SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 SMART Flight Path Trial 2 Draft Report 2014 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Introduction Aviation influence, roles and responsibilities in New Zealand Legal framework for aviation in New Zealand Flights into Auckland SMART Flight Path Trial 3 Draft Report 2014 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 SMART flight paths Results Decision on whether to approve under CAR Part 173.201(d) Public consultation SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Introduction Airways Corporation of New Zealand (Airways), the Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand (BARNZ), representing airlines, and Auckland International Airport Ltd (Auckland Airport) are considering the use of new SMART flight paths. SMART flight paths are aimed at improving flight path and aircraft efficiency, use satellite navigation and are specifically designed to maximise flying over industrial areas of Auckland city and to reduce the distance flown over residential areas. The purpose of this report is to summarise the origins and design of this initiative, to present information on what the participating airlines and Airways have learnt during the recent trial of the initiative, and to summarise the public feedback Auckland Airport has received so far. The report concludes with a list of potential modifications to the flight paths trialled, which is based on lessons the airlines gained during the trial by using the new flight paths, and lessons Airways gained during the trial as they managed the overall air traffic at Auckland Airport using both the new SMART and pre-existing flight paths. To assist interested parties to gain a deeper insight into these lessons, the following reports are available at: www.aucklandflightpathtrial.co.nz • Airways New Zealand SMART Approach Trial Report, 31 March 2014. • Auckland SMART Approach Trial Review, An Airline Perspective, Prepared by BARNZ, 3 April 2014. • Marshall Day Acoustics Auckland Airport Smart Approach Trial Noise Report, 03 April 2014. Auckland Airport is required to make a decision under Civil Aviation Rule Part 173.201(d) on whether to agree that the Airport may be used for new SMART flight paths. Auckland Airport is seeking public feedback to inform its decision and intends that this report will give interested parties a level of information which will help with any further feedback they wish to give on any matter that they believe should be considered as part of this decision. Before Auckland Airport makes this decision, it invites members of the public to provide feedback on this document so that it can consider their views in making its decision. Auckland Airport notes that Rule 173.201(d) does not set out any matters that Auckland Airport must consider before making its decision. You are therefore welcome to provide your views on any matter that you think is appropriate for Auckland Airport to consider. In turn, Auckland Airport will consider all views with an open mind. Ultimately, however, it will need to exercise its judgement on the extent to which it is appropriate for views provided to influence the final decision. Auckland Airport will publish its decision in the fourth quarter of 2014. 5 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 SMART Flight Path Trial 7 Draft Report 2014 Aviation influence, roles and responsibilities in New Zealand 2.1 Overview 2.6 Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand 2.2 International Civil Aviation Organisation 2.7 Airports 2.3 M inistry of Transport 2.8 Airlines 2.4 Civil Aviation Authority 2.9 Pilots 2.5 A irways Corporation of New Zealand SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 8 2.0 Aviation influence, roles and responsibilities in New Zealand 2.1 Overview There are several parties that either influence the management of or assume roles and responsibilities for aviation within New Zealand. These include: • International Civil Aviation Organisation; • Ministry of Transport; • Civil Aviation Authority; • Airways Corporation of New Zealand; • Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand; • Airports; • Airlines; and • Pilots. Below we outline the role each party plays in relation to flight tracks and noise management at Auckland Airport. 2.2 International Civil Aviation Organisation The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations responsible for the safe and orderly development of the world’s aviation industry. It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security, efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection. These standards and regulations flow through to New Zealand’s aviation-related legislation. In 2010, the ICAO Assembly resolved that states (i.e. member countries) should achieve a 2%pa improvement in fuel efficiency until 2020 and thereafter have an aspirational goal of maintaining that rate through to 20501. How that is to be achieved is still being worked through by the aviation industry as a whole, and the International Aviation Transport Association has adopted targets that go towards meeting the ICAO resolution. 1Resolution A37-19: Consolidated statement of continuing ICAO policies and practices related to environmental protection – climate change. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 2.3 Ministry of Transport The Ministry of Transport (Ministry) is the New Zealand Government’s principal transport adviser. The overriding objective of the Ministry is to: 1. improve the overall performance of the transport system across New Zealand; 2. improve the performance of transport Crown entities; and 3. achieve better value for money for the Government from its investment in the transport system2. The Ministry represents New Zealand’s transport interests internationally, particularly in aviation. As such, the Ministry advises Government on policy and legislation to make air travel in New Zealand safer. The Ministry also acts as the Minister’s agent in the Government’s relationship with the Civil Aviation Authority and other transport agencies. An example of the Ministry’s policy advice is the National Airspace Policy. National Airspace Policy 2012 The National Airspace Policy 2012 (Policy) was created in response to a Global Air Navigation Plan which ICAO issued in 2007, recognising the step-change from land-based navigational aids to performance-based navigation technology and global positioning satellites (GPS), which is the essence of SMART technology. The Policy states that it is consistent with the Government’s goal for New Zealand’s economic growth and its objective of an effective, efficient, safe, secure, accessible and resilient transport system that supports that growth. The Policy includes the principle of a safe airspace which is compatible with international standards and best practice. The Policy aims to deliver an airspace system which is efficient, environmentally responsible, integrated and enhances the ability for systems and organisations within the aviation sector to work more collaboratively. 