Birmingham Airport Airspace Change Proposal. Proposed changes to the Runway 15 Standard Instrument Departure procedures

Transcription

1 Birmingham Airport Airspace Change Proposal Proposed changes to the Runway 15 Standard Instrument Departure procedures

2 Contents Foreword by Chief Executive Officer... 5 Introduction... 6 Artist impression of Birmingham Airport s Runway Extension... 6 Background for the changes to the Standard Instrument Departure procedures... 8 Why is an Airspace Change Proposal required?... 8 What is the departure end of runway and why is it being relocated?... 8 What are Standard Instrument Departure procedures and why do we need to change them?... 9 What are Noise Preferential Routes?... 9 About actual flight paths and performance What is Area Navigation and what is Conventional Navigation? Changes to the Standard Instrument Departure (SIDs) procedures...14 How have the flight paths been developed? What will be the effect of the change? Are there any alternative procedures? What will be the environmental impact? Noise Carbon Assessment Local Air Quality Tranquillity and Visual Intrusion Proposed Standard Instrument Departure procedures for non- RNAV-1 aircraft...27 Say hello to even more world. 2

3 Conclusions...29 Consultation Process...31 The Purpose The Process The Scope How to respond Appendix A...33 Glossary of Key Terms Appendix B...35 Current SID Routes from Birmingham Airport Appendix C...36 Current Noise Preferential Routes from Runway Appendix D...37 New proposed SID Routes from Birmingham Airport Appendix E...38 New proposed NPRs from Birmingham Airport Appendix F...39 Development of the new SIDs Options considered: Northbound Routes Appendix G...44 Development of the new SIDs Options considered: Southbound Routes Appendix H...47 Comparison of old and new NPRs for routes Say hello to even more world. 3

4 Appendix I...48 SID procedures for aircraft which are not approved for RNAV-1 operations Appendix J...49 Leq Leq Leq SEL Footprints Noise Contour Maps Say hello to even more world. 4

5 Foreword by Chief Executive Officer Birmingham Airport is a Strategic National Asset that makes a significant contribution to the West Midlands economy, serving its demand for air transport and acting as a catalyst to boost employment and inward investment. We have invested heavily in recent years, most notably in the runway extension project, which is now under way. By extending our runway, we will improve the region s connectivity by enabling direct, non-stop services to long-haul destinations in emerging markets. This is our second Airspace Change Proposal triggered by the extension of our runway and is complementary to a consultation currently under way about changes to the approach procedures to Runway 33. In order to make use of the extended runway, new departure routes are required for aircraft departing towards the south from Runway 15, and these new routes are the subject of this consultation. We take the concerns and views of our local stakeholders very seriously. We try to maintain a constant dialogue with our neighbours that is characterised by a straightforward, open and honest approach and our aim is to build understanding, trust and mutual respect. From the very earliest stages of this process we have engaged with the community through the Airspace Change Focus Group (ACFG). The ACFG is made up of key representatives from communities potentially affected by this process and I would like to add my personal thanks to all representatives for giving up their time and contributing to the process so far. Your feedback into this consultation process is important and I encourage you to respond. Paul Kehoe Chief Executive Officer Say hello to even more world. 5

6 Introduction On 2 nd November 2009 Birmingham Airport Limited (BAL) gained planning approval for an extension to its runway which will enable air services to operate to destinations much further afield than at present. BAL is now developing the scheme and construction of the diversion to the A45 associated with the runway extension is well under way. Work to construct the runway extension itself and the new infrastructure necessary for its operation will commence in earnest in April 2013 with the extended runway planned to be fully operational by Spring Artist impression of Birmingham Airport s Runway Extension In order to be able to make use of the extended runway, new departure procedures are required for aircraft taking off towards the south and new arrival procedures are required for aircraft landing towards the north. No changes are required to the departure procedures for aircraft taking off to the north or landing towards the south. The introduction of new departure procedures or arrival procedures is governed by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and is the subject of a detailed process of procedure development and consultation by the Airport, followed by submission of an Airspace Change Proposal (ACP) which is assessed by the regulator. The process is set out in a CAA document Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process (CAP725) - Say hello to even more world. 6

7 In consultation with the CAA, BAL has decided that it is appropriate for the changes to the proposals for new Standard Instrument Departure procedures from Runway 15 to be consulted upon separately to those relating to the arrival procedures for Runway 33. Consequently BAL is to operate two separate ACPs which will overlap each other. This document sets out the proposals for the changes to departure procedures only. It is proposed that the date for the implementation of the new SIDs is 12 December This date has been chosen to fit in with the construction programme for the runway extension and with the international requirements for the distribution of aeronautical information. The CAA requires that both the aviation industry and local community interests must be included in the consultation process. This document is structured to give a clear and concise explanation of the proposed changes in plain language. Whilst aviation consultees will be familiar with the aeronautical terminology used, non-aviation consultees may not be so familiar with aviation terminology and practice; consequently these aspects are explained in some detail where necessary. A Glossary of the key technical terms used in this document is given at Appendix A. Say hello to even more world. 7

8 Background for the changes to the Standard Instrument Departure procedures Why is an Airspace Change Proposal required? An ACP is required because of the need to introduce new Standard Instrument Departure procedures (SIDs) to replace the existing procedures for Runway 15. New SIDs are required due to the relocation of the departure end of runway (DER) as a consequence of the runway extension. The CAA requires an ACP to be developed wherever there are changes to SIDs or Noise Preferential Routes (NPRs) within controlled airspace. What is the departure end of runway and why is it being relocated? The DER is defined as the end of the area declared suitable for take-off (i.e. the end of the runway or, where a clearway is provided, the end of the clearway). When the runway extension is completed the DER will be moved to the south east by 391 metres as shown on the following diagram. This map is for illustrative purposes only. Existing DER 391 metres New DER Say hello to even more world. 8

9 What are Standard Instrument Departure procedures and why do we need to change them? Aircraft on departure from Birmingham Airport are required to follow SIDs which are a set of instructions published for pilots and air traffic controllers, designed to provide safe routes from the Airport to the UK airways system. The SIDs incorporate both the Airport s requirements for aircraft routeing immediately after take-off (known as Noise Preferential Routes (NPRs)) and the Air Traffic Control routeing requirements to integrate departing aircraft with other air traffic. SIDs are commonly referred to as flight paths enabling aircraft to negotiate entry from the Airport to the airways system and en route to their destination. Under International (ICAO) and UK (CAA) procedure design criteria, the SID starts at the DER. Thus, the runway extension (extended to the south-east) requires a change to the starting point of the SIDs. This will mean a change in the routing of aircraft after take-off. In designing SIDs the latest international safety and technical requirements have to be taken into account, alongside the twin objectives of providing for sufficient airspace capacity and utilising routes that minimise the impact of noise and emissions on surrounding communities as far as practicable. What are Noise Preferential Routes? NPRs are routes established in the vicinity of aerodromes where it is desirable that aircraft avoid overflying noise-sensitive areas as far as is practicable. NPRs must be compatible with the initial stages of SID procedures and vice versa. The design of NPRs should ensure that flight along them does not require excessive navigational skill on the part of pilots, nor should they be beyond the operating parameters of automated aircraft operating systems. Additionally they should not put the aircraft into a state that approaches its minimum safe operation with regard to speed or changes in direction. An NPR should also specify an upper height limit. Once the aircraft has reached the upper limit of the NPR the air traffic controllers can redirect aircraft on a tactical basis to fit in with other aircraft in the vicinity and the requirements of the air traffic management system. Say hello to even more world. 9

