Dont fly over the red circles! Interesting to note noise and track adventures...if you have a FOQA monitoring program in place, the track and other data will be available there..if not, then the aircraft has little means to store the data.
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 12th Sep 2012 at 21:52.
I find this "noise" problem quite funny (ha, ha). Back in the days when we had real noise problems, it was caused be the older non by-pass engines on DC9, B727, DC8 BAC 111, etc. In todays world with Hi By-Pass engines there is no longer a "noise" thing. These modern engines are way much quieter than back in the 80s. Any country that is still fussing about noise should have their heads examined. It's just another tax grab. Totally unnecessary. If they keep bugging you, take them to court !!
I remember years ago , the company I was flying on that time for, started receiving fines in Manchester, I guess when departing from rwy24. The problem stood with track during a turn.
There were no speed limits on that departure, so pilots used to do it nearly 250kts. Company released a circular restricting the speed to 220 or less and we had never had any violation again.
Stupid? Yes, because the SID should have a speed limit, but it was the way we managed to solve this problem.
Though it shouldn't have been a problem - after all you were flying the SID accurately, at a legal airspeed, weren't you ?
Most, if not all, radar-driven track monitoring systems work by comparing your flightpath with an imaginary line on the ground (e.g. in the UK, the edges of the NPRs). Of course a SID is a procedure, not a path, so that clearly the radius of a constant-rate turn, and therefore your track over the ground, can be expected to vary with airspeed.
In theory the width of the NPR swathe is supposed to take into account such variations, but I recall querying with the CAA a couple of years ago some of the saw-tooth edge coordinates of the NPRs in Heathrow's NTK system - the response was that nobody could remember who had originally plotted them ...