2Source: http://www.transport.govt.nz/about/ 9 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 10 2.4 Civil Aviation Authority The Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (CAA) regulates civil aviation in New Zealand and enforces ICAO’s standards and regulations to the extent they are incorporated into relevant New Zealand legislation. The CAA was established by the Civil Aviation Amendment Act 1992 and operates under the Civil Aviation Act 1990. It is focused on establishing civil aviation safety and security standards, and monitoring adherence to those standards3. Civil Aviation Rules, (CARs) for New Zealand govern how aircraft are to manoeuvre in New Zealand airspace, as well as how aircraft are to approach and depart New Zealand airports. The New Zealand Government agreed in August 2011 to the development of the Policy and a National Airspace and Air Navigation Plan. The CAA is leading the development of the Plan, and it states that performance-based navigation will be an important component of this work3. 2.5 Airways Corporation of New Zealand Airways manages New Zealand’s 30 million km2 of airspace, providing air traffic control, surveillance, communication, flight inspections, mapping and airspace design services. Airways operates under rules set down by the CAA, which are developed using ICAO guidelines. Airways is a State-owned Enterprise, a fully-owned subsidiary of the New Zealand Government operating as a commercial business. Airways’ main role in relation to the SMART trial is designing the SMART flight paths and procedures for use of those flight paths, and integrating the SMART trial aircraft into the overall air traffic approaching and departing Auckland Airport. 3Source: http://www.caa.govt.nz/about_caa/about_the_CAA.htm SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 2.6 Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand The Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand Inc (BARNZ) is an incorporated society comprising 21 member airlines which operate scheduled international and domestic services into and within New Zealand. BARNZ focuses on representing the airlines across four broad areas: • consultation on airport pricing; • airport capital expenditure; • Government departments and agencies; and • noise issues around airports. BARNZ’s main role in relation to the SMART trial is representing the airlines that use Auckland Airport. 2.7 Airports Airports provide the infrastructure for aircraft to land and take off, and facilities for processing passengers as they arrive and leave. An airport’s main influence in relation to aircraft noise relates to its role in on-airport development, influencing off-airport development (e.g. via designations in District Plans), and airline schedules management. CARs state that; “an Instrument Flight Procedure must not be designed for an aerodrome or heliport unless the operator of the aerodrome or heliport agrees in writing that the aerodrome or heliport may be used for IFR [Instrument Flight Rules] operations using the intended instrument flight procedure” 4 . The main role of Auckland Airport in relation to the SMART trial is agreeing to the instrument flight procedures and responding to concerns raised by the public about aircraft noise. 4CAR Part 173.201(d) 11 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 12 2.8 Airlines Twenty-two airlines fly into and out of Auckland Airport. Airlines decide their flight schedules, frequencies of operation, which markets to serve, what fares to charge and types of aircraft and equipment to operate. They do so in compliance with aircraft certification and operating requirements. In addition to the legal requirement to operate under New Zealand CARs, airlines set their own standard operating procedures based on best business and operating practices. An airline’s fleet replacement strategy determines the type of aircraft in operation and the timeframes for using newer aircraft. Three airlines participated in the SMART trial – Air New Zealand, Jetconnect5 and Jetstar. Their main role in relation to the SMART trial is managing their aircraft operating fleets and setting operating procedures that meet CAR requirements. 2.9 Pilots Pilots have the ultimate responsibility for the safe operation of their aircraft. Although each airline can adopt procedures and recommended best practices, pilots still retain the operational authority and discretion to make final decisions regarding the safe operation of the aircraft. Pilots are expected and encouraged to adhere to special operational procedures for arrivals and departures. However, in the interest of safety, pilots may deviate from such procedures when necessary. The main role of pilots in relation to the SMART trial is adhering to CAR requirements, including noise abatement procedures set by regulatory authorities, the airport and their airlines. 5Jetconnect is an airline based in Auckland, New Zealand. The airline is a wholly owned subsidiary of Qantas and was established in July 2002. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 13 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 14 SMART Flight Path Trial 15 Draft Report 2014 Legal framework for aviation in New Zealand 3.1 Overview 3.2 Civil Aviation Act 1990 3.3 Civil Aviation Rules 3.4 Resource Management Act 1991 3.5 Manukau District Plan SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 16 3.0 Legal framework for aviation in New Zealand 3.1 Overview The planning and operation of Auckland Airport is regulated through a number of national and regional Acts, Rules and Plans. Aviation legislation and policy focuses on the safe and efficient operation of airports. Land use planning legislation and policy protects both the airport’s function and the surrounding communities from the impacts of the airport, especially in relation to noise. These Acts, Rules and Plans include: • Civil Aviation Act 1990; • Civil Aviation Rules; • Resource Management Act 1991; and • Manukau District Plan. 3.2 Civil Aviation Act 1990 The Civil Aviation Act 1990 is New Zealand’s central piece of aviation legislation. The Act is administered by the CAA. It establishes rules of operation and divisions of responsibility within the New Zealand civil aviation system in order to promote aviation safety. It also ensures that New Zealand’s obligations under international aviation agreements are implemented and it consolidates and amends the law relating to civil aviation in New Zealand. CARs developed under the Civil Aviation Act provide the framework to enact the requirements of the Civil Aviation Act. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 3.3 Civil Aviation Rules The CAA governs civil aviation in New Zealand and sets rules relating to airport and aircraft operations using CARs. CARs cover topics such as aircraft, personnel, airspace, general operating and flight rules and noise abatement procedures. 3.4 Resource Management Act 1991 New Zealand’s Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is the nation’s central piece of environmental legislation. The RMA is managed by the Ministry for the Environment. Statutory regulation of aviation-related noise arises from the RMA, which provides mechanisms for placing limits on activities making noise, sets out duties and enables the taking of enforcement action to prevent excessive or unreasonable noise. The relevant sections of the RMA are sections 9 and 16. 