerospace Hawk Mk127 |0 |1 |0 |3 |0 |4 |
|Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet |0 |89 |0 |62 |0 |151 |
|Military Other Jet | | | | | | |
|Airbus KC-30A MRRT |0 |44 |0 |10 |0 |54 |
|Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ |0 |6 |0 |12 |0 |18 |
|Bombardier CL-604 Challenger |0 |0 |0 |1 |0 |1 |
|Israel 1124 Westwind |0 |3 |2 |10 |0 |15 |
|Learjet 35/45 |0 |4 |0 |2 |0 |6 |
|Boeing C-17A Globemaster |0 |51 |2 |33 |0 |86 |
|Military Propeller | | | | | | |
|Beechcraft 350 King Air |1 |25 |1 |18 |0 |45 |
|Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules |0 |16 |0 |13 |0 |29 |
|Pilatus PC-9/A |1 |4 |0 |2 |0 |7 |
|Military Helicopters | | | | | | |
|Boeing CH-47D Chinook |0 |1 |0 |1 |0 |2 |
|Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger |0 |0 |0 |0 |1 |1 |
|NH Industries - NH90 |0 |0 |0 |0 |1 |1 |
|UH-60 Black Hawk/Sea Hawk |0 |0 |0 |4 |4 |8 |
|Civil Heavy Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing 707-300 |0 |7 |0 |11 |0 |18 |
|Civil Medium Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing 737 Series |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Boeing 757-200 |0 |3 |0 |1 |0 |4 |
|Civil Light Propeller | | | | | | |
|Civil Light Propeller sub-total |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Civil Helicopter | | | | | | |
|Sikorsky S-76 Spirit |0 |2 |0 |2 |10 |14 |
|Unknown | | | | | | |
|Unknown Aircraft Type |7 |112 |1 |105 |18 |243 |
|Total |9 |372 |6 |290 |34 |711 |
The unknown aircraft types made up 34% of the total departures. The majority of the unknown arriving aircraft used beacon code 1200 which is normally used for training flights by general aviation aircraft.
Table B4 contains a detailed breakdown of circuit movements by aircraft types on each of the four runways and on the helipads during Quarter 4 2012.
Table B4 – Aircraft Types – Circuit Movements – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft Type |Rwy 04 |Rwy 15 |Rwy 22 |Rwy 33 |H |Total |
|Military Fast Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet |0 |28 |0 |23 |0 |51 |
|Military Other Jet | | | | | | |
|Airbus KC-30A MRRT |0 |13 |0 |5 |0 |18 |
|Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ |0 |37 |0 |23 |0 |60 |
|Bombardier CL-604 Challenger |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Boeing C-17A Globemaster |0 |78 |3 |143 |0 |224 |
|Military Propeller | | | | | | |
|Beechcraft 350 King Air |0 |2 |0 |7 |0 |9 |
|Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules |0 |0 |0 |6 |0 |6 |
|Lockheed P-38 Lightning |24 |4 |0 |0 |0 |28 |
|Military Helicopters | | | | | | |
|Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|NH Industries - NH90 |0 |16 |0 |0 |0 |16 |
|UH-60 Black Hawk/Sea Hawk |0 |12 |0 |10 |0 |22 |
|Civil Heavy Jet | | | | | | |
|Boeing 707-300 |0 |0 |0 |3 |0 |3 |
|Civil Medium Jet | | | | | | |
|Cessna Citation 3/6/7 |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Civil Light Propeller | | | | | | |
|Civil Light Propeller sub-total |41 |204 |0 |0 |0 |245 |
|Civil Helicopter | | | | | | |
|Agusta AB 412 |0 |4 |0 |0 |0 |4 |
|Agusta AW139 |8 |18 |0 |0 |0 |26 |
|AS-365 Dauphin 2 |0 |4 |0 |0 |0 |4 |
|Eurocopter BK 117 |0 |2 |0 |0 |0 |2 |
|Sikorsky S-76 Spirit |5 |6 |3 |0 |2 |16 |
|Unknown | | | | | | |
|Unknown Aircraft Type |126 |420 |8 |402 |28 |984 |
|Total |204 |854 |14 |622 |30 |1,724 |
The unknown aircraft types made up 57% of the total circuit movements. The majority of the unknown circuit aircraft used beacon code 1200 which is normally used for training flights by general aviation aircraft.
