I found this report on CDA and the FAA. I am curious about the reference to the "safety and noise risks discovered overseas".
"The FAA wanted to implement Continuous Descent Approach (CDA) at La Guardia as part of the Regional Airspace Redesign to reduce the noise impact when they terminalized a much larger area. In the Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) CDA was included however CDA failed the safety field test in the summer of 2007 and was not included in the Final Impact Study(FEIS).
Nonetheless the Port Authority, commercial airlines and certain members of congress continued to push CDA as the preferred solution to jet engine noise to make use of the associated efficinecies. Due to this pressure by congress and the industry the FAA chose to include CDA in the latest implementation schedule for all the New York New Jersey airports even though it failed the safety test.
The FAA decided to rebrand CDA due to the safety and noise risks discovered oversease and in litigation so they changed the name of the procedure from “Continuous Descent Approach” to “Optimized Profile Descent” (OPD)."
OurAirspace: CDA or OPD
I have not heard of any issues with CDA overseas that would determine a failed safety case, noise, or litigation issues.
Can someone help out with this, or point me in a direction to look into this?