3.5 Manukau District Plan Auckland Airport is a requiring authority with designations which place various controls over activities on airport land (the Designated Area in the Manukau Operative District Plan). The designation for the airport includes conditions to control noise from aircraft operations and engine testing on aircraft generated at and by the airport. 17 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 18 SMART Flight Path Trial 19 Draft Report 2014 Flights into Auckland 4.1 Operating procedures 4.2 Traditional flight paths 4.3 Movement numbers SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 20 4.0 Flights into Auckland 4.1 Operating procedures Each country has a set of operating procedures for aircraft operating within their designated airspace. General operating and flight rules for New Zealand are articulated in CAR Part 91. This CAR outlines general flight rules, visual flight rules (VFR), instrument flight rules (IFR) and other requirements to operate aircraft in New Zealand airspace6, 7. CAR Part 93 provides aerodrome traffic rules and noise abatement procedures for a number of New Zealand’s airports, including Auckland Airport. These rules include requirements for pilots to approach and depart runways under certain conditions to minimise noise impacts from landing and take-off operations. Auckland Airport’s runway is orientated north-east to south-west. The runway’s mode of operation is called either “Runway 05” or “Runway 23”, representing the abbreviated magnetic compass direction of the runway. The runway is 50 degrees when approaching from the south-west or departing to the north-east, and is 230 degrees when approaching from the north-east or departing to the south-west. This is illustrated on the next page. 6Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and Visual Flight Rules (VFR) are the international requirements governing all aspects of aircraft operations. IFR rules are established for aircraft that fly and navigate by reference to instruments in the cockpit. IFR aircraft can fly in any weather conditions day or night and within clouds, IFR aircraft can also fly using visual references outside the cockpit (horizon, buildings, flora, etc), this may be done when they are close to an airport and positioning to land. The SMART flights operated under IFR using cockpit instruments. VFR rules are established for aircraft that fly and navigate by visual references outside the cockpit. VFR aircraft usually fly in clear skies during the day but not within clouds or in bad weather, and not normally at night. 7 Specific details for each airport’s flight rules are published in New Zealand’s Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP). SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Runway 05 Arrival from South West Ru n way Departure to North East Runway 23 Departure to South West Ru n way Arrival from North East Aircraft generally take off and land into the wind, therefore wind direction dictates whether Runway 05 or Runway 23 will be operated. The predominant wind direction at Auckland Airport is westerly, so Runway 23 dominates. When there is tailwind of less than 5 knots and minimal air traffic, it is possible for Airways to operate Auckland Airport’s runway in a reciprocal mode (meaning aircraft can both land and take off over the Manukau Harbour). These conditions sometimes occur at night, and this reciprocal mode is one of the noise abatement procedures included in CAR Part 93. 21 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 22 4.2 Traditional flight paths Aircraft fly from destination to destination within designated flight paths, which are effectively ‘highways’ in the sky. These allow aircraft to predictably, and therefore safely, fly along standard routes. These routes are marked on published charts and are used by pilots to plan their flights. In the vicinity of an airport, there are additional routes which guide aircraft to and from runways under IFR conditions8. Routes that guide aircraft to and from runways are known as Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs). SIDs and STARs have specified procedures, including directional and height limits, which pilots are required to observe when flying into and out of a destination, unless instructed otherwise by Air Traffic Control. While flight paths are often depicted as single lines on a map, it is usually not possible for all aircraft following a particular flight path to fly precisely along the same line. In practice, individual flight paths tend to occur within flight corridors that can be a number of kilometres wide. The exception to this is when performance-based navigation (PBN) paths are used, (referred to as SMART flight paths in this report). PBN utilises GPS technology on the aircraft and can follow flight paths to a far greater degree of accuracy9. There is considerable variation in where aircraft fly day-to-day, for reasons including weather, airspace congestion and activity at other aerodromes (eg, Ardmore, Whenuapai, etc). Most areas of Auckland experience overflight10 by arriving and/or departing aircraft. 8IFR and visual flight rules (VFR) are discussed in footnote 5 on page 20. Ministry of Transport website includes a discussion of PBN at the following location: http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/air/performancebasednavigation/ 10“Overflight” is a term used to describe the flight of an aircraft over a specific area or territory. 9The SMART Flight Path Trial 23 Draft Report 2014 4.3 Movement numbers Aircraft movements at Auckland Airport have plateaued in recent years, falling from a peak of 162,000 movements11 in 2008. Over the past three to four years there have been around 155,000 movements per annum (currently approximately 45,000 international and 110,000 domestic). Domestic movements are mostly to and from the south. International movements are mostly to and from the north, with some 80% of those to and from the North West. The diagrams below show two typical weeks of aircraft movements at Auckland Airport before the SMART Trial (in September 2011). The Runway 23 diagram shows when predominantly aircraft landed at Auckland Airport from the north-east and departed to the south-west (red lines indicate approaches and green lines departures). The Runway 05 diagram shows when predominantly aircraft landed from the south-west and departed to the north-east. Direction of approach and departure is wind-dependant. Runway 23 predominant movements Arrivals Departures Runway 05 predominant movements Arrivals Departures 11A “movement” includes both the takeoff and landing of the same aircraft. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 24 SMART Flight Path Trial 25 Draft Report 2014 SMART flight paths 5.1 What is driving the initiative? 