Arrivals Review for Gatwick suggests a range of measures to slightly reduce the noise problem

The Arrivals Review, by Bo Redeborn and Graham Lake, has now been published. It has made a series of recommendations for ways in which the aircraft noise problem might be slightly reduced – without limiting the capacity of the airport at all. These recommendations are copied below.  The report is wide-ranging, with a lot of issues covered. Below just what is says on four topics (chosen arbitrarily by AirportWatch, to give a taster of the report) is included. These are  1). The decision to move the joining point onto the ILS to be a minimum of 8nm from touchdown, rather than the 10nm used at present.   2). Changing the way Gatwick uses its runway in nil or low wind.   3). Deterring flights being delayed so take-offs occur during the night period, as a Key Performance Indicator.   4). The noise complaints policy needs to be improved. (The review comments: “the current limit of one noise complaint per day per household is considered wholly unacceptable by those residents addressing this issue with the review. It is easy to understand their point of view.”) They propose: “that Gatwick should establish an enhanced complaints policy with no daily limit and a fully transparent procedure, as soon as possible, using an on-line form as the sole electronic complaint registration medium.” The Review also recommends the establishment of a Noise Management Board (NMB) by summer 2016.
.

 

 

“Independent Arrivals Review” for Gatwick airport, published by Bo Redeborn and Graham Lake

The Gatwick Airport Arrivals Review, led by Bo Redeborn and Graham Lake, carried out for the airport, has been published. The purpose of the review was: “To make sure everything that can reasonably be done to alleviate issues raised by the local community is being done.” and “To understand if the way Gatwick communicates with and provides information to the local community, including the handling of complaints, is fully adequate.” The review set out some practical steps to slightly reduce the noise problems being experienced, including increasing CDA, reducing “stacking”, setting up an independently chaired noise management board, and improving the noise complaints system – among other things. However, Gatwick’s welcome for the review is carefully worded; the normal weasel words are in there. Such as: “Gatwick Airport has welcomed the report and its recommendations and will examine the report’s conclusions with a view to proceeding with as many of them as possible in the shortest practicable time.” And “There is no silver bullet that will ever eliminate the problem of aircraft noise but taken together I believe that these measures can make a real difference.” And “We want to act as soon as possible on these recommendations so people can start to feel the difference but we cannot do so alon

Click here to view full story…

More on the just four extracts from the Review:

Arrival Procedures – and the change to 8nm joining point:

Page 57   Link 

“As noted previously, the approach stabilisation initiative of 2013, implemented primarily for safety reasons but also for capacity improvement, extended the daytime ILS joining point from 7nm to 10nm. The minimum joining point has been located at 10nm at night (23:30-06:00 local time) since before 2004. The CAA recognizing that aircraft are both higher and benefit from a longer stable approach through use of a 10 mile join, agreed that the
change to 10nm minimum join during the day was a safety improvement and hence the change was supported.

Many residents reported to the review that they have asked both GAL and NATS to reverse the 2013 change of vectoring methodology, thereby returning the minimum ILS join distance to 7nm. These requests were also widely made to the review team. The review has confirmed that increasing the size of the arrival swathe is expected to deliver overall noise improvements for those on the ground.

An adaptation to radar vectoring methodology using an ILS join point minimum of 8nm from touchdown should extend the arrival swathe 2nm further to the west for Runway 26 and correspondingly to the east for Runway 08 arrivals while still enabling the safety objectives of the previous change. If implemented, the effect will be to increase the arrivals dispersal to more closely emulate the circumstances the prior to 2013 position. Hence the arrival swathe would normally extend from a minimum of 8nm to 14nm. When traffic permits, aircraft from the east for Runway 26 will join on a straight in approach even further east, and for 08, straight-in further from the west. The CAA has indicated that on request from GAL and NATS that it will consider this subject to normal process.

These measures, if implemented, should go a long way towards restoring the arrivals situation to a level of dispersal seen prior to 2015. Proposals to resolve other underlying noise management questions are identified later in this report in Section 4, dealing with noise planning and coordination.”

The Review therefore recommends: 

That GAL explore with NATS the potential for aircraft to be vectored to be established on the ILS at a minimum of 8nm from touchdown outside of night hours, rather than the current 10nm.  This adaptation to vectoring methodology should extend the arrival swathe 2nm closer to the airport and increase the arrivals dispersal to more closely emulate the operations prior to the 2013 change.  Hence the arrival swathe would normally extend from a minimum of 8nm to 14nm, with aircraft joining on a straight in approach when traffic permits. 