Table B5 contains a detailed breakdown of aircraft movements by aircraft types by operation.
Table B5 – Aircraft Types – Operations – Quarter 4 2012
|Aircraft Type |Arrivals |Departures |Circuits |Total |
|Military Fast Jet | | | | |
|British Aerospace Hawk Mk127 |4 |4 |0 |8 |
|Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet |157 |151 |51 |359 |
|Military Other Jet | | | | |
|Airbus KC-30A MRRT |52 |54 |18 |124 |
|Boeing 737 AEW&C/BBJ |15 |18 |60 |93 |
|Bombardier CL-604 Challenger |1 |1 |2 |4 |
|Israel 1124 Westwind |14 |15 |0 |29 |
|Learjet 35/45 |6 |6 |0 |12 |
|Boeing C-17A Globemaster |70 |86 |224 |380 |
|Military Propeller | | | | |
|Beechcraft 350 King Air |44 |45 |9 |98 |
|Lockheed C-130/C-30J Hercules |26 |29 |6 |61 |
|Lockheed P-38 Lightning |0 |0 |28 |28 |
|Pilatus PC-9/A |7 |7 |0 |14 |
|Military Helicopters | | | | |
|Boeing CH-47D Chinook |4 |2 |0 |6 |
|Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger |1 |1 |2 |4 |
|NH Industries - NH90 |0 |1 |16 |17 |
|UH-60 Black Hawk/Sea Hawk |7 |8 |22 |37 |
|Civil Heavy Jet | | | | |
|Boeing 707-300 |16 |18 |3 |37 |
|Civil Medium Jet | | | | |
|Boeing 737 Series |2 |2 |0 |4 |
|Boeing 757-200 |3 |4 |0 |7 |
|Cessna Citation 3/6/7 |0 |0 |2 |2 |
|Civil Light Jet | | | | |
| |0 |0 |0 |0 |
|Civil Medium Propeller | | | | |
| |0 |0 |0 |0 |
|Civil Light Propeller | | | | |
|Civil Light Propeller sub-total |6 |2 |245 |253 |
|Civil Helicopter | | | | |
|Agusta AB 412 |0 |0 |4 |4 |
|Agusta AW139 |1 |0 |26 |27 |
|AS-365 Dauphin 2 |0 |0 |4 |4 |
|Eurocopter BK 117 |0 |0 |2 |2 |
|Sikorsky S-76 Spirit |13 |14 |16 |43 |
|Unknown | | | | |
|Unknown Aircraft Type |275 |243 |984 |1,502 |
|Total |724 |711 |1,724 |3,159 |
The unknown aircraft types made up 38% of the total arrival movements, 34% of the total departure movements, 57% of the total circuit movements and 47.5% of total movements.
Figure B1 shows the daily distribution of aircraft movements from Monday 1 October to Wednesday 31 October 2012.
Figure B1 – Daily Distribution Aircraft Movements by Day for October 2012
[pic]
There were 1,376 aircraft movements during October 2012, consisting of 317 arrivals, 321 departures and 738 circuit movements. The circuit movements represented 54% of the total aircraft movements.
There were fewer aircraft movements on the weekends (6/7, 13/14, 20/21 and 27/28 of October 2012) as military aircraft generally do not fly on weekends and there can be a reduction in civil aircraft and unknown aircraft types operations also on the weekends.
Figure B2 shows the daily distribution of aircraft movements from Thursday 1 November to Friday 30 November 2012.