5.2 SMART benefits 5.3 Auckland’s SMART flight paths trial SMART Flight Path Trial 26 Draft Report 2014 5.0 SMART flight paths 5.1 What is driving the initiative? As outlined earlier in this report, in 2007 ICAO urged member countries to move to PBN. According to ICAO: “PBN is helping the global aviation community reduce aviation congestion, conserve fuel, protect the environment, reduce the impact of aircraft noise and maintain reliable all-weather operations, even at the most challenging airports. It provides operators with greater flexibility while increasing the safety of regional and national airspace systems.” 12 The New Zealand Government has complied with that resolution and issued a National Airspace Policy which recognises the step-change to PBN, allowing safer and more efficient airspace management. 5.2 SMART benefits Satellite navigation allows curved approach paths to runways and the ability for aircraft to be established on the extended runway centerline13 much closer to the runway than is possible using a ground-based instrument landing system (ILS). Helensville Takapuna Belmont Chatswood In westerly wind conditions, most international aircraft approaching Auckland have to fly over the region to align with the appropriate runway to land into the wind. Satellite navigation provides the opportunity for shorter approach paths, resulting in fuel and carbon emission savings and fewer residents being overflown. The diagram below highlights Auckland’s traditional ground-based instrument landing arrival path to Runway 23 and the much shorter SMART, performance-based, navigation approach. The diagram also shows the waypoints14 aircraft use to guide them into Auckland Airport. Devonport Te Atatu Penisula Herne Bay Herne Bay Mission Bay u St Heliers Point Chevalier VIBAG Eastern Beach Newmarket Meadowbank Rosebank Mount Albert ndene Sandringham Avondale Greenlane LOSGA Farm Cove Cornwall Park Ellerslie Howick Panmure ELNAK Glen Eden Penrose North Park Pakuranga Onehunga Green Bay Hillsborough Lynfield ANKOT Burswood Titirangi East Tamaki Heights Mangere Bridge Whitford Otara Papatoe Auckland International Airport Alfriston Wiri Manurewa East EMRAG SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 SMART technology also allows constant descent when aircraft are on final approach to a runway, allowing aircraft engines to run close to flight idle when the SMART flight path design is correctly integrated with the preceding STAR. SMART technology almost eliminates the traditional step-down approach, where aircraft descend in steps separated by intervals of level flight and engine thrust (see diagram below). Due to the longer flight path and level flight engine thrust of traditional approaches, more fuel is used, delivering more CO2 emissions into the environment, and more noise is generated. In summary, the conventional step-down approach, which largely relies on ground-based navigational aids, is noisier, less fuel efficient and less environmentally friendly than a continuous descent using SMART technology. Constant SMART Approach 3 Degrees Conventional step–down Approach Traditional land-based navigational technology requires flights approaching the runway to join the extended runway centreline seven to ten nautical miles from the runway. Satellite-based SMART technology allows a curved approach with aircraft joining the extended runway centreline within three to four nautical miles of the runway. The maximum benefits from SMART technology are achieved when flight paths join the extended centreline as close as practical to the runway, thereby reducing the distance flown as much as possible. 12Source:http://www.icao.int/safety/pbn/Pages/default.aspx 13Aircraft need to approach and land on a runway by establishing on the extended runway centerline. waypoint names illustrated in the aerial photo are computer-generated words. Their locations are approximately as follows: LOGSA is above the Mt Roskill end of Sandringham; ELNAK is above One Tree Hill; ANKOT is above Pakuranga; EMRAG is above Brookby/Clevedon; VIBAG is above the Tamaki Strait of Maraetai. 14The 27 SMART Flight Path Trial 28 Draft Report 2014 5.3 Auckland’s SMART flight paths trial At the request of the one of the participating airlines, Airways designed and proposed four SMART flight paths in line with various civil aviation requirements. CAR Part 173 requires Auckland Airport to agree that the airport may be used for the SMART flight paths before any flight path can be implemented. Auckland Airport agreed that three of the four proposed SMART flight paths should be trialled, two from the north and one from the south. The diagram below highlights the three trialled SMART paths. One SMART flight path descends from the north to Runway 23 (Green X23) and one from the south to Runway 23 (Red Y23). The third SMART flight path (Blue X05) approaches and descends from the north to Runway 05. This report refers to each of the SMART flight paths individually as Green X23, Red Y23, or Blue X05 as shown in the diagram below. Location of SMART Approach Tracks Legend SMART flight paths Red Y23 Green X23 Helensville Blue X05 Takapuna Belmont Chatswood Devonport Te Atatu Penisula Massey Herne Bay Herne Bay Mission Bay Te Atatu South Ranui St Heliers Swanson Point Chevalier Eastern Beach Newmarket Rosebank Meadowbank Mount Albert Glendene Greenlane Henderson Valley Sandringham Avondale Farm Cove LOSGA Cornwall Park Ellerslie Howick Panmure Glen Eden Penrose North Park Pakuranga Oratia Onehunga Hillsborough Green Bay Waiatarua Burswood Lynfield Mackies Rest Titirangi East Tamaki Heights Mangere Bridge Whitford Otara Papatoe Auckland International Airport Alfriston Wiri Manurewa East Weymouth Takanini SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 The Red Y23 flight path was designed to largely replicate an existing visual arrival flight path. The Green X23 flight path was designed in the first instance to achieve the minimum flight path length while still remaining within the requirements of the CAR Part 93 noise abatement procedures. The Green X23 flight path was also designed to overfly industrial and greenfield areas, minimise the distance flown at low altitude over residential areas, and to align with existing instrument flight arrival routes. The Blue X05 flight path was designed as a mirror-image of the Green X23 flight path, but approaching the runway from the south-west. To limit the impact of the trial on the community, especially in relation to aircraft noise, the trial was limited to a maximum number of flights that could use each SMART flight path per day. Flights were also only permitted to use the SMART flight paths between 7am and 10pm. The number of flights per flight path was to be increased progressively over the trial period. The table below outlines this process for the Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths. Trial Period Stage 1 (Month 1) Maximum Daily Arrivals Green X23 Blue X05 5 flights 5 flights Review Stage 2 (Month 2 & 3) 10 flights* 10 flights* Review Stage 3 (Month 4–7) 20 flights* 10 flights* Review Stage 4 (Months 8–12) 30 flights* 10 flights* *These numbers were initial recommendations to be confirmed at each review before progressing. However, the increases to the Stage 3 and 4 levels were not implemented, and months 4 to 12 remained at the Stage 2 maximum of 10 flights per day. 29 SMART Flight Path Trial 30 Draft Report 2014 The