 

 

Operations in Nil or Low Wind

Page  61

“Normally, an aircraft will land and take off into wind unless safety, the runway configuration, or air traffic conditions determine that a different direction is preferable. In selecting the runway-in-use, the unit providing aerodrome control service (Gatwick Tower) takes into consideration, besides surface wind speed and direction, other relevant factors such as upper winds, the lengths of runway available, and the serviceability of approach and landing aids.

At Gatwick, as in the rest of the UK, the prevailing wind is westerly and therefore the reported long term average allocation of runway in use is 70:30 in favour of westerly operations47 (landing towards the west), and it is not unusual to experience periods of prolonged operation in either one direction or another.  This means that arriving aircraft can use a particular landing direction for many days or even weeks without change, hence providing little respite to residents. The Flight Performance Team report contains detail.  (48. Link)

A characteristic of surface wind, subject to the wider meteorological situation, is that it tends to erode or disappear in the late evening. There will therefore be occasions, normally but not exclusively at night, when wind conditions would permit a change of landing direction, thereby potentially delivering respite for residents experiencing both arriving and departure noise.

It is the opinion of the review that an operating protocol should be developed, published and adopted by GAL to define the criteria and occasions when a change of landing direction could be implemented at Gatwick for noise reasons, when weather and other conditions permit. The objective of the protocol would be to achieve a more even split of arrivals, and to fragment the otherwise continuous use of one runway direction or another because of long term weather patterns. This is particularly relevant, but not limited, to the peak arrival hours that occur in the evening. The target implementation should be before the peak summer period 2016, which
has been reported to the review team as a sensitive time for residents concerned about aircraft noise.”
The Review therefore recommends:

The development, publication and implementation by GAL of an operating protocol to define the occasions when a change of landing direction will be implemented at Gatwick for noise reasons, if weather, safety requirements and other conditions permit. The objective of the protocol being to achieve a more even split of arrivals, and to fragment the otherwise continuous use of one runway direction or another because of long term weather patterns. The impact should be monitored by GAL and the results regularly reviewed by the Noise Management Board (NMB).The target implementation of the protocol should be during 2016 following engagement with airlines, air traffic control and communities.


Scheduling – so take-offs are not delayed into the night period

Page 64.

“Good schedule planning is essential at airports such as Gatwick with constrained runway capacity.  Flight delays are exacerbated by the bunching of arrival runway demand caused in part by peaks within the schedule, but also by airline processes and performance which do not consistently deliver aircraft movements on plan, (recognising that there are very often network factors outside of airline control such as weather, industrial action or unplanned equipment outages).

Moreover, the Air Traffic Flow Management tools designed to smooth aircraft flows to runways are not yet fully integrated at airports and so are not optimised to minimize both arrival and departure delays, further compounding the problem. Aircraft holding and arrivals maneuvering in the last minutes of the flights, extending noise exposure, are associated symptoms. Another consequence of delayed flights is the impact of accumulated delay, which for some flights scheduled late in the day, causes consequent unplanned
slippage of the actual operation into the night period.

The airport and its community of airline users have a set of planning, governance and performance review structures which are fully compliant with EU Slot Regulations, safety and DfT Regulations, and IATA scheduling guidelines. Despite this, in practice actual demand patterns vary from plan. Particular difficulty is created when over demand is anticipated, which prompts flow rate regulation to manage the number of aircraft down to safe
levels in airspace or holding stacks.

There are a number of committees which monitor aspects of airport performance, including the slot performance committee, the Flight Operations Performance Committee and the capacity limits and runway performance improvement groups.

In so far as the review team has been able to ascertain, it appears that more can be done at Gatwick by all stakeholders, to improve flight scheduling and operational resilience, and thus reduce the incidence of arriving flights being delayed into the night hours.”

The Review therefore recommends:

That the Gatwick Flight Performance Team introduce a KPI, enabling the monitoring and reporting of the number of flights delayed from planned daytime arrival, into a night movement (after 23:30 local) and that GAL initiate measures to identify and agree steps, including enhanced use of time based operations, with airlines and with the airport’s scheduling committee for implementation within 12 months, to effectively and progressively reduce unplanned night arrivals at Gatwick.


Noise Complaints Policy needs to be improved

Page 71

“The feedback to the review team regarding the noise complaints policy (link) and procedures employed by GAL suggests that an overhaul of the Gatwick noise complaints policy and procedure is an essential step to restore the trust in the system for residents sensitive to aircraft noise. Again, for airports elsewhere, it has become evident in the review that it is a commonplace phenomenon for the noise complaints procedure of an airport to become a focus of community ire. This seems to be a symptom of frustration at the perceived inability of some residents to be able to make their voices heard by the aviation stakeholders able to deliver real change.