10 Birmingham Airport currently has two NPRs for aircraft taking off from runway 15: one for aircraft which will turn left after take-off to join the en-route airways system to the north-east or north of Birmingham (using the Trent (TNT) and Whitegate (WHI) SIDs) and one for aircraft departing in a more southerly direction (using the Daventry (DTY), Westcott (WCO), Compton (CPT) and COWLY SIDs). The upper limit of the Birmingham NPRs is currently 3000ft. NPRs for Birmingham Airport are shown in Appendix B. The distribution of departing traffic between the two NPRs is typically 34% northbound and 66% southbound (using runway usage data for 2011). However it is important to note that Runway 15 is typically in use for 40% of the time (annually). An important element in the establishment of NPRs is the objective that the aircraft should adhere as closely as possible to the nominal ground track. However, using current methods there will always be a degree of dispersion around the nominal ground track of the procedure, particularly during turns. To account for the anticipated dispersion of flights a swathe either side of the nominal track is used for monitoring the track-keeping performance of aircraft. The width of the swathe currently used by Birmingham Airport for the NPRs is 1.5km either side of the nominal track. This is in line with the swathe used by the Department for Transport (DfT) for monitoring track-keeping performance at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted Airports and by most other airport operators. However, coincidental with the introduction of the new NPRs, BAL is proposing to reduce the width of the swathe from Runway 15 to 1.0km either side of the nominal track to reflect the improved accuracy to be achieved by the new proposed Area Navigation (RNAV) SIDs (see page 12 for more information about RNAV SIDs). At this time no change is proposed to the NPR swathe for departures from Runway 33, nor to the NPRs for the two conventional SIDs, for non RNAV traffic (see page 26 for more information about non RNAV traffic). About actual flight paths and performance The current SIDs and NPRs for Runway 15 at Birmingham Airport have been in place since 1990, when a 20 degree right turn at 0.8 nautical miles, beyond the DER, was introduced as a noise abatement measure for residents in Hampton-in-Arden. Track-keeping performance refers to the ability for aircraft to remain within the NPR, and not the ability to fly the SID (i.e. the nominal track). Track-keeping performance is excellent at Birmingham Airport; in % of aircraft were on-track. However, when we begin to Say hello to even more world. 10

11 analyse the performance of aircraft against the SID we see a significant degree of dispersion within the NPR. Recent monitoring shows that today s aircraft types are not achieving the 20 degree turn at 0.8 nautical miles followed by the left turn between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common for the northbound NPR with a consistent degree of accuracy. This is shown below: TRACK DENSITY PLOTTING FOR DEPARTURES FROM RUNWAY JUNE 30 SEPTEMBER 2012 This map is taken from Birmingham Airport s Noise and Track-Keeping System. Say hello to even more world. 11

12 One of the principal reasons for the degree of dispersion within the NPRs today, is that the current SIDs were designed for earlier generations of aircraft and navigation systems and are not compatible with the procedure design requirements for modern aircraft systems. We have observed that the degree of dispersion has increased in recent years, due to the change in aircraft performance. Most aircraft today do not use the raw navigational references to the ground-based navigational aids around which the historic procedures were designed but, instead, rely on Flight Management Systems (FMS) to provide the navigational guidance. Within the FMS the current SID procedures are coded as overlay procedures, for which the navigation database coders have interpreted the procedures as best they can into navigation database format. However, because the current procedures are not compatible with the International procedure design criteria and the requirements of modern aircraft navigation systems, the routes cannot be accurately replicated. Conversely, where routes are designed to the current international procedure design criteria, as is now required by the CAA, aircraft will adhere to the routes much more closely than was the case with older navigation techniques. What is Area Navigation and what is Conventional Navigation? Historically, aircraft navigation and route structures worldwide were based on a network of navigation facilities on the ground such as Very High Frequency (VHF) Omni-Directional Radio Range (VOR), Non-Directional Beacons (NDB) and Distance Measuring Equipment (DME). This navigation technology required routes to be aligned between the beacons or directly towards or away from them. This is known as Conventional Navigation. All current SID procedures from Birmingham Airport are Conventional Navigation procedures, based on a series of VORs (these are located at Honiley (HON), Trent (TNT), Daventry (DTY) and Compton (CPT)) and NDBs (at Whitegate (WHI) and Westcott (WCO)). Improvements in aircraft navigation technology, including the availability of space-based navigation systems, means that aircraft no longer require to fly along routes which are aligned directly towards or away from ground-based beacons. Suitably equipped aircraft can fly on any desired flight path, with greater accuracy, provided that the flight path has been designed to be compatible with the aircraft navigation systems. This is known as Area Say hello to even more world. 12

13 Navigation (RNAV). The vast majority of commercial aircraft operating today are equipped with modern RNAV systems and, indeed, when operating in the entire UK and European en route Airways system the use of RNAV systems is mandatory. RNAV routes also allow for improved airspace route structures to meet the ever increasing demands for air travel and ensure the most effective and efficient use of the airspace available. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has established a Future Air Traffic Management (FATM) Strategy, which is also reflected in the European Commission s Single European Skies (SES) Strategy and the UK CAA s Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) which adopts RNAV and Performance Based Navigation (PBN) as the current navigation standard. The CAA requires that all new or revised SIDs should be designed as RNAV procedures. It also specifies that all existing conventional SIDs should be phased out when an opportunity arises, and be replaced by RNAV terminal procedures. The navigation standard for terminal airspace procedures is RNAV-1, as opposed to RNAV-5 which is the standard for en route navigation 1. 1 RNAV-1 requires a navigation accuracy of ± 1 nautical mile (nm) for 95% of the time, whereas RNAV-5 requires a navigation accuracy of ± 5nm for 95% of the time. The aircraft equipage and approval requirements are different for each. In practice aircraft consistently achieve a much greater navigation accuracy then the minimum allowed, which is why an NPR swathe can be narrower than the navigational safety tolerances. Say hello to even more world. 13