table below outlines this process for the Red Y23 flight path. Trial Period Maximum Daily Flights Red Y23 Stage 1 (Month 1 & 2) 10 points* Review Stage 2 (Month 3 & 4) 15 points* Review Stage 3 (Month 5–7) 25 points* Review Stage 4 (Months 8–12) 50 points* * For the Red Y23 flight path only, a points system was used, based on the 2 aircraft types using this path (the noisier type was allocated 2 points and the other type 1 point). ** These numbers were initial recommendations to be confirmed at each review before progressing, and the increases did occur Prior to the SMART trial commencing, Auckland Airport engaged sound experts Marshall Day Acoustics15 (MDA), which determined that the trial impacts could be accommodated within the noise provisions in the Manukau District Plan16. MDA measured the noise of five pre-trial flights, using the proposed Green X23 SMART flight path, to confirm that the SMART trial would not breach statutory noise provisions in the Manukau District Plan. The trial of the Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths commenced in November 2012, and Auckland Airport gave approval for the maximum number of allowable flights per day for each of these flight paths to increase from 5 to 10 in December 2012, but no further increases occurred after that date. The trial of the Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths concluded on 31 October 2013. 15Founded in 1981, Marshall Day Acoustics is New Zealand’s leading firm of acoustic engineering consultants who provide the highest standard of environmental and architectural acoustic consulting services. 16Those provisions require the following: aircraft noise outside the High Aircraft Noise Area (HANA) is not allowed to exceed Ldn 65 dB, and aircraft noise outside the HANA and Moderate Aircraft Noise Area (MANA) is not allowed to exceed Ldn 60 dB. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 The trial of the Red Y23 flight path commenced in February 2012, and Auckland Airport gave approval for the number of allowable points17 per day for this flight path to increase as originally designed for each of the Stages (refer to table on previous page). Auckland Airport gave approval for the trial for the Red Y23 flight path to advance to Stage 4 in February 2014, and the trial for the Red Y23 flight path concluded on 30 April 2014. Because the Red Y23 flight path largely replicated the visual approach to Runway 23 from the south, and Green X23 and Blue X05 had been designed to minimise low-altitude flight over residential areas, community noise impacts were expected to be minimal. On that basis, Auckland Airport, Airways and BARNZ decided that more could be learnt about community reaction if the trial was not given pre-publicity. Instead, material relating to the trial was made available on a website so that members of the public could be referred to that if they made enquiries. This approach was discussed at several meetings of the Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group18 and was supported at their meeting on 13 June 2012. 17 Note that because of distinctly different noise-levels of the two aircraft types flying this flight path, a points system was used, rather than a specific maximum of flights. 18This group includes appointees of Auckland Council and representatives of the Council’s local Boards. 31 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 32 SMART Flight Path Trial 33 Draft Report 2014 Results 6.1 Noise monitor results during trial 6.2 Community feedback 6.3 How the airline operational objectives were met 6.4 How the Airways operational objectives were met 6.5 Possible procedural enhancements SMART Flight Path Trial 34 Draft Report 2014 6.0 Results 6.1 Noise monitor results during trial During the course of the trial, five noise monitors operated in the community, in the following locations: • Marsden Avenue, Balmoral. • Coronation Road, Epsom. • Moana Avenue, One Tree Hill. • Torokina Place, Oranga. • Reinheimer Place, Flat Bush. Location of Noise Monitors and SMART Approach Tracks Legend Noise Monitor Red Y23 Takapuna Green X23 Belmont Chatswood Blue X05 Devonport Te Atatu Penisula Herne Bay Herne Bay Mission Bay Te Atatu South Ranui St Heliers Swanson Point Chevalier Eastern Beach Newmarket Meadowbank Rosebank Mount Albert Glendene Henderson Valley Marsden Avenue Avondale Greenlane Coronation Road Farm Cove Ellerslie Howick Panmure Glen Eden Penrose Moana Avenue Green Bay Waiatarua Mackies Rest North Park Pakuranga Oratia Tokorina Place Onehunga Hillsborough Burswood Lynfield Titirangi East Tamaki Heights Mangere Bridge Whitford Otara Reinheimer Place Papatoe Auckland International Airport Alfriston Wiri Manurewa East Weymouth Takanini SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 The Coronation Road noise monitor was a portable monitor from the airport’s noise monitoring system, while the four other monitors were standalone monitors. MDA and Airways collaborated to match data collected from the four standalone monitors with radar data to identify the individual aircraft and noise activity. The internationally-accepted measure for aircraft noise is the ‘average’ noise exposure over an extended period, and airports use this to describe the total noise energy level experienced in the surrounding community. The calculated levels are adjusted for more noise-sensitive times of the day (evening and night) to provide an airport noise-exposure index. The noise metric used in New Zealand is Ldn (or, day-night sound level), defined as: • The 24-hour equivalent continuous sound level calculated with a 10 decibel weighting for the night-time period (10pm to 7am). Auckland Airport’s designation restrictions on noise levels relating to aircraft operation at Auckland Airport are based on Ldn metrics19. Ldn is also the main metric adopted in the US. Another noise metric is LAmax, which measures the maximum noise level of an event. LAmax can be explained as: • The maximum noise level is the highest noise level which occurs during a single noise event. MDA undertook considerable analyses of both the Ldn (day-night average) and the maximum sound level (LAmax) of SMART and non-SMART flights during the trial. While MDA identified that individual SMART flights had marginally higher noise levels (LAmax approximately 3 decibels higher on average), it regarded the difference between SMART and non-SMART flights was not significant and expected such a difference to be “only ‘just perceptible’”. The exception to this was the noise monitor at Reinheimer Place, Flatbush, where MDA judged the difference in LAmax of 7 decibels was likely to be noticeable. SMART flights made up a small percentage of total flights over all these locations, thus when MDA calculated the overall noise exposure level the change in noise level due to the SMART trial was 0.3 to 0.6 decibels Ldn at all five locations. 