In the case of Gatwick, the current limit of one noise complaint per day per household is considered wholly unacceptable by those residents addressing this issue with the review. It is easy to understand their point of view. There is also an implied lack of transparency. Conversely, the review team has also had direct (and documented) experience of multiple offensive and abusive communications from some residents which is, and should remain, an entirely unacceptable practice.

Our view is that E-mail noise complaints should not be accepted, nor should complaints that do not contain sufficient information; time, date, postcode location, to allow a proper investigation and response by Gatwick and the other stakeholders tasked to identify causes and response.

Therefore it is proposed that Gatwick should establish an enhanced complaints policy with no daily limit and a fully transparent procedure, as soon as possible, using an on-line form as the sole electronic complaint registration medium. The form should require sufficient detail to allow the location (postcode) of the complainant, the date and time of day of the incident, such that the aircraft in question can be identified and associated, to allow empirical noise trend data to be developed and analysed, so that noise mitigation can be targeted and action taken.

Further guidance could include: Any public user of the system shall be able to see the postcode origin, and time of day, of every complaint for the current year, to ensure that the system is fully transparent. For the process to be an effective tool in planning noise mitigation, the complaints system should also permit complainants to add other detail; for example in relation to estimated aircraft height (or in the case where aircraft height information
is derived by the complainant from a Flight Following APP or Casper, the source should be noted, as should the specific reasons for the complaint (height, noise, time of day or night). Gatwick may wish to consider publishing a quarterly summary of noise complaints received with post investigation information included. The addition of the noise modification and replacement status for the A320 family of aircraft using Gatwick would be a useful
enhancement. Gatwick’s existing annual summary noise report analysis already provides a good level of information.”

The Review therefore recommends:

That Gatwick should establish an enhanced complaints policy and fully transparent procedure, as soon as possible, using an on-line form as the primary medium, requiring sufficient detail to allow the location (postcode) of the complainant, the date and time of day of the incident, such that the aircraft in question can be identified and established with the location, to allow empirical data to be developed and analysed so that noise mitigation action can be taken. There should be no limit to the number of complaints per household. For residents not possessing computer access, postal submissions should be accepted, but should be required to contain the basic information outlined above.


 

Also

The Review recommends: 

The establishment of a Noise Management Board (NMB) by summer 2016, to be operated under independent chairmanship and comprising representatives from each of the institutions able to effect change for Gatwick arrivals, as well as the chair of the Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM), and both elected council members and residents’ representatives.


 

The main recommendations of the Review:

Immediate > 12 months

Noise at source

Imm-1

That as an indication of GAL commitment to noise reduction, as a further tangible indication to local communities that the noise impact of the airport is taken seriously and to incentivise an accelerated noise modification by all airlines using A320 family aircraft at Gatwick, GAL should establish an earlier sunset date for unmodified Airbus 320 family aircraft using the airport of December 31st 2017. With an appropriate noise penalty applied for non-compliant aircraft immediately thereafter.

Imm-2

That GAL to engage with DfT, consider proposing to the European Commission the establishment of a sunset date of December 31st 2020 for the operation in Europe of Airbus 320 series aircraft without the Fuel Over Pressure Protector (FOPP) cavity vortex generator noise modification.

Land Use Planning

Imm-3

That planning authorities for communities impacted by aircraft noise from Gatwick, coordinate to conduct their own joint review of the application of land use policy in context of Gatwick aircraft noise, with the objective of identifying steps that will enable the increase of its effective use and the improvement of the aircraft noise awareness for existing and potential land users.

Imm-4

That Gatwick develop, publish and maintain with annual updates an information booklet intended for planning authorities, home buyers, estate agents and conveyancing solicitors, to provide reference information on flight routes, terminology and other aspects of the airport operation relevant to communities. NATS and the CAA should also be encouraged to participate, and to verify those elements of the content that reflect their own areas of activity.

Noise Abatement Operational Procedures

Imm-5

That as soon as possible, the altitude for commencement of CDA at Gatwick should be increased from the current 6000 feet to 7000 feet (FL070).

Imm-6

That GAL collaborates with NATS, CAA and airlines, within 12 months, to agree incremental improvements, to the application of CDA procedures at Gatwick.

Imm-7

That GAL work with NATS and CAA to raise the Gatwick CDA commencement altitude to 8000 feet when feasible.

Imm-8

That GAL propose a subsidiary CDA taxonomy which includes the commencement altitude of the procedure, e.g. CDA 6000, be established by the CAA to improve lay understanding and to better benchmark later improvements.