14 Changes to the Standard Instrument Departure (SIDs) procedures The proposal is to change the SIDs for departing aircraft from Runway 15 to fit the relocated DER and to meet the current safety and regulatory requirements. There are seven SIDs currently in place from Runway 15 at Birmingham Airport 2 and all seven will need to be redesigned. The current SIDs for Birmingham Airport are shown at Appendix B. The new proposed SIDs are shown at Appendix D. The SIDs have been designed to RNAV-1 criteria as required by the CAA. For any aircraft that are not RNAV-1 capable (estimated to be less than 20% of traffic currently serving Birmingham Airport) an additional two conventional routes have been designed to accommodate this traffic. These are detailed later in this document (page 26). The new SID procedures will continue to link up with the Airways system in the same way that they do now, and the parts of the SID farthest from the Airport will not change other than to be defined as RNAV routes instead of conventional routes. The only part of the routes that will change are closer to the Airport. How have the flight paths been developed? As required by the CAA, BAL has employed CAA approved instrument flight procedure designers to undertake the design of new SIDs. In developing the new SIDs the designers complied with three key objectives specified by BAL: design procedures which are safe, flyable and in line with ICAO and CAA standards for flight procedure design and using RNAV-1 criteria design procedures which match as closely as possible the existing arrangement in order to mitigate the number of new people affected by the changes minimise the environmental impacts as far as possible, including noise and emissions 2 Although there are seven SIDs, the initial stages of each SID close in to the airport follows one of the two NPRs as detailed on Page 8. Say hello to even more world. 14

15 In developing the final procedures detailed in this document a number of options have been considered and rejected, mainly for regulatory reasons. The CAA also requires the Do Nothing option to be considered. A detailed description of each of the options considered is given at Appendix F for the northbound routes and at Appendix G for the southbound routes. What will be the effect of the change? The proposed new NPRs and SIDs will mean a change in the routeing of aircraft over the ground after take-off from Runway 15. Appendix H shows a comparison between the existing and the new NPRs for the northbound routes and Appendix H shows a comparison between the old and the new NPRs for the southbound routes. However, it is important to note that there is expected to be a reduced degree of dispersion around the nominal track for the new RNAV routes in comparison to the old conventional navigation routes, although there will still be some dispersion due to the differing speeds and performance of individual aircraft from day-to-day. (Page 11 shows the current level of dispersion around the existing routes.) The main effect of the change to the departure procedures is that as a consequence of the end of the runway moving to the south-east then the earliest point at which an aircraft can safely make a turn after take-off also moves to the south-east. Description of the changes to Northbound SIDs Currently the SID for aircraft routeing via the northbound SIDs makes a 20 right turn before making a left turn to pass between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common. It should be noted that this routeing, with closely spaced right and left turns (only 1 nautical mile apart) in the critical stages of flight immediately after departure, is a very difficult manoeuvre for aircraft to fly and there has, for many years, been a dispersion of aircraft towards the south of the nominal track. Whilst an objective in developing the new procedures has been to replicate, as far as is possible, the existing arrangements, it is not possible to replicate the consecutive right and left turns within the distances available whilst meeting the safety requirements for the procedure design. The current procedures were designed for previous generations of aircraft with different performance characteristics to modern day aircraft and pre-date the application of formal procedure design criteria and regulatory requirements. (It should be Say hello to even more world. 15

16 noted that the existing procedures could not be applied even to the existing runway configuration if they were being developed to present-day requirements). Therefore, the new SID procedures for the northbound routes will route straight ahead from the runway to then make a left turn to pass between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common. In doing so they will pass slightly closer to Hampton-in-Arden but further away from the northern part of Balsall Common. Appendix F gives the technical details of the options that have been considered in the development of the new routes. Description of the changes to Southbound SIDs With respect to the SID for aircraft routing via the southerly SIDs, the current procedure also makes a 20 right turn shortly after take-off before turning left again at approximately 4nm from the airport to join its appropriate SID route. Again, because of the relocation of the DER it is not possible to replicate the existing right and left turns, in this case due to obstacles in the take-off path which preclude the ability to design the turn (with the appropriate height for obstacle clearance). Therefore, the new procedures will route straight ahead to approximately 4nm from the airport before turning to join the appropriate SID route. In doing so aircraft will pass slightly closer to Hampton-in-Arden, Barston and the western part of Balsall Common but further away from Catherine-de-Barnes, Eastcote and Knowle. As noted above, Appendix G gives the technical details of the options that have been considered in the development of the new routes. Are there any alternative procedures? In developing the new procedures for the runway extension, BAL has tried very hard to replicate, as far as possible, the existing SIDs. However, in each case, the proximity of the existing turns to the new DER precludes the replication of the existing routes within the international safety and procedure design requirements that the CAA requires us to apply. Therefore, over the last 6 months BAL has worked closely with specialist procedure designers and has sought advice from the CAA on a number of possible alternative procedure designs for each of the new SIDs. However, in each case the alternative options Say hello to even more world. 16

17 were either not feasible in procedure design terms or would have overflown more households and built up areas than the procedures that have been selected. As well as complying with the procedure design requirements, BAL also has to demonstrate to the CAA that it has minimised the environmental impact of the procedures as far as is practicable within the safety and regulatory requirements for procedure design. Thus the new procedures detailed in this document represent safe and flyable procedures which affect the least practicable number of households whilst meeting the CAAs requirements. What will be the environmental impact? Noise BAL commissioned the CAA to produce independent modelling of the aircraft noise impact. The aircraft noise contours produced were based on a measure known as Leq which combines noise levels of aircraft, with the number of aircraft over a peak summer daytime period. Sound Exposure Level (SEL) noise contours have also been produced for the individual events for the noisiest and most common aircraft types forecast to operate at night in The CAA has modelled the scenarios as follows: 1. a base case noise contours with and without this airspace change for the departure procedures, and with and without the airspace change for the revised Instrument Approach Procedures (also excluding the relocated Start of Roll position for departures from Runway 33) 2. the year of implementation 2013 (using the forecasts for the Runway Extension) with and without this airspace change for the departure procedures, and with and without the airspace change for the revised Instrument Approach Procedures (also excluding the relocated Start of Roll position for departures from Runway 33) Say hello to even more world. 17