19Aircraft noise outside the High Aircraft Noise Area (HANA) is not allowed to exceed Ldn 65 dB, and aircraft noise outside the HANA and Moderate Aircraft Noise Area (MANA) is not allowed to exceed Ldn 60 dB. 35 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 36 6.2 Community feedback Auckland Airport has a long-established process in place for handling community feedback on aircraft noise. In April 2013, five months after the Green X23 trial began, a Mt Eden resident identified that the SMART trial was taking place and contacted Auckland Airport. On 3 May 2013, the Central Leader newspaper published the first media story about the trial20. Following the Central Leader story, there was an increase in interest in the trial from the community, media and political stakeholders. The number of calls to Auckland Airport through the established feedback process escalated. Many residents also used other means to express their concerns, such as direct email contact with Auckland Airport management. Residents also directly approached Airways seeking information, and approached local and central government representatives. As a result, Auckland Airport met with certain residents and local and central government stakeholders, and two public meetings were convened by local residents. The first meeting on 12 September 2013 was attended by representatives of Airways, BARNZ and Auckland Airport. The second meeting on 10 October 2013 was attended by BARNZ. As a result of those meetings and questions from political stakeholders, a formal list of 44 questions was put to Airways, BARNZ and Auckland Airport. These were responded to in a joint letter dated 5 December 2013. Detailed analysis by MDA of community feedback revealed that in the period from the initial media coverage on 3 May until the end of the Green X23 trial on 31 October, approximately 76% of the noise event complaints Auckland Airport received were attributed to conventional rather than SMART flight paths (refer to diagram on next page)21. All other complaints related to aircraft following previously applicable procedures. 20 Source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/central-leader/8623168/flight-path-turbulance figures Auckland Airport has made public in this respect related to the 111 aircraft noise event complaints received during April, May and June 2013, analysis of which revealed approximately 10% of the noise events complaint could be attributed to the aircraft using SMART trial flight paths. 21Previous SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Community feedback after initial media coverage (3 May 2013 – 31 Oct 2014) 527 1708 SMART Flights Non–SMART Flights Auckland Airport requested Airways to investigate claims by residents that more than 10 flights were using the Green X23 flight path per day, and/or that SMART flights were occurring between 10pm and 7am. Airways’ investigation concluded that no flights used the SMART flight paths between 10pm and 7am. However, Airways found that on three days during the trial the number of SMART flights using the Green X23 flight path exceeded the maximum allowable flights per day as follows: • 24 June 2013 – exceeded the maximum of 10 flights by 2 flights. • 29 June 2013 – exceeded the maximum of 10 flights by 1 flight. • 01 July 2013 – exceeded the maximum of 10 flights by 4 flights. Airways undertook at that time to ensure additional measures were put in place to ensure the maximum number of flights was not exceeded for the remainder of the trial. Positive and negative feedback was received from residents in areas which experienced a reduction in the number of flights over their homes due to the SMART trial. 37 SMART Flight Path Trial 38 Draft Report 2014 Legend Location of complainants SMART Approaches Red Y23 Green X23 Blue X05 Helensville Takapuna Belmont Chatswood Devonport Te Atatu Penisula Massey Herne Bay Herne Bay Mission Bay Te Atatu South Ranui St Heliers Point Chevalier Eastern Beach Newmarket Meadowbank Rosebank Mount Albert Glendene Henderson Valley Avondale Sandringham Greenlane Cornwall Park Farm Cove Ellerslie Howick Panmure Glen Eden Penrose North Park Pakuranga Oratia Onehunga Green Bay arua Mackies Rest Hillsborough Burswood Lynfield Titirangi East Tamaki Heights Mangere Bridge Otara Papatoe Alfriston Auckland International Airport Wiri Manurewa East Weymouth Takanini SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Feedback in relation to aircraft noise and flight tracks were investigated by both Airways (using SkyView) and MDA (using the Brüel & Kjær Airport Noise and Operations Management System, or ANOMS)22. Analysis of historic radar data showed altitudes of normal flights over Epsom/Royal Oak were slightly higher during 2013 than in previous years. MDA’s investigations concluded that “based on noise measurements, complaint analysis and community-wide effects studies, the noise effects of the SMART procedure trialled are not considered to be significant”.23 The focus of much community concern shifted during the trial. Concern was expressed that there had been flight path changes, other than SMART trial, which had caused increased noise over Auckland. Some concerns cited new air traffic control software called the Collaborative Flow Manager (CFM) and Arrivals Manager (AMAN), as the cause of increased aircraft noise. The CFM system had already been in operation for four years before the SMART trial commenced, and AMAN was introduced in April 2013. Neither CFM nor AMAN have had any negative effect upon aircraft noise24. During the trial, 352 residents provided 1360 pieces of feedback in relation to 2236 separate events. Feedback about what was believed to be SMART-related flights continued even after the trial of the Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths had concluded and no aircraft were using those SMART flight paths. Analysis of this feedback showed that, in relation to the 2236 events, five residents identified 1307 events (i.e. approximately 60% of the total event complaints). One resident identified 19% (i.e. 430) of the events, and in the two months following the end of the trial of the Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths, this particular resident identified a further 374 events. The locations of the 352 residents who expressed concern during the 12-month trial period are shown on the map on the left. 22SkyView is an air traffic control replay tool that can show aircraft flight paths in a vertical and lateral sense and this information can be accurately overlaid onto a geographic background. It is not a noise monitoring tool, but it can provide very accurate information on aircraft heights and positions sequenced with times and dates. ANOMS is the world-leading system for accurate monitoring and management of noise at any size airport and across multiple airport locations. 23Marshall Day Acoustics: Auckland Airport SMART Approach Noise Report, 3 April 2014. 