Figure B2 – Daily Distribution of Aircraft Movements by Day for November 2012
[pic]
There were 1,317 aircraft movements during November 2012, consisting of 282 arrivals, 273 departures and 762 circuit movements. The circuit movements represented 58% of the total aircraft movements.
There were fewer aircraft movements on the weekends (3/4, 10/11, 17/18 and 24/25 of November 2012) as military aircraft generally do not fly on weekends and there can be a reduction in civil aircraft and unknown aircraft types operations also on the weekends.
Figure B3 shows the daily distribution of aircraft movements from Saturday 1 December to Monday 31 December 2012.
Figure B3 – Daily Distribution of Aircraft Movements by Day for December 2012
[pic]
There were 466 aircraft movements during December 2012, consisting of 125 arrivals, 117 departures and 224 circuit movements. The circuit movements represented 48% of the total aircraft movements.
There were fewer aircraft movements on the weekends (1/2, 8/9, 15/16, 22/23 and 29/30 of December 2012) as military aircraft generally do not fly on weekends and there can be a reduction in civil aircraft and unknown aircraft types operations also on the weekends.
Figure B4 shows the aggregation of aircraft movements by time of day for the whole of the period from Monday 1 October to Wednesday 31 October 2012.
Figure B4 – Distribution of Aircraft Movements by Time of Day for October 2012
[pic]In the early morning period between 0000 and 0700 hrs, there were no military aircraft operations and 7 civil and unknown aircraft types operations during the month of October 2012.
In the evening period between 1900 and 2400 hrs, there were 30 military aircraft operations during October 2012 period. Of these military aircraft operations, 2 were by F/A-18FSuper Hornet aircraft, 27 were by Boeing C-17A Globemaster and 1by an Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft. During the evening period, there were 4 civil heavy jet aircraft (Boeing 707-300) and 2 civil light aircraft operations during the October 2012 period.
Figure B5 shows the aggregation of aircraft movements by time of day for the whole of the reporting period from Wednesday 1 November to Friday 30 November 2012.
Figure B5 – Distribution of Aircraft Movements by Time of Day for November 2012
[pic]
In the early morning period between 0000 and 0700 hrs, one military aircraft operations occured during the month of November 2012, an arrival by a Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft at approximately 0430 h on Thursday 29 November. There was 4 circuit operations by 2 civil light propeller aircraft in the morning period during November 2012.
In the evening period between 1900 and 2400 hrs, there were 35 military aircraft operations during November 2012 period. Of these operations, 22 were by F/A-18FSuper Hornet aircraft and 7 were by by Boeing C-17A Globemaster aircraft. During the evening period, there was also 23 unknown aircraft types operations during the November 2012 period.
Figure B6 shows the aggregation of aircraft movements by time of day for the whole of the reporting period from Saturday 1 December to Monday 31 December 2012.
Figure B6 – Distribution of Aircraft Movements by Time of Day for December 2012
[pic]
In the early morning period between 0000 and 0700 hrs, there were no military aircraft operations during the month of December 2012. There was 2 circuit operations by civil light aircraft 1 arrival 1 departure and 3 operations unknown aircraft types during the morning period during December 2012.
The evening period between 1900 and 2400 hrs, there were 9 military aircraft operations during December 2012 period. Of these 9 military aircraft operations, 7 were by Boeing C-17A Globemaster and w were by Airbus KC-30A MRRT aircraft. During the evening period there were no operations by civil or unknown aircraft types during the December 2012 period.
Annex C
Community Exposure to Aircraft Noise
| | |
| | |
| | |
Print this page on blue paper
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Assessment of Aircraft Noise Events
LAeq Aircraft Noise Events
Tables C1 to C3 detail the 24 Hour LAeq for aircraft noise events for each day of the quarter for each of the four community NMTs.
Table C1 details the daily LAeq contribution from aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs over the 24 hour period for each day of October 2012.