18 3. a future case 2022 (using the forecasts for the Runway Extension) with and without this airspace change for the departure procedures, and with and without the airspace change for the revised Instrument Approach Procedures (also excluding the relocated Start of Roll position for departures from Runway 33) 4. SEL contours for noisiest and most common aircraft types forecast to operate at night in 2013 Forecast data for the Runway Extension has been used in all scenarios to show the direct impact of the airspace change. It should be noted that without the Runway Extension, the forecasts, in terms of the number of ATMs will be smaller due to the limitations of runway length. There would also be a slightly different aircraft mix, with fewer large aircraft types in operation. Both the L eq contours and SEL footprints have been produced with details giving the area (in km 2 ), population and households. Both population and household data tables have been generated to the nearest 100 and are quoted as such below. Full results are in Appendix J. Noise Contours have also been produced to include the airspace change proposal for the revised Instrument Approach Procedures (although this is subject to a separate consultation, currently ongoing). L eq Contours The aircraft noise study concludes that from the base case in 2010 there is an increase in the number of people exposed to aircraft noise by 2013 and This is attributable to increases in aircraft movements, which were forecast in the Runway Extension Planning Application. This forecast information was chosen because it had previously been used as the basis for the assessment of the environmental impact of the Runway Extension. However, it should be noted that since the permission to extend the runway was granted (2009), the Airport has not grown in line with the forecasts predicted, largely due to the economic recession. Therefore, the noise contours should be viewed as showing a worst case scenario. Say hello to even more world. 18

19 Summary of Changes to the Noise Impact with the ACP for the SIDs (i.e. not taking into account the changes to the arrival procedures, or the Start of Roll position for Runway 33) The results of the noise study show that the noise effects will increase over time due to an increase in air transport movements at the Airport. It is also important to consider the changes to the noise impact for communities as a result of this airspace change. In each of the sections below is a description of the changes to the contours as a result of this airspace change proposal for the changes to the SIDs. The information below has been produced to assist the reader in identifying the areas affected but please refer to Appendix J for full results tables and maps. Summary of results of the 2010 noise contours The 2010 scenario shows that overall with the airspace change there is no overall increase in population or households within the noise contours, with the exception of the 60dB level where there is an increase in the population by approximately 100. There is a change of shape of the contours towards the South, where there is a marginal shift towards the South East of the airfield. This means a change to the noise contour bandings for some properties to the east of Catherine-de-Barnes and east of Eastcote where there is a modest benefit to these communities, but as the contour shifts further to the South East, parts of Bickenhill, Hampton-in-Arden and areas to the North of Barston move into a higher noise banding. Summary of results of 2013 noise contours The 2013 scenario shows that overall with the airspace change there is no overall increase in population or households within the noise contours. Again, there is a shift in the contours to the South, where there is a marginal shift towards the South East of the airfield, this means a change to the noise contour bandings for some properties to the east of Catherine-de-Barnes and east of Eastcote where there is a modest benefit to these communities, but as the contour shifts further to the East, parts of Bickenhill, Hampton-in-Arden and areas to the North West of Balsall Common move into a higher noise banding. The noise contours show very subtle changes around the area of Barston. Say hello to even more world. 19

20 Summary of results of 2022 noise contours The 2022 scenario shows that overall with the airspace change there is no overall increase in population or households within the noise contours. Again, there is a shift in the contours to the South, where there is a marginal shift towards the South East of the airfield, this means a change to the noise contour bandings for some properties around Catherine-de-Barnes, and for the majority of Eastcote where there is a modest benefit to these communities, but as the contour shifts further to the South East, parts of Bickenhill, Hampton-in-Arden and the western edge of Balsall Common move into a higher noise banding. The noise contours show subtle changes around the area of Barston. For full information please review the noise contour maps found in Appendix J. Summary of Changes to the Noise Impact with the new SIDs, new Instrument Approach Procedures and the relocated Runway 33 Start of Roll position BAL commissioned the CAA to consider the overall noise impact with the Runway Extension in place with the changes to the SIDs, the Instrument Approach Procedures and the relocated Runway 33 Start of Roll position. Overall when taking out the impact of growth and combining the airspace change for the approach procedures, the SIDs and the relocated Start of Roll position for runway 33, there is a reduction in the number of people affected by aircraft noise, leading to an overall modest environmental benefit. This is due to a shift in the noise contours further south, away from more densely populated parts of Birmingham towards less densely populated areas of Solihull. This, in the main, is due to the relocation of the Start of Roll position for Runway 33. It should also be noted that the results for all contours (2010, 2013, and 2022) do not take account of existing physical mitigation, such as the existing noise bund on the north east edge of the Airfield between the Airport and Marston Green or of operational changes which may result in an extended runway being made available to airlines. Say hello to even more world. 20

21 Sound Exposure Level (SEL) Footprints SEL footprints show the extent of noise energy generated from a single aircraft event, for example, an aircraft either taking off or landing. SEL footprints have been produced for both the proposed R-NAV and conventional SIDs. R-NAV footprints were produced for the noisiest aircraft (Boeing ) and most frequent (Boeing /400/500). Conventional routes also had SEL footprints produced for the noisiest aircraft (Boeing /400/500) and most frequent aircraft (British Aerospace 146). Footprints were produced for the year of implementation (2013) at the 80dbA and 90dBA levels. The table below gives a summary of the results of the SEL footprints at the 90dBA and 80dBA level. For full information please refer to Appendix J for full results tables and maps. SEL Footprints- Proposed PR-NAV routes TRENT PR-NAV Most Frequent B /400/ db No change 80 db Increase in Population 300 Increase in Households 100 TRENT PR-NAV Noisiest B db No change 80 db Decrease in Population 400 Decrease in Households 200 DAVENTRY PR-NAV Most Frequent B /400/ db No change 80 db Increase in Population 800 Increase in Households 400 DAVENTRY PR-NAV Noisiest B db Increase in Population db Increase in Population 2400 Increase in Households 900 COMPTON/COWLEY/WESTCOTT PR-NAV Most Frequent B /400/ db No change 80 db Increase in Population 900 Increase in Households 400 Say hello to even more world. 21

22 CPT/COW/WCO PR-NAV Noisiest B db Increase in Population db Increase in Population 2200 Increase in Households 800 SEL Footprints- Proposed conventional routes TNT Conventional Most Frequent 90 db No change 80 db Increase in Population 600 Increase in Households 200 TNT Conventional Noisiest 90 db No change 80 db No change DTY Conventional Most Frequent 90 db No change 80 db Increase in Population 400 Increase in Households 100 DTY Conventional Most Noisiest 90 db No change 80 db Increase in Population 800 Increase in Households 400 For full information please refer to Appendix J for the maps to view the changes in shape of the SEL contours. Say hello to even more world. 22

