Airports and noise attenuation

[Satellite Man]

Hi all,

I am wondering how noise attenuation laws and ordinances apply in airports around the world.

Is noise abatement and noise attenuation important in airport operation in your countries?

In Spain SIDs try to avoid populated areas (I think this is very common everywhere) but there is still a lot to do in terms of noise reduction, particularly when passengers are exposed to very high levels of noise on boarding or leaving the planes. At many airports in Spain passengers walk to the planes that are closer to the terminals, being exposed to the noise of planes taxiing around, or taking off. This got me thinking because the personnel that works on the platform is usually wearing (or should be wearing) hearing protection, usually high-attenuation earmuffs like the ones used in construction.

Looking forward to read your thoughts about this,

SM

[Satellite Man]

Thanks for your reply but airplanes taking-off and taxiing can be heard at the platform at noise levels that may cause progressive hearing damage, even at very short exposure times.

Not to mention that in the event there is an engine burst (and I have seen this a few times already) the noise is equivalent to a very loud explosion and people and passengers walking on the platform are exposed to it.

[Satellite Man]

Yes, I meant ground level, near the taxiing areas.

At MAD for instance there are corridors that take passengers very close to the stands when they board on foot and have to walk to the plane. These corridors are made of concrete and I am sure they have a good soundproofing. It would be the ground-level equivalent of a jetty, but in Spain I have only seen them in Madrid.

I was wondering if there are other noise attenuation measures taken at other airports. Basically, the discussion is whether further noise attenuation measures should be implemented and which ones.

[Burnie5204]

We've recently had testing done at the UK airport I work at.

From 30m away at a 45 degree angle a 737 with both engines at idle power produced around 80dB (as they were testing the noise level at a cabin used by ramp teams).

The point at which noise levels require hearing protection is (IIRC) 85dB. The reason ground crews wear hearing protection is because of the cumulative damaging effects of repeated exposure to louder than normal noise at constant frequency as we have to listen to it 20-30 times a day, every day whilst the passenger only hears it twice.

[Satellite Man]

Did they measure the noise levels when planes take off?

I would say the noise of planes departing could exceed 120 dbs and probably exposure to a noise like that always requires hearing protection even if exposure times are very low.

If we talk about fighters noise levels can be way higher than 120 dbs.

[Satellite Man]

Apparently at Heathrow noise is measured taking an average during the day:

Heathrow Noise: Measuring aircraft noise (http://www.heathrowairport.com/noise/noise-explained/noise-today/measuring-aircraft-noise)

It is ridiculous to measure noise levels as an average taking into account that certain noise levels are dangerous even if heard for very short periods of time (think of a gunshot or a plane departing).

[DaveReidUK]

Apparently at Heathrow noise is measured taking an average during the dayYou seem a little confused.

Are you talking about the noise burden on communities under the flightpaths, or the noise exposure to passengers boarding or disembarking from aircraft?

Or both?

[Satellite Man]

I am talking about the noise suffered by passengers boarding and disembarking.

I would like to know if any country addresses this specific implementing providing noise attenuation measures for passengers that have to walk from a terminal to a "nearby" plane parked at the stand.

[good egg]

So, let me get this right....

You're worried about the hearing of people (passengers) exposed to noise of a busy (?) airport for a minute, or so, whilst they board?

Ever walked past roadworks? Did it permanently affect your hearing?

[good egg]

And what does this have to do with ATC???

[de facto]

Satellite,
Use your wife's earplugs,that should help:ok::E

[Satellite Man]

Probably 20 years from now things will have changed A LOT in this field. Wait and see.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I am talking about the noise suffered by passengers boarding and disembarking.>>

So why is this in the Air Traffic Control forum when ATC has nothing to do with the subject?

[tubby linton]

At Gatwick arriving flights are meant to fly a CDA but observing them visually and using FR24 a lot of them now seem not to be bothering.
The info used to be in the UK AIP but it does not appear in any of the commercial chart providers pages.

[DaveReidUK]

At Gatwick arriving flights are meant to fly a CDA but observing them visually and using FR24 a lot of them now seem not to be bothering.Strange. According to the stats published by Gatwick, more than 92% of arriving flights over the last 12 months achieved a CDA.

The info used to be in the UK AIPIt still is. AD2.EGKK-20

[tubby linton]

The requirement is in the UK AIP but the explanatory notes which are referenced(AD 2-EGKK-1-17 of the UK AIP )have disappeared.
There are no corresponding notes or references published by Jeppesen.
The worst culprit imho is Norwegian
Are the figures on cda compliance available to the public?

[wiggy]

Are the figures on cda compliance available to the public?

A quick Google reveals the likes of this (slightly dated) info:

http://www.gatwickairport.com/PublicationFiles/business_and_community/all_public_publications/aircraft_noise/FPT_Qrt3_2013.pdf (http://www.gatwickairport.com/PublicationFiles/business_and_community/all_public_publications/aircraft_noise/FPT_Qrt3_2013.pdf)

[DaveReidUK]

Most recent LGW report (2014 Q1), from which the 92% figure that I quoted comes:

http://www.gatwickairport.com/PublicationFiles/business_and_community/all_public_publications/aircraft_noise/FPT_Q1_2014.pdf

LHR Q1 report for comparison: http://www.heathrowairport.com/static/Heathrow_Noise/Downloads/PDF/LHR-FP-Q1-2014.pdf. Heathrow CDA compliance tends to be around the 85-90% mark.

[tubby linton]

We used to get a score sheet of the airlines at LGW adherence to cda but. I haven't seen one for over a year.

[DaveReidUK]

We used to get a score sheet of the airlines at LGW adherence to cda but. I haven't seen one for over a year.Last year, with a big fanfare, Heathrow started to publish a rather smart quarterly scorecard for its Top 50 operators (by number of flights), showing performance indicators (red, amber, green) against half-a-dozen metrics including CDA compliance.

Heathrow Noise: FlyQuiet Programme (http://www.heathrowairport.com/noise/what-we-do-about-it/flyquiet-programme)

There doesn't seem to have been one published since February of this year, so it may be that the idea has been quietly dropped, which would be a pity.

[DaveReidUK]

Heathrow Noise: FlyQuiet Programme (http://apicdn.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=1e857e7500cdd32403f752206c297a3d&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fatc-issues%2F544666-airports-noise-attenuation.html&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heathrowairport.com%2Fnoise%2Fwhat-we-do-about-it%2Fflyquiet-programme&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fatc-issues-18%2F)

There doesn't seem to have been one published since February of this year, so it may be that the idea has been quietly dropped, which would be a pity. I've now been advised by Heathrow that FlyQuiet is still operating. For some reason Q1 stats didn't make it onto the website, but will appear imminently, with Q2 results due out shortly.

[DaveReidUK]

Heathrow have now posted their 2014 Q1 FlyQuiet table.

Among the top 50 airlines, CDA compliance (which normally dips in the winter, for obvious reasons), was as follows:

Green (75% or more of arrivals): 26 operators
Amber: (55-75%) 14 operators
Red: (under 55%) 10 operators

Six airlines (Air France, Cyprus, Aegean, LOT, TAM, El Al) have been red-flagged for CDAs in the last two consecutive quarters.