Table C1 – 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise for October 2012
|Day of Month |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|01 |41.2 |26.3 |0.0 |38.6 |
|02 |60.4 |0.0 |51.4 |61.9 |
|03 |61.2 |43.2 |53.1 |64.4 |
|04 |53.1 |44.2 |51.9 |56.8 |
|05 |64.0 |44.6 |51.8 |53.2 |
|06 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |23.3 |
|07 |29.7 |31.6 |36.8 |36.5 |
|08 |59.0 |44.5 |51.4 |60.6 |
|09 |59.2 |37.0 |60.1 |58.6 |
|10 |54.8 |37.3 |50.4 |56.4 |
|11 |42.8 |36.0 |53.7 |61.9 |
|12 |43.9 |35.9 |40.6 |51.9 |
|13 |0.0 |0.0 |28.5 |37.0 |
|14 |0.0 |34.4 |30.0 |0.0 |
|15 |61.7 |33.2 |55.0 |62.4 |
|16 |61.7 |43.4 |60.6 |64.7 |
|17 |62.9 |40.6 |58.2 |61.1 |
|18 |63.0 |28.5 |52.5 |61.1 |
|19 |48.0 |43.4 |48.0 |54.4 |
|20 |32.9 |44.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|21 |29.1 |0.0 |33.4 |27.2 |
|22 |53.0 |41.3 |46.3 |58.0 |
|23 |59.3 |35.4 |52.1 |61.1 |
|24 |54.1 |27.1 |51.1 |60.8 |
|25 |0.0 |31.1 |38.9 |31.8 |
|26 |45.5 |39.1 |50.4 |51.1 |
|27 |0.0 |27.3 |34.6 |40.7 |
|28 |31.7 |30.9 |0.0 |35.8 |
|29 |50.5 |41.2 |37.5 |57.9 |
|30 |47.4 |28.3 |49.8 |58.0 |
|31 |51.6 |34.4 |51.8 |56.3 |
The average of the LAeq aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs for the month of October 2012 are as follows:
| |Willowbank Cemetery NMT |57.1 dB(A) |
| |Kholo Gardens NMT |39.2 dB(A) |
| |Walloon State School NMT |52.3 dB(A) |
| |Yamanto COC NMT |58.4 dB(A) |
Table C2 details the daily LAeq contribution from aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs over the 24 hour period for each day of November 2012.
Table C2 – 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise Events for November 2012
|Day of Month |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|01 |48.8 |34.8 |52.4 |49.9 |
|02 |55.1 |37.1 |52.2 |54.8 |
|03 |0.0 |35.6 |31.5 |39.3 |
|04 |27.3 |20.8 |0.0 |28.0 |
|05 |55.3 |33.0 |42.1 |58.0 |
|06 |52.8 |40.3 |48.3 |55.3 |
|07 |56.6 |31.6 |45.9 |60.9 |
|08 |49.6 |41.6 |45.6 |57.5 |
|09 |42.9 |27.8 |47.1 |51.3 |
|10 |43.1 |0.0 |0.0 |37.9 |
|11 |32.6 |0.0 |0.0 |38.8 |
|12 |56.8 |35.8 |48.7 |63.4 |
|13 |46.6 |39.0 |52.7 |59.3 |
|14 |50.3 |43.9 |49.0 |59.3 |
|15 |49.5 |39.9 |52.2 |56.3 |
|16 |49.9 |34.1 |44.7 |39.1 |
|17 |33.8 |0.0 |31.5 |32.9 |
|18 |0.0 |0.0 |28.0 |54.2 |
|19 |51.1 |33.9 |49.7 |58.8 |
|20 |57.8 |22.0 |52.2 |61.5 |
|21 |56.1 |35.9 |51.1 |61.4 |
|22 |59.9 |29.8 |48.3 |59.8 |
|23 |48.6 |26.1 |55.7 |54.3 |
|24 |0.0 |22.3 |0.0 |0.0 |
|25 |39.1 |26.0 |0.0 |32.5 |
|26 |51.8 |0.0 |48.9 |61.1 |
|27 |59.5 |47.8 |43.0 |61.9 |
|28 |54.9 |45.6 |47.6 |59.9 |
|29 |49.9 |0.0 |48.9 |55.8 |
|30 |43.5 |21.8 |48.6 |61.4 |
The average of the LAeq aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs for the month of November 2012 are as follows:
| |Willowbank Cemetery NMT |53.0 dB(A) |
| |Kholo Gardens NMT |38.1 dB(A) |
| |Walloon State School NMT |48.7 dB(A) |
| |Yamanto COC NMT |57.8 dB(A) |
Table C3 details the daily LAeq contribution from aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs over the 24 hour period for each day of December 2012.