23 Carbon Assessment Birmingham Airport commissioned NATS to undertake an assessment of the impact of the ACP on CO 2 emissions. The current and proposed SIDs, together with the forecast information, including aircraft types were modelled using the NATS Fuel Burn Model (KERMIT) to produce fuel burn and CO 2 figures for each SID for the forecast scenarios (as detailed below). The results were compared for current and proposed SIDs, including the an assessment of the proposed Conventional SIDs, for the following years: a base case 2011 (using actual data) to show the current situation the year of implementation 2013 (using the forecasts for the Runway Extension) a future case 2022 (using the forecasts for the Runway Extension) The table below summarises the annual estimated fuel burn and CO 2 for the SIDs collectively with and without this airspace change proposal. The fuel burn and CO 2 is broken down by route overleaf. Annual estimated fuel burn and CO 2 emissions With Airspace Change Without Airspace Change Year Total Movements Total CO 2 Total Fuel Total CO 2 Total Fuel (Departures from Runway 15) (Tonnes) (Tonnes) (Tonnes) (Tonnes) ,213 44,223 13,907 44,901 14, ,186 96,961 30,491 98,219 30, , ,893 41, ,665 42,348 As with noise, there is predicted to be an increase in CO 2 for each of the assessment years. This is directly attributable to the predicted increases in air transport movements from the airport, rather than a direct result of this airspace change proposal. In fact, as the above table shows, overall there is a modest measurable reduction in CO 2 with this airspace change proposal if the same growth were to occur without it. This is mostly attributable to the reduction in aircraft track miles for the proposed new SIDs. Say hello to even more world. 23

24 Fuel and CO 2 differences per SID and aircraft type have been combined with the traffic count data to calculate an annual estimated change in emissions for the designs. The table below provides a summary of Total Fuel and CO 2 emissions for each traffic sample year: Overall changes in fuel burn and CO 2 emissions by year with this airspace change Year Total Movements Total CO 2 Change Total Fuel Change (Departures from Runway 15) (Tonnes) (Tonnes) , , , Overall Results by SID and by Year SID Year Total Movements Total CO 2 Change (Tonnes) Total Fuel Change (Tonnes) COWLY COMPTON DAVENTRY WESTCOTT TRENT/ WHITEGATE Say hello to even more world. 24

25 The analysis shows that each of the new SIDs proposed for Departures from Runway 15 have the potential to reduce fuel burn and therefore CO 2 emissions. There is one exception, which is the proposed Whitegate SID, where with Whitegate there is a small increase in the track mileage of 0.4 nautical miles. Local Air Quality A detailed and comprehensive assessment of atmospheric emissions associated with Birmingham Airport was undertaken to determine how air quality in the local area may change as a result of the proposed runway extension. The key local air quality pollutants are nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and particulates (as PM10 ). The overall significance of the proposed runway extension in terms of NO₂ is negligible to slight adverse. At all receptor locations outside the airport, the air quality objectives for this pollutant are expected to be achieved either with or without the proposed runway extension. The overall significance of the proposed runway extension in term of PM10 is negligible. At all receptor locations outside the airport, the air quality objectives for this pollutant are expected to be achieved either with or without the proposed runway extension. A review of monitoring data and the results of local air quality management indicate that the air quality objectives for NO₂ and PM10 are being achieved and are expected to continue being achieved in the vicinity of Birmingham Airport. At certain locations within the Airport site these objectives may be exceeded, but these are in locations where there is no public access and are not receptor locations and will have been exceeded without the runway extension. Objectives may also be exceeded on the M42 and A45 in certain locations but these are not directly attributable to either the airport or the runway extension but thus is associated with the general growth in traffic on the M42 and A45 over the same period not that with the runway extension. Say hello to even more world. 25

26 Tranquillity and Visual Intrusion Tranquillity can be defined as a state of calm or quietude, and CAA guidance recommends that this is considered when airspace changes are required. The measurement of tranquillity is not well developed, but the CPRE commissioned research and produced tranquillity maps in A desk top study has considered the effects of the current and proposed departure routes to a nominal height of 3000 feet on Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSI), and to 7000 feet for Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and National Parks. This has identified that there are four SSSIs located under or adjacent to the existing departure routes and these will continue to be overflown under the new proposed routes. Two of the SSSIs are already in close proximity to the runway and aircraft approach centreline and experience frequent overflying. One of the other SSSIs is the River Blythe which is designated as a SSSI from the point at which Spring Brook exits from under the Stratford-upon-Avon to Birmingham railway line (near Earlswood, to the south west of Solihull) to its confluence with the River Tame. The Blythe is overflown at present and will continue to be overflown. However as a result of the proposed reduced flight swathes, it is expected that, the length of the Blythe which is overflown will significantly reduce. There are no Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) or National Parks within or adjacent to the existing or proposed departure routes (to 7000 feet). At a wider scale, the proposed departure routes further out from the airport (where aircraft are significantly higher and therefore less likely to disturb tranquillity or create a visual intrusion) substantially replicate the existing routes. Birmingham Airport is located on the western edge of a busy airways complex that routes between northern major UK cities and London. Within this complex aircraft will be seen at various levels and altitudes and not all will be routing to or from Birmingham Airport. In addition, there are numerous General Aviation and leisure flying sites located in the Midlands that generate air traffic routing through the area (many of which are not required to speak to Birmingham ATC). It is not felt therefore that the proposed changes will have a significant effect on tranquillity or visual intrusion at a local scale or further out from the airport. Say hello to even more world. 26

27 Proposed Standard Instrument Departure procedures for non-rnav-1 aircraft A small proportion of the aircraft using Birmingham Airport are not equipped or approved for RNAV-1 operations. However, provision needs to be made for these aircraft to operate from Birmingham Airport and to access the Airways system. This is important as it ensures that existing aircraft operator s at Birmingham Airport are able to continue to operate. Whilst not RNAV-1 approved, these aircraft are, nonetheless, equipped and approved for RNAV-5 operation within the Airways system. As part of the development of the new SID procedures our procedure designers put to the CAA a proposal that the existing RNAV-5 capability of these aircraft should be utilised to allow them to fly the proposed RNAV-1 procedures. This was considered to be a valid, albeit non standard proposal, however it was not acceptable to the CAA as it is counter to current CAA policy on the implementation of RNAV-1 procedures. Therefore, in order to allow these aircraft to continue to operate from Birmingham Airport it is necessary for BAL to introduce new Conventional SIDs from runway 15, based on the new DER and meeting the current regulatory requirements for procedure design. These procedures will remain in place until the ground-based navigation infrastructure which supports them is withdrawn by NATS, circa It is therefore expected that without the runway extension, BAL would need to change the SIDs by 2018 at the latest. NATS is aiming to rationalise its provision of traditional navigation aid infrastructure on the ground across the country as its role within en-route air navigation changes from being the primary means to a secondary one. Again, it is not possible to replicate the existing conventional procedures due to the relocation of the DER and the current procedure design requirements. Therefore the new conventional procedures are designed to replicate, as far as is practicable, the new RNAV procedures but using conventional navigation techniques. Due to the expected small number of aircraft that will use the conventional procedures BAL has decided, with the agreement of NATS, that access to the en route Airways system will be limited to only two routes: one for northbound flights via Trent VOR and one for Say hello to even more world. 27

28 southbound flights via Daventry VOR. Whilst for some flights this will result in a longer flight planned route, the opportunity will remain for ATC to give more direct routeing on a tactical basis once the aircraft has climbed above the upper limit of the NPR. The proposed conventional SIDs are shown at Appendix I. Say hello to even more world. 28

29 Conclusions The extension to the Runway at Birmingham Airport requires new departure procedures to be developed for Runway 15. The regulatory requirements for the design of departure procedures, together with the process required for implementation of the new procedures are specified by the CAA. The CAA requires that all new or revised SID procedures should be RNAV procedures, with RNAV-1 as the navigation standard. The existing departure procedures from Runway 15 cannot be replicated with reference to the new runway configuration. Nor do they meet current regulatory and procedure design requirements for the existing runway configuration. Therefore, new departure procedures have been developed which are safe, flyable and meet the ICAO and CAA standards for flight procedure design and using RNAV-1 criteria. BAL is proposing to reduce the width of the swathe from Runway 15 to 1.0km either side of the nominal track to reflect the improved accuracy to be achieved by the new proposed Area Navigation (RNAV) SIDs (see page 12 for more information about RNAV SIDs). Forecast scenarios show that overall there will be an increase in the noise impact. However, this is mostly attributable to growth within the forecast scenarios. When analysing the noise impact with and without this airspace change there is a modest increase in people affected by noise as a result of this change. It is noteworthy, that the results when modelling the overall impact of the runway extension with all new procedures that overall fewer people are impacted by the new procedures than the existing ones. This is mostly attributable to the new Start of Roll position for Runway 33 departures. Overall there are benefits to the new SIDs in terms of fuel burn and CO 2 emissions; where overall there is a modest reduction in CO 2 emissions if growth were to occur without the new SIDs in place. Say hello to even more world. 29

30 The new routes match as closely as possible, within the constraints detailed above, the existing arrangement, minimise, as far as possible the number of new people affected by the changes and minimise the environmental impacts as far as possible, including noise and emissions. Say hello to even more world. 30

31 Consultation Process The Purpose The purpose of this consultation process is to provide stakeholders the opportunity to comment on the proposals to establish new SIDs from Runway 15 at Birmingham Airport. THIS PROPOSAL CONCERNS STANDARD INSTRUMENT DEPARTURE PROCEDURES ONLY. The Process As the Change Sponsor for this airspace change, BAL will manage the public consultation process. This proposal and public consultation process has been developed in line with the CAA document - Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process (CAP 725). This proposal will be subject to a 13-week consultation. The public consultation will commence on Friday 11 th January 2013 and will end on Friday 12 th April All feedback will be given appropriate consideration before the formal proposal is prepared for submission to the CAA for approval. The Scope This consultation is focused around those communities which might be affected by the changes to SIDs. The Airport Consultative Committee, its sub-group the Environment Monitoring Working Group and the Airspace Change Focus Group, as well as Airlines and Air Traffic Control will also be included in this consultation. Other stakeholders, including Environmental Groups and Local Authorities will also be consulted. A full list of consultees is available via our website (see below). The consultation material will be available on our website or can be posted on request by calling Say hello to even more world. 31

32 To supplement this material, BAL is inviting all consultees to visit one of a series of Airport Exhibitions. All exhibitions will be held at local community venues, please visit our website for the latest schedule. How to respond BAL welcomes your comments on the proposed new SIDs and you are invited to submit your feedback in the following ways; By ing airspace2@birminghamairport.co.uk By writing to Airspace Change Process Birmingham Airport Diamond House Birmingham, B26 3QJ All feedback will be analysed and considered by BAL. Subsequently, the results will be summarised in a consultation report following the closure of the consultation period; this report will be available on our website in due course. Please be aware that copies of all consultation responses will be a matter of public record and will be submitted to the CAA. Any comments regarding the process as set out in CAA s guidance for the ACP (CAP725) should be directed to the CAA at: Business Coordinator Directorate of Airspace Policy CAA House Kingsway London WC2B 6TE airspacepolicy@caa.co.uk Say hello to even more world. 32

33 Appendix A Glossary of Key Terms AAL ACC ACFG ACP ATC ATM CAA CAP 725 DAP DME EMWG ICAO IFP KT NATS NM NPR NTK Noise Contour PANS-OPS Altitude Airport Consultative Committee Airspace Change Focus Group Airspace Change Process Air Traffic Control Air Transport Movement Civil Aviation Authority (the specialist regulatory agency for the aviation industry in the UK) Airspace Change Process Guidance document produced by the CAA providing a framework for consideration of airspace changes. Directorate of Airspace Policy. The division of the CAA which is responsible for the planning and regulation of all UK airspace, including the navigation and communications infrastructure, to support safe and efficient operations Distance Measuring Equipment Environmental Monitoring Working Group, one of the subgroups of the Airport Consultative Committee. International Civil Aviation Organisation Instrument Flight Procedure Knot 1.1 mph National Air Traffic Services (Air Traffic Service provider) Nautical Mile Noise Preferential Route. The route established by the airport operator in the vicinity of aerodromes where it is desirable that aircraft avoid overflying noise-sensitive areas as far as is practicable. Noise and Track-Keeping System used by Airports to monitor noise and track-keeping performance. Aircraft noise maps, which show lines joining points of equal noise, illustrate the impact of aircraft noise around airports. A document published by ICAO specifying the design criteria to be used for the safe design of IFPs. Say hello to even more world. 33

34 RNAV Runway 15 Runway 33 Area Navigation The Runway description at Birmingham Airport when aircraft are taking off to the South and arriving from the North The Runway description at Birmingham Airport when aircraft are taking off to the North and arriving from the South Section 106 Agreement SID UK AIP Legally binding Planning Obligation which Birmingham Airport entered into with Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council in November 2009 Standard Instrument Departure procedure. The route linking the runway to the en route Airways system which incorporates local and en route ATC requirements and NPRs UK Aeronautical Information Publication, a manual containing information relating to all UK airports including flight procedures, noise abatement procedures and SID charts Say hello to even more world. 34

35 Appendix B Current SID Routes from Birmingham Airport Schematic diagram of nominal tracks of current SID/NPRs from Runway 15 NB: Nominal design parameters for the current left turn between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common equate to 35 degree bank angle at 185kt ground speed, which are outside normal aircraft operating envelopes and procedure design criteria. Say hello to even more world. 35

36 Appendix C Current Noise Preferential Routes from Runway 15 Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown copyright All rights reserved. Licence number Say hello to even more world. 36

37 Appendix D New proposed SID Routes from Birmingham Airport Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown copyright All rights reserved. Licence number Schematic diagram of nominal tracks of new SID/NPRs from the extended Runway 15 Say hello to even more world. 37