24CFM controls when aircraft leave their departure airport so that they are not delayed on arrival. AMAN controls sequences so that aircraft arrive on the extended runway centreline when there is a runway slot available, using established STARS (though air traffic controllers do have the ability to take an aircraft off its planned flight track to expedite its joining the extended runway centreline). Further explanation can be found at: http://www.airways.co.nz/about_Airways/media_releases/2013_Airways_Barco_collaboration.asp 39 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 40 6.3 How the airline operational objectives were met The objectives of the trial from an airline perspective were to assess: • the performance of aircraft flying the flight paths in the various weather conditions across a year; and • how effectively Airways would be able to utilise the SMART procedure and merge aircraft on the SMART flight paths and aircraft on conventional tracks onto the extended centerline for final approach. In assessing this, the airlines also wanted to ensure that runway capacity in terms of aircraft movements per hour was not adversely affected. Three aircraft types took part in the Green X23 and Blue X05 SMART flight paths, Air New Zealand Boeing 777s, Air New Zealand and Jetstar Airbus A320s and Jetconnect Boeing 737s. The two aircraft types that took part in the Red Y23 flight path were Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s. Before each aircraft participating in the trial entered the “SMART” component of its entire journey, they would generally have flown on a STAR25. 25As discussed earlier in the report, STAR stands for Standard Terminal Arrival Routes. An aircraft approaching Auckland Airport which is given approval to utilise, for example the Green X23 flight path would use a STAR until the waypoint LOSGA, at which point the SMART flight path component of its journey would commence. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Airlines anticipated prior to the trial that the transitions from STAR to SMART would be seamless. However, Auckland Airport’s understanding from the airlines is that all three aircraft types had difficulty with the transition in relation to the Green X23 flight path26. Both the A320 and the B737 tended to fly a level section, as opposed to a constant descent operation, around and downstream of LOSGA to the next waypoint ELNAK, a distance of 2.6 nautical miles. In addition, Auckland Airport’s understanding from the airlines is that all three aircraft types had difficulty keeping below the maximum specified descent speed downstream of LOSGA, and that meant measures such as air brakes, extended flaps and early lowering of landing gear were required to slow the aircraft. The airlines have informed Auckland Airport that these measures created additional airframe noise that was not anticipated by them. The airlines involved in the trial believe that the SMART flight paths could be improved from both an operational and noise perspective by commencing SMART flight paths further out, and by raising the altitude of the flight path at LOSGA to steepen the profile and increase the maximum permitted speed within the SMART section of the approach. Airways considers that implementing a steeper descent-path angle and an increase in the procedure design speeds are achievable, although the ability to increase maximum speeds on the flight path is limited by the turning radius required to join onto the extended centreline. Any such enhancements take approximately four to six months to develop and another four to six months to implement. Auckland Airport understands from BARNZ that the airlines were satisfied with the second of the two operational objectives, that air traffic management was effective and runway efficiency was not compromised. In summary, the airlines found that while SMART technology supports low-thrust engine operations, the trialled flight paths were not optimised for low-noise operations. 26Auckland Airport has not received advice from airlines about such aircraft performance on the Red Y23 flight path or the Blue X05 flight path. 41 SMART Flight Path Trial 42 Draft Report 2014 6.4 How the Airways operational objectives were met Airways advised Auckland Airport that it had eight objectives for the trial. As documented below, Airways considers those were largely achieved. Airways Key Objectives Be aligned with the public ICAO 2013 – 2028 Global Air Navigation Plan 4th Edition Achieved Be aligned with ICAO Aviation System Block Upgrades. Block 0 – Performance Based Navigation, Continuous Decent Operations, Continuous Climb Operations. Achieved Be aligned with ICAO Performance Based Navigation – Safety, Capacity, Efficiency, Environment, and Access (With a focus on Environment and Access). Achieved Have alignment with the New Zealand Government National Airspace Policy and New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority National Airspace and Air Navigation Plan Documents. Achieved Operate, validate and integrate SMART approach traffic in Air Traffic Management real–world operations for A320, B738 and B777 aircraft types. Achieved Measure lateral and vertical flight paths for comformance to design profiles. Achieved In conjunction with Auckland Airport, assess aircraft noise feedback to ensure recorded values are as expected for the trial. Achieved Determine suitability of SMART flight paths for continued use beyond trial period. Achieved Airways has calculated the following operational benefits of the trialled Green X23 and Blue X05 flight paths27: SMART Approaches Total Green X23 Blue X05 Number flown 1,704 1,558 146 Distance saved (nautical miles) 25,560 23,370 2,190 Time saved (mins) 5,112 4,674 438 Average number of flights per day 4.7 4.3 <0.5 Fuel not burned (kgs) 234,036 213,984 20,052 CO2 emissions reduced (kgs) 739,282 675,982 63,300 Auckland – Wellington 100 Auckland – Christchurch 65 Comparative one–way flights possible from saved milage Airways also advises that the extent to which SMART flight paths removed holding patterns over Auckland was a key improvement in terms of efficiency measures. By reducing overall in-flight holding delays from around 3 minutes to less than 20 seconds per flight, Airways delivered additional fuel, environmental and overall noise benefits well beyond the objectives of just the SMART trial. 27The Red Y23 SMART trial concluded on 30 April 2014, and metrics for that trial were not available at the date of publication of this report. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 44 6.5 Possible procedural enhancements As a result of the trial, Airways and BARNZ consider the following changes would have improved the way in which aircraft fly the Green X23 flight path (and equivalent changes would improve the Blue X05 flight path): 1. Approach vertical profile – To improve the ability of aircraft to fly the flight paths in a continuous descent with the engines remaining at close to flight idle (resulting in less noise), the initial approach fix (ie, commencement of SMART flight path) could be moved from waypoint ELNAK towards LOSGA and made slightly steeper to achieve a higher altitude over LOSGA of approximately 4800 feet. This would provide a more continuous descent over residential areas, increased altitude at LOSGA, and significantly reduce the need to apply power above flight idle over the suburbs of Mt Roskill, Epsom and One Tree Hill. As a result, aircraft using SMART flight paths would not be flying as low for as long, and therefore would have less of an effect on residents. 