Table C3 – 24 Hour LAeq Aircraft Noise for December 2012
|Day of Month |Willowbank Cemetery |Kholo Gardens |Walloon PS |Yamanto COC |
|01 |0.0 |0.0 |26.8 |0.0 |
|02 |38.8 |0.0 |28.6 |0.0 |
|03 |47.6 |35.0 |48.1 |57.5 |
|04 |52.9 |45.9 |49.4 |58.6 |
|05 |49.8 |37.4 |43.5 |51.4 |
|06 |61.9 |0.0 |45.7 |55.9 |
|07 |49.5 |50.2 |51.7 |55.5 |
|08 |0.0 |22.1 |0.0 |26.9 |
|09 |26.2 |35.8 |0.0 |0.0 |
|10 |54.3 |0.0 |42.3 |58.1 |
|11 |57.2 |34.6 |47.0 |58.9 |
|12 |53.3 |27.2 |53.5 |61.1 |
|13 |61.0 |29.8 |49.6 |62.9 |
|14 |55.7 |50.0 |41.4 |57.5 |
|15 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|16 |0.0 |0.0 |26.3 |0.0 |
|17 |38.5 |0.0 |0.0 |32.4 |
|18 |0.0 |23.1 |30.1 |0.0 |
|19 |56.6 |25.2 |0.0 |0.0 |
|20 |38.6 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|21 |30.3 |28.1 |0.0 |36.7 |
|22 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|23 |30.8 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|24 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|25 |0.0 |31.8 |0.0 |0.0 |
|26 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|27 |0.0 |32.6 |0.0 |0.0 |
|28 |31.2 |0.0 |37.3 |40.5 |
|29 |0.0 |27.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|30 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
|31 |0.0 |28.0 |0.0 |0.0 |
The average of the LAeq aircraft noise events for each of the community NMTs for the month of December 2012 are as follows:
| |Willowbank Cemetery NMT |52.2 dB(A) |
| |Kholo Gardens NMT |39.3 dB(A) |
| |Walloon State School NMT |43.9 dB(A) |
| |Yamanto COC NMT |53.8 dB(A) |
Maximum Aircraft Noise Events
Tables C4 to C7 details the maximum noise levels recorded by the AMB NFPMS for each of the four community NMTs. The average LAmax value is the arithmetic average of all the noise events. The tables show noise events for aircraft that are based at RAAF Base Amberley or regularly operate from RAAF Base Amberley.
The Standard Deviation of a data set is defined as the square root of the variance. It is a widely used parameter for the variability or dispersion of data points from the mean (arithmetic average). A low standard deviation indicates that the data points tend to be very close together, whereas a high standard deviation indicates that the data points are spread over a large range of values.
AS2021-2000 specifies for the purpose of noise control the use of the “Aircraft noise level” – the average maximum noise level which is determined for each aircraft type on the specific flight mode or track relevant to the receiver location. The NFPMS report does not provide “Aircraft noise levels” as defined in AS2021-2000.