38 Appendix E New proposed NPRs from Birmingham Airport Please note that the proposed NPRs are illustrative only, pending formal design. Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown copyright All rights reserved. Licence number Say hello to even more world. 38

39 Appendix F Development of the new SIDs Options considered: Northbound Routes Option 1 - Do Nothing In any ACP the CAA requires the Do Nothing option to be considered even if, from the outset, it is not a feasible option. In this case, the Do Nothing option is taken to mean retention of the currently published procedures referenced to the old DER and the old DME location. Clearly this option is not feasible because the runway configuration will be changed as a result of the runway extension project and the DER will move. The DME facility (referenced to the Runway 33 landing threshold) will also move and its point of reference will change to reflect the new landing threshold of runway 33. The International and UK procedure design requirements specify that the design of departure procedures starts at the DER. Thus, moving the DER dictates that new procedures must be established. (See diagram on Page 7 which shows the change to the DER.) Additionally, retention of the existing procedures would not be compatible with the changes to the ground-based navigation infrastructure which it is anticipated will start to take place take place within 2 years of the completion of the runway extension. Furthermore, the current procedures, even from the existing runway configuration, are not compatible with the CAAs current regulatory regime for SID procedures and so would need to be reconfigured irrespective of the runway extension project. The Do Nothing Option is therefore not available. Option 2 - Replicate the existing nominal ground tracks The current procedure specifies a 20 right turn at I-BIR D1 (i.e. 1nm from the current landing threshold of runway 33), which is 0.8nm beyond the existing DER, provided that the aircraft is above 500ft aal (The Hampton Turn). The extended runway configuration results in the DER moving 390m (0.2nm) closer to the current NPR turn position. I.e. the current turn position would be only 0.6nm beyond the new DER. The CAA accepts that all aircraft will, in general, be capable of achieving 500ft aal within 1nm of the DER and therefore permits turns to be established at 1nm beyond DER. Say hello to even more world. 39

40 The CAA exceptionally will accept a turn to be designed at less than 1nm beyond DER subject to stringent evaluation conditions by the aerodrome operator. These conditions include: A detailed traffic study has been undertaken of achieved aircraft performance which demonstrates that the necessary climb performance to reach a minimum of 500ft above the aerodrome level can be consistently achieved before the turn commences; The proposed climb gradient is within the flight manual performance requirements of user aircraft; Noise preferential runway requirements (i.e. the potential for tail-wind departures) do not compromise the proposed climb gradient; The performance of future aircraft types has been taken into account, as far as possible; The requirements of safety regulation and aircraft operations are met. The procedure design climb gradient required for aircraft to achieve 500ft aal by 0.6nm beyond the new DER would be 13.3%. BAL has considered the conditions specified by the CAA in adopting an initial turn for noise abatement purposes at 0.6nm beyond the new DER and has concluded that the conditions could not be met for all aircraft types currently operating and planned to operate from Birmingham Airport. Therefore, the retention of the Hampton Turn in its current location is not viable. The earliest point at which a turn can be specified is 1nm beyond DER, which would be 0.4nm south-east of its current position. However, before adopting this measure, we also must consider the subsequent left turn (the Balsall Turn) which currently is specified at I-BIR D2 (i.e. 2nm from the current landing threshold of runway 33 or 1.8nm from the current DER). The objective of this turn, with a track change of 151, is to establish a nominal ground track which lies between the communities of Hampton-in-Arden to the north and Balsall Common to the south. The start of the Balsall Turn would lie only 0.6nm beyond the start of a reconfigured Hampton Turn described above and also before an aircraft could have completed the Hampton Turn. Regard must be taken of the procedure design requirements for RNAV SID procedures, which specify that a minimum distance must be established between successive turning waypoints to ensure that aircraft RNAV systems are not forced to bypass them. Each leg must be long enough to allow the aircraft to stabilise after the first turn before commencing the next. This is shown in the diagram below. Say hello to even more world. 40

41 For successive turning waypoints with turns in opposite directions to achieve a Hampton Turn followed by a Balsall Turn the minimum distance between waypoints (from ICAO PANS-OPS procedure design criteria) would be 4.0nm 3. Furthermore, the maximum track change allowed in any single turn is limited to 120, whereas the current Balsall Turn is 151. Thus the replication of the Balsall Turn, following an adjusted Hampton Turn, is not feasible within the procedure design criteria. It is not feasible to replicate the existing nominal ground track within the specified procedure design criteria and regulatory requirements. This Option is therefore not available. (Option 5, detailed below, considers the implication of a combined reconfigured Hampton Turn together with a reconfigured Balsall Turn) Option 3 - Use an offset departure ICAO procedure design criteria allow the use of an offset initial departure track of up to 15 in order to avoid obstacles in the take-off area. The effect of this would be that instead of climbing straight ahead after take-off, the aircraft would climb on an offset track to achieve the obstacle clearance requirements. However, the ICAO criteria for the design of NPRs is explicit in stating that turns for noise abatement purposes are not permitted below 500ft aal. BAL has investigated with the CAA whether the offset departure technique could be used for noise abatement purposes alone (there are no take-off area obstacles which would require this application), which would effectively start The Hampton Turn from the DER. However, the CAA has confirmed that use of the offset departure technique is not permitted for noise abatement purposes alone. This option is therefore not available. 3 First turn 20 right at 180kt, Minimum Stabilisation Distance (MSD) 0.9nm; second turn 120 left at 200kt, Turn Initiation Distance (TID) 3.1nm. Total Minimum Segment Length = 4.0nm Say hello to even more world. 41

42 Option 4 - Straight Ahead to a reconfigured Balsall Turn It is seen from the above that sustaining or replicating both the Hampton Turn and the Balsall turn is not viable within the current regulatory requirements and procedure design criteria for RNAV SIDs. Given these constraints, BAL has considered how best to achieve adequate noise mitigation measures which meet the current requirements for procedure design. A procedure design option has been developed in which the aircraft would initially climb straight ahead before turning directly into a left turn to pass between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common (i.e. eliminating completely the Hampton Turn). This procedure design would establish a flyby waypoint which would ensure that a left turn was initiated some distance after 1nm from the new DER. The left turn would be less than 120 onto a track passing between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common, and then towards a second flyby waypoint, from which the aircraft would turn left again towards the existing ATS Route entry points. A speed limit would be included in order to limit dispersion to the south of the nominal track by faster accelerating aircraft. Due to the fact that a procedure cannot be developed which replicates the Hampton Turn in combination with the Balsall Turn, this option becomes the preferred option. Option 5 - Retain the reconfigured Hampton Turn and delay the Balsall Turn Finally, in order to test the implications of retaining a reconfigured Hampton Turn in conjunction with a reconfigured Balsall Turn and both being in compliance with the regulatory and procedure design requirements a further design was tested. For this option a 20 right turn is retained at 1nm beyond the new DER (i.e. 0.4nm southeast of the current turn position) to form a reconfigured Hampton Turn. This was then followed by a left turn of 120 as soon as the procedure design criteria would permit. As detailed in Option 2 above, the minimum distance between turning waypoints for opposite direction turns at reasonable post-departure speeds would be 4nm in order to allow the aircraft to stabilise after the right turn before commencing the left turn. The left turn would start approximately 3.1nm before the waypoint and the turn radius would be 1.8nm. The nominal ground track would pass substantially closer to Balsall Common than the track detailed in Option 4 above. The associated NPR swathe would encompass a substantially increased population, including parts of Coventry, than either the current swathe or the swathe for the procedure detailed in Option 4 above. Therefore this option is not the preferred option. Say hello to even more world. 42