Imm-9

That GAL considers proposing to the CAA, the establishment in airspace design criteria, of a minimum distance between arriving tracks for aircraft, to deliver for arrivals; both a meaningful dispersal and an opportunity for respite. This is likely to apply to aircraft before they have joined the final approach track, which for Gatwick will therefore be at 3000 feet or above.

Imm-10

That GAL explore with NATS the potential for aircraft to be vectored to be established on the ILS at a minimum of 8nm from touchdown outside of night hours, rather than the current 10nm. This adaptation to vectoring methodology should extend the arrival swathe 2nm closer to the airport and increase the arrivals dispersal to more closely emulate the operations prior to the 2013 change. Hence the arrival swathe would normally extend from a minimum of 8nm to 14nm, with aircraft joining on a straight in approach when traffic permits.

Imm-11

The development, publication and implementation by GAL of an operating protocol to define the occasions when a change of landing direction will be implemented at Gatwick for noise reasons, if weather, safety requirements and other conditions permit. The objective of the protocol being to achieve a more even split of arrivals, and to fragment the otherwise continuous use of one runway direction or another because of long term weather patterns. The impact should be monitored by GAL and the results regularly reviewed by the Noise Management Board (NMB).The target implementation of the protocol should be during 2016 following engagement with airlines, air traffic control and communities.

Operating efficiency

Imm-12

That the Gatwick Flight Performance Team introduce a KPI, enabling the monitoring and reporting of the number of flights delayed from planned daytime arrival, into a night movement (after 23:30 local) and that GAL initiate measures to identify and agree steps, including enhanced use of time based operations, with airlines and with the airport’s scheduling committee for implementation within 12 months, to effectively and progressively reduce unplanned night arrivals at Gatwick.

Imm-13

That within 6 months, GAL and NATS conduct a joint investigation to establish and agree whether the XMAN extended arrivals manager is an effective tool to reduce arrival holding at Gatwick and if so; to agree and publish within 9months when XMAN can be deployed for Gatwick and what results can be expected.

Imm-14

GAL and NATS should evaluate the potential efficiency benefits of an earlier implementation of advanced TBS technology (timescale for completion of evaluation within 12 months).

Other

Imm-15

To better inform stakeholders, independent academic research should be undertaken to validate the reasons why arriving aircraft are often perceived by residents to be lower than in the past and to identify measures to establish the actual facts in a controlled analysis with community involvement.

Community relations

Imm-16

That GAL allocates additional manpower, as soon as possible, to strengthen the Airport’s Community engagement capability.

Imm-17

That Gatwick should establish an enhanced complaints policy and fully transparent procedure, as soon as possible, using an on-line form as the primary medium, requiring sufficient detail to allow the location (postcode) of the complainant, the date and time of day of the incident, such that the aircraft in question can be identified and established with the location, to allow empirical data to be developed and analysed so that noise mitigation action can be taken. There should be no limit to the number of complaints per household. For residents not possessing computer access, postal submissions should be accepted, but should be required to contain the basic information outlined above.

Imm-18

The establishment of a Noise Management Board (NMB) by summer 2016, to be operated under independent chairmanship and comprising representatives from each of the institutions able to effect change for Gatwick arrivals, as well as the chair of the Airport Consultative Committee (GATCOM), and both elected council members and residents’ representatives.

Imm-19

That Gatwick should publish not later than March 31st a description of the steps that it is intended to take in response to the arrivals report and which, if any of the recommendations it plans to pursue.

Imm-20

In the interests of improved community relations that; GAL publish not later than January 31st 2017 a report of overall progress towards delivery of the steps recommended in this report, including relevant status updates from CAA and NATS, with where appropriate the basis for any related decisions.

Aspirational

Aspire-21

The adoption of carefully designed routes from the approach holding fixes used for Gatwick, to the ILS final approach tracks, provides real opportunity to reduce noise, to disturb fewer people, to deliver fair and equitable dispersal of noise, and, to deliver well defined respite measures. The London Airspace Management Programme should be developed by NATS and GAL to incorporate alternative proposals, to those published in 2013, as soon as reasonably possible, for consultation, agreement and implementation for Gatwick arrivals.

Aspire-22

That the Gatwick holding areas should be higher, or should be relocated to enable holding aircraft to dwell over water, rather than over Sussex.

Aspire-23

That the requirements specification of any system upgrade to, or replacement of, any sequencing tools must take full account of the need to integrate the AMAN at Swanwick and DMAN at Gatwick, such that they are each fully informed of, and take into account the capacity allocations of both arrival and departure functions.