Willowbank Lawn Cemetery
Table C4 summarizes the maximum aircraft noise events recorded by the AMB NFPMS for Willowbank Cemetery NMT for the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
Table C4 – Maximum Aircraft Noise Events – Willowbank Cemetery NMT
Aircraft |Operation |Rwy |LAmax Low |LAmax High |LAmax Average |Standard Deviation |No of Records | |B350 |Departure |04 |67.3 |67.3 |67.3 |- |1 | |KC-30A |Departure |15 |72.3 |85.9 |77.8 |3.4 |18 | |KC-30A |Circuit |15 |68.2 |74.1 |71.2 |4.2 |2 | |B350 |Departure |15 |72.2 |72.2 |72.2 |- |1 | |B737 |Arrival |15 |71.7 |71.7 |71.7 |- |1 | |B737 |Circuit |15 |70.6 |76.7 |72.8 |2.5 |8 | |C-130 |Arrival |15 |72.7 |72.7 |72.7 |- |1 | |C-130 |Departure |15 |69.1 |74.1 |71.5 |2.5 |3 | |C-17A |Departure |15 |68.5 |86.2 |76.6 |5.8 |21 | |C-17A |Circuit |15 |68.1 |79.8 |75.8 |3.4 |10 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |15 |71.9 |85.3 |79.4 |5.1 |5 | |F/A-18F |Departure |15 |69.5 |101.0 |83.2 |7.7 |84 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |15 |72.2 |95.8 |82.6 |7.4 |12 | |B350 |Departure |22 |69.9 |69.9 |69.9 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |22 |72.5 |75.4 |74.0 |2.1 |2 | |C-17A |Circuit |22 |71.3 |71.3 |71.3 |- |1 | |KC-30A |Arrival |33 |71.1 |76.6 |73.2 |3.0 |3 | |KC-30A |Departure |33 |70.4 |70.4 |70.4 |- |1 | |KC-30A |Circuit |33 |77.0 |77.0 |77.0 |- |1 | |B350 |Arrival |33 |67.4 |69.2 |68.3 |1.3 |2 | |B350 |Circuit |33 |69.3 |69.3 |69.3 |- |1 | |B737 |Arrival |33 |74.3 |74.3 |74.3 |- |1 | |B737 |Departure |33 |73.8 |73.8 |73.8 |- |1 | |B737 |Circuit |33 |73.1 |75.7 |74.2 |1.1 |7 | |C-130 |Arrival |33 |69.0 |73.3 |71.6 |2.3 |3 | |C-130 |Departure |33 |67.7 |82.4 |73.5 |7.8 |3 | |C-17A |Arrival |33 |68.9 |82.5 |74.3 |5.4 |8 | |C-17A |Departure |33 |68.0 |70.5 |69.3 |1.8 |2 | |C-17A |Circuit |33 |67.3 |82.2 |76.5 |4.2 |37 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |33 |68.8 |104.9 |77.9 |5.7 |55 | |F/A-18F |Departure |33 |67.8 |81.1 |72.3 |3.5 |23 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |33 |72.4 |85.4 |77.4 |4.7 |13 | |BAe Hawk |Departure |33 |75.4 |75.4 |75.4 |- |1 | |
Kholo Botanical Gardens NMT
Table C5 summarizes the maximum aircraft noise events recorded by the AMB NFPMS for the Kholo Gardens NMT for the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
Table C5 – Maximum Aircraft Noise Events – Kholo Gardens NMT
Aircraft |Operation |Rwy |LAmax Low |LAmax High |LAmax Average |Standard Deviation |No of Records | |KC-30A |Arrival |15 |62.3 |71.0 |67.4 |3.8 |4 | |KC-30A |Departure |15 |67.1 |67.1 |67.1 |- |1 | |KC-30A |Circuit |15 |66.8 |68.2 |67.5 |1.0 |2 | |B350 |Circuit |15 |67.9 |67.9 |67.9 |- |1 | |B737 |Arrival |15 |65.5 |65.5 |65.5 |- |1 | |C-130 |Arrival |15 |69.5 |69.5 |69.5 |- |1 | |C-130 |Departure |15 |66.4 |66.4 |66.4 |- |1 | |C-17A |Arrival |15 |65.3 |66.3 |65.8 |0.7 |2 | |C-17A |Departure |15 |66.2 |71.0 |67.9 |2.7 |3 | |C-17A |Circuit |15 |63.7 |68.4 |66.1 |3.3 |2 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |15 |63.0 |88.9 |75.0 |9.8 |7 | |F/A-18F |Departure |15 |62.4 |62.4 |62.4 |- |1 | |C-17A |Circuit |22 |64.2 |64.2 |64.2 |- |1 | |B350 |Arrival |33 |62.5 |62.5 |62.5 |- |1 | |B350 |Departure |33 |62.1 |62.1 |62.1 |- |1 | |B737 |Departure |33 |63.9 |73.9 |68.9 |7.1 |2 | |B737 |Circuit |33 |70.8 |70.8 |70.8 |- |1 | |C-130 |Departure |33 |63.3 |63.3 |63.3 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |33 |61.7 |74.2 |68.1 |4.6 |7 | |C-17A |Circuit |33 |63.4 |75.3 |68.8 |4.6 |8 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |33 |65.8 |65.8 |65.8 |- |1 | |F/A-18F |Departure |33 |62.9 |80.9 |71.6 |6.4 |14 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |33 |72.0 |72.0 |72.0 |- |1 | |
Walloon Primary School NMT
Table C6 summarizes the maximum aircraft noise events recorded by the AMB NFPMS for the Walloon State School NMT for the Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
Table C6 – Maximum Aircraft Noise Events – Walloon State School NMT
Aircraft |Operation |Rwy |LAmax Low |LAmax High |LAmax Average |Standard Deviation |No of Records | |KC-30A |Arrival |15 |70.5 |75.9 |72.5 |2.4 |4 | |KC-30A |Departure |15 |70.8 |78.1 |74.4 |3.4 |4 | |KC-30A |Circuit |15 |72.7 |81.3 |77.9 |4.6 |3 | |B350 |Arrival |15 |67.6 |75.0 |71.3 |5.2 |2 | |B350 |Departure |15 |71.8 |71.8 |71.8 |- |1 | |B350 |Circuit |15 |69.1 |75.9 |72.5 |3.1 |5 | |B737 |Arrival |15 |68.5 |68.5 |68.5 |- |1 | |B737 |Circuit |15 |71.4 |75.4 |73.2 |1.6 |9 | |C-130 |Arrival |15 |69.4 |77.6 |74.3 |3.5 |4 | |C-17A |Arrival |15 |70.2 |84.0 |76.6 |6.6 |4 | |C-17A |Departure |15 |71.6 |78.6 |74.9 |3.4 |5 | |C-17A |Circuit |15 |67.9 |82.8 |76.2 |3.8 |19 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |15 |69.4 |88.2 |77.6 |4.2 |72 | |F/A-18F |Departure |15 |68.9 |79.1 |72.8 |2.7 |33 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |15 |71.4 |87.7 |79.5 |5.4 |13 | |BAe Hawk |Arrival |15 |70.6 |70.6 |70.6 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |22 |76.6 |76.6 |76.6 |- |1 | |C-17A |Circuit |22 |73.2 |73.2 |73.2 |- |1 | |KC-30A |Arrival |33 |71.8 |75.9 |73.9 |2.9 |2 | |KC-30A |Departure |33 |74.0 |79.4 |76.9 |1.8 |7 | |B350 |Departure |33 |74.2 |74.2 |74.2 |- |1 | |B350 |Circuit |33 |69.9 |75.7 |72.8 |4.1 |2 | |B737 |Departure |33 |76.2 |80.4 |78.3 |2.1 |3 | |B737 |Circuit |33 |71.1 |77.9 |74.1 |2.5 |6 | |C-130 |Arrival |33 |75.5 |78.4 |77.0 |2.1 |2 | |C-130 |Departure |33 |74.6 |74.6 |74.6 |- |1 | |C-17A |Arrival |33 |74.2 |74.2 |74.2 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |33 |69.3 |85.2 |76.4 |6.6 |5 | |C-17A |Circuit |33 |70.7 |87.6 |75.6 |4.2 |22 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |33 |67.8 |81.0 |73.4 |5.9 |4 | |F/A-18F |Departure |33 |70.8 |95.5 |78.1 |5.0 |48 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |33 |73.9 |86.3 |77.7 |4.9 |5 | |BAe Hawk |Departure |33 |79.3 |88.0 |84.8 |4.8 |3 | |
Christian Outreach Centre, Yamanto NMT
Table C7 summarizes the Maximum aircraft noise events recorded by the AMB NFPMS for the Yamanto COC NMT for Quarter 4 2012 reporting period.