43 Conclusion The extension of Runway 15, coupled with the CAAs regulatory requirements and the international criteria for the safe design of Instrument Flight Procedures and the requirement to adopt RNAV procedures for departing aircraft, mean that the existing SID and NPR procedures cannot be replicated. The existing procedures are historic and do not meet the current requirements for procedure design (even without taking the runway extension into account). There is empirical evidence from NTK records that modern aircraft do not accurately adhere to the nominal ground track of the existing procedures and do not satisfactorily achieve the closely spaced opposite direction turns. A procedure design has been selected as the preferred option which retains a nominal ground track between Hampton-in-Arden and Balsall Common communities and which meets the regulatory requirements for RNAV procedure design. Whilst the proposed procedure does not incorporate a Hampton Turn, it is anticipated that aircraft would not pass substantially closer to Hampton-in-Arden than is currently being achieved by the non-compliant procedure. Say hello to even more world. 43

44 Appendix G Development of the new SIDs. Options considered: Southbound Routes Option 1 - Do Nothing As detailed in the Northbound case above, the Do Nothing Option is not tenable simply because the extension of the Runway requires that new procedures must be developed, which meet the current regulatory requirements and procedure design criteria. Therefore the Do Nothing Option is not available. Option 2 - Replicate the existing nominal ground tracks As detailed in the northbound case above, the replication of a right turn at less than 1nm beyond the new DER cannot be achieved within the current regulatory requirements for procedure design. Therefore, the retention of the Hampton Turn in its current location is not viable. The earliest point at which a turn initiation could be specified is 1nm beyond new DER, which would be 0.4nm southeast of its current position. Therefore this option is not available. Option 3 - Offset Departure As detailed in the northbound case above, the use of offset departure track is not permitted for noise abatement purposes alone. Therefore this option is not available. Option 4 - Adopt a reconfigured Hampton Turn As detailed above, the retention of the Hampton Turn in its current location is not viable. The earliest point at which a turn could be specified is 1nm beyond new DER, which would be 0.4nm southeast of its current position. Considering this in conjunction with a second turn of the current procedures (at 3.8nm beyond old DER, 3.6nm beyond new DER), it is seen that there is adequate distance between the two opposite direction turns to provide sufficient stabilisation distance between two waypoints as the consecutive turns would not be as extensive as for the northbound case. Say hello to even more world. 44

45 Furthermore, the adjustment of the Hampton turn start point would place the nominal track slightly further away from Knowle. However, when a detailed procedure design was undertaken it was found that obstacles in the vicinity of the relocated Hampton Turn would preclude the development of the right turn within a reasonable distance of the desired position. Discussions were held with the CAA to ascertain whether an increased achieved height above the DER could be utilised in the procedure design than that specified in the ICAO procedure design criteria. However, the CAA would not permit this. It should be noted that the obstacles concerned only become accountable when a turn is being designed; they are not accountable if the route does not turn. Also, it should be noted that the minimum climb performance requirements specified in the procedure design criteria for obstacle clearance purposes do not reflect the day-to-day performance of modern aircraft. In reality all departing aircraft would be much higher than the minimum taken into account for procedure design obstacle clearance purposes (indeed, steeper climb gradients are specified for ATC purposes), but the CAA requires the procedure design to take obstacles into account at the gradients specified in the ICAO procedure design documents. Thus, the CAA has confirmed that they would not permit a right turn to be designed into the NPR to replicate a repositioned Hampton Turn. This option is therefore not available. Option 5 - Straight ahead to 4nm beyond DER (eliminate Hampton Turn) Given that a Hampton Turn cannot be replicated within the procedure design and regulatory requirements, adoption of a climb Straight Ahead to approximately 3.6nm beyond the new DER (i.e. the same as for the current procedures based on the old DER) is feasible and has been developed. This would provide commonality of the initial portion of the procedure with that for the northbound procedure and the obstacle difficulty outlined above would not arise. Whilst the nominal ground track would be moved away from Knowle, it would move closer to Balsall Common, indeed the NPR swathe would encompass most of Balsall Common. Conversely, for a climb without turns the achieved navigational accuracy would be much improved over a turning procedure and aircraft climb performance would also be improved. Given that no alternative is available within the current regulatory regime and international procedure design criteria, this option becomes the preferred option. The CAA has confirmed that this option would meet their procedure design requirements. Say hello to even more world. 45

46 Conclusion The extension of Runway 15, coupled with the CAAs regulatory requirements and the international criteria for the safe design of Instrument Flight Procedures and the requirement to adopt RNAV procedures for departing aircraft, mean that the existing SID and NPR procedures cannot be replicated. The existing procedures are historic and do not meet the current requirements for procedure design (even without taking the runway extension into account). A procedure design has been selected as the preferred option which meets the regulatory requirements for RNAV procedure design and is acceptable to the CAA. Whilst the proposed procedure does not incorporate a Hampton Turn, it is anticipated that aircraft would not pass substantially closer to Hampton - in - Arden than is currently achieved by the non-compliant procedure. Whilst the proposed procedure passes closer to Balsall Common than the current procedure it passes substantially further away from Knowle. Say hello to even more world. 46

47 Appendix H Comparison of old and new NPRs for routes Please note that the proposed NPRs are illustrative only, pending formal design. Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown copyright All rights reserved. Licence number Note 1: Nominal ground track for current NPR requires nominal procedure design parameters of 35 bank angle at 185kt ground speed. These are outside normal operating parameters for aircraft in the critical stages of flight after take-off and are outside current procedure design criteria. Say hello to even more world. 47

48 Appendix I SID procedures for aircraft which are not approved for RNAV-1 operations TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS; Via TNT VOR: Climb straight ahead. At 900ft ALT turn left onto TNT R178; at TNT D33 turn left onto DTY R320; At DTY D32 turn right onto TNT R185 to TNT VOR. Cross TNT D