曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

approaches to mitigate noise at airports.
7.4.19 It should be noted that there are trade-offs which need to be
considered when noise restrictions are put in place at airports.
Depending on the approach, noise restrictions may adversely
affect flight efficiency (e.g. noise routes and runway use) and
capacity utilisation.
7.4.20 ANS can have an impact on the airports’ noise footprint as well
as on the population affected by aviation noise through
measures including, inter alia: the management of taxiing
(ground noise), the selection of runway and runway
configuration, the management of engine testing and the design
and application of designated routes (SIDs and STARs) in and
out of airports.
Related Initiative(s):
The System for Airport
Noise Exposure Studies
(STAPES) project was
jointly initiated by the
European Commission,
EUROCONTROL and
EASA. The objective is to
develop an aircraft noise
model capable of
supporting all types of
noise impact assessments
in relation to the EC’s or
the ICAO’s future policy
options, as well as any
new operational concept
designed under the
SESAR programme.
7.4.21 The main noise-reducing contribution of ANS is in the management of departure and
arrival procedures and the ability to maximise the use of modern aircraft capabilities.
Among others, these include:
 Noise preferential routes/ runways;
 Airspace design parameters including avoiding sensitive areas;
 Noise abatement departure procedure;
 Continuous descent operations (CDO);
 Low power/ low drag (LP/LD);
 Limitation of engines running on the ground; and,
 Capture of ILS glide slope at higher altitude.
7.4.22 Noise restrictions are usually imposed on airports by Governments or local Planning
PRR 2009 86 Chapter 7: Environment
Authorities and the level of compliance is monitored at local level. Noise is usually
considered to be the responsibility of the airport operator, but in fact noise is a shared
responsibility of all local operational stakeholders at an airport. Noise is therefore
considered to be more of a local environmental performance issue with little added value
for aggregation at European level.
7.4.23 An example of how noise compliance is monitored is Manchester Airport where several
years ago the airport operator entered into a binding agreement to secure permission for a
second runway. This agreement has around 100 clauses many of which refer to noise (e.g.
a maximum of 5% of all departures to be non-standard clearances). Performance under
this agreement is reported annually by the airport to the planning authorities and this
report and the information systems that are used to populate this are scrutinised by an
independent auditor who reports to local environmental regulators.
7.5 Conclusions
7.5.1 Sustainable development and global emissions are on the top of the political agenda. The
significant fuel efficiency improvements in global aviation over the past were not
sufficient to realise carbon neutral growth which subsequently resulted in an increase in
aviation related CO2 emissions over the years.
7.5.2 Aviation represents 3.5% of man made CO2 emissions in Europe. Long-haul flights (>3
hours), for which there is virtually no substitute, account for 13% of flights, but 60% of
fuel burn. Flights shorter than 1 hour, which could possibly be substituted, represent 23%
of flights, but only 4% of total fuel burn in Europe.
7.5.3 The average ATM fuel efficiency is estimated to be close to 94%. This is good news but
means that there is limited scope for improvement from ANS.
7.5.4 Total ANS actionable CO2 are estimated to be around 6% of total aviation related
emissions and account therefore of some 0.2% of total CO2 emissions in Europe. Due to
inherent necessary (safety) and desired (noise, capacity) limitations, the ANS actionable
inefficiencies cannot be reduced to zero.
7.5.5 The extension of the horizontal en-route flight path is the main component (3.6% of total
fuel burn) followed by delays in the terminal area (1.1% of total fuel burn).
7.5.6 Significant fuel efficiency improvements could be realised by optimising arrival flows
into main airports. In the short term, high priority should be given (1) to the optimisation
of the route network and (2) to the implementation of arrival managers at main airports.
In the longer term (SESAR), the focus should move to a more integrated management of
the flight trajectory geared to optimising arrival time.
7.5.7 Noise and local air quality are major concerns of residents in the vicinity of major
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Performance Review Report 2009(63)