Table C7 – Maximum Aircraft Noise Events – Yamanto COC NMT
Aircraft |Operation |Rwy |LAmax Low |LAmax High |LAmax Average |Standard Deviation |No of Records | |KC-30A |Arrival |15 |64.9 |72.3 |69.8 |2.9 |5 | |KC-30A |Departure |15 |65.2 |78.8 |73.3 |2.7 |44 | |KC-30A |Circuit |15 |71.9 |79.1 |75.2 |3.6 |3 | |B350 |Departure |15 |66.3 |67.0 |66.7 |0.5 |2 | |B737 |Arrival |15 |67.7 |67.7 |67.7 |- |1 | |B737 |Departure |15 |70.7 |74.3 |72.6 |1.5 |6 | |B737 |Circuit |15 |70.0 |70.0 |70.0 |- |1 | |C-130 |Departure |15 |67.7 |75.2 |70.5 |2.7 |7 | |C-17A |Arrival |15 |71.3 |73.7 |72.5 |1.7 |2 | |C-17A |Departure |15 |66.0 |87.0 |73.7 |3.1 |52 | |C-17A |Circuit |15 |67.8 |79.4 |72.3 |3.5 |31 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |15 |65.5 |80.2 |72.4 |4.3 |22 | |F/A-18F |Departure |15 |79.8 |98.8 |91.5 |3.4 |84 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |15 |66.0 |98.3 |85.8 |9.9 |16 | |BAe Hawk |Departure |15 |78.9 |78.9 |78.9 |- |1 | |B350 |Arrival |22 |77.0 |77.0 |77.0 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |22 |76.8 |81.6 |79.2 |3.4 |2 | |C-17A |Circuit |22 |74.1 |75.0 |74.6 |0.6 |2 | |KC-30A |Arrival |33 |69.2 |71.2 |70.2 |1.0 |3 | |KC-30A |Departure |33 |77.0 |84.8 |80.9 |5.5 |2 | |B737 |Circuit |33 |66.9 |82.0 |73.1 |7.9 |3 | |C-130 |Arrival |33 |74.9 |74.9 |74.9 |- |1 | |C-17A |Arrival |33 |71.6 |71.6 |71.6 |- |1 | |C-17A |Departure |33 |70.0 |77.7 |73.9 |5.4 |2 | |C-17A |Circuit |33 |64.4 |75.0 |69.9 |3.4 |17 | |F/A-18F |Arrival |33 |69.5 |98.1 |83.0 |6.3 |80 | |F/A-18F |Departure |33 |64.7 |92.2 |76.6 |5.8 |47 | |F/A-18F |Circuit |33 |68.7 |96.1 |81.7 |8.5 |21 | |BAe Hawk |Arrival |33 |67.4 |68.5 |68.0 |0.8 |2 | |BAe Hawk |Departure |33 |67.7 |73.9 |70.7 |3.1 |3 | |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- tennessee department of education report card
- department of education report cards
- department of education report card
- ohio department of education report cards
- department of education report school
- kentucky department of education school report card
- kentucky department of education school report cards
- kentucky department of education report card
- oregon department of education report cards
- alabama state department of education report card
- minnesota department of education report card
- louisiana department of education school report cards