2. Speed constraint – The 170-knot speed constraint at waypoint ANKOT and the Category C 160-knot speed constraint at waypoint ELNAK resulted in a higher-than-desirable level of speed-brake deployment and early landing gear extension. Increasing the maximum speed allowed would reduce these noise-creating events. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 An additional finding during the trial was that a small percentage of aircraft (not flying SMART flight paths) are flying lower than the published procedures for non–SMART approaches. Taking LOSGA as an example 90–95% of aircraft were found to be above the published procedure altitude of 5000 ft. There are two reasons for aircraft to be lower; 1. Visual approaches – On a clear day with little activity in the airspace over Auckland city, pilots can elect to conduct (with Air Traffic Control approval) an instrument–based visual approach to the extended runway centreline. The current noise abatement procedures for that approach to Auckland from the north allow pilots to fly lower than either SMART or traditional ILS approaches. These visual approaches often follow a similar path to the SMART paths, and this made it difficult for the public to distinguish SMART from non–SMART flights. In fact, some feedback purportedly regarding SMART approaches were identified upon examination as relating to visual instrument approaches. The stakeholders involved in this trial agreed that it is in the best interests of both the community and industry to adopt stricter criteria for visual approaches over Auckland. Therefore, BARNZ and Airways recommend that visual approaches for jet flights arriving from north of the airport be removed in two stages; wide–body jet aircraft commencing 18 September 2014, and all jets by 17 September 2015. This will generally result in aircraft on non-SMART flight paths flying over LOSGA at above 5000 feet. 2. Other approaches – Air traffic control is permitted under normal operations not to follow published procedures in order to assist in maintaining safety separations and to help with overall airspace efficiency. Therefore, BARNZ and Airways have agreed to review operating procedures with an aim of lessening the occasions when lower flight altitudes might be required. 45 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 46 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Decision on whether to approve under CAR Part 173.201(d) 47 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 48 7.0 Decision on whether to approve under CAR Part 173.201(d) The following recommendations have been made to Auckland Airport as a result of the trial: 1. The Green X23 and Blue X05 SMART flight paths to Auckland Airport should be restarted in early 2015, but with the following modifications; a. the minimum height of an aircraft using that new SMART flight path at LOSGA (the navigational waypoint approximately at the intersection of Mount Albert and Dominion Roads) increase from 4,000 feet to at least 4,800 feet; and b. the maximum permitted air speed of an aircraft using that new SMART flight path be increased; and c. a maximum of 10 flights per day use that new SMART flight path, with an industry review of that maximum number to occur every 12 months. 2. Airways should design and propose a second new SMART flight path to Auckland Airport from the North to Runway 23, consistent with the above height, speed and maximum flights requirements, to enable aircraft to be shared between the two SMART flight paths, rather than being concentrated on a single new flight path. If approved, a maximum of 10 SMART flight path flights per day in total would use this flight path, with an industry review of that maximum number to occur every 12 months. 3. The Red Y23 SMART flight path to Auckland Airport should be adopted for operational use. 4. Any new SMART flight paths Airways designs (excluding those tracks which result from the above) should undergo a trialling period. SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 In addition, it has been decided by BARNZ and Airways: • That all instrument-based visual approaches to Auckland Airport from the north in both directions for wide-body jet aircraft (which includes B747, B777, 787, B767, A380, A340 and A330) will cease from 18 September 201428. • That all instrument-based visual approaches to Auckland Airport from the north in both directions for narrow-body jet aircraft (i.e. A320 and B737) will cease on 17 September 201528, at which time the second SMART flight path referred to in 2 on the facing page is expected to be available. The changes relating to existing instrument-based visual approaches are separate to the proposed introduction of SMART flight paths, and those decisions are not subject to this consultation. However, the changes to the instrument-based visual approaches may inform your views on the proposal to introduce SMART flight paths, so you are welcome to provide feedback on these instrument-based visual approach changes as part of your feedback on the SMART flight path proposals. Before making a final decision on whether to agree that the airport may be used for the SMART flight paths, Auckland Airport will consider all public feedback on whether Auckland Airport should approve SMART flight paths that incorporate these or any other features. When a final decision is made on whether Auckland Airport may be used for SMART flight paths, the decision will be communicated to the public and stakeholders. Auckland Airport intends to do this in the fourth quarter of 2014. 28This date will coincide with the publication dates of the New Zealand Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP). 49 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 50 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 Public consultation 51 SMART Flight Path Trial Draft Report 2014 52 8.0 Discussion of SMART trial results Auckland Airport welcomes feedback on this draft report and its recommendations. You can make a written submission by writing to: Auckland Flight Path Trial C/- PO Box 73020 Manukau Auckland 2150 or completing the online form at www.aucklandflightpathtrial.co.nz Written submissions will be accepted until 5pm on Friday 27 June 2014. There will be a series of opportunities for members of the public who have made a written submission to personally present their submissions to the participants in the trial should they wish to. This will be comprised of three days during which members of the public may book a 15-minute slot at which to present. The time allocated will be followed to ensure that members of the public wishing to provide feedback on the recommendations have an opportunity to do so. Ellerslie Event Centre Ellerslie Racecourse, Ascot Ave, Remuera. Thursday 3 July 10am to 6pm MIT, Manukau Institute of Technology DINE @Gate 14, NT Block, Alexander Cres, Otara. Wednesday 9 July 10am to 6pm Fickling Convention Centre 545 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings. Thursday 10 July 10am to 6pm If you wish to take this opportunity, then please book online at: www.aucklandflightpathtrial.co.nz Slots will be allocated to the public on a “first-come-first-served basis” Auckland Airport, Airways and BARNZ will consider all feedback before publishing a final report by 31 December 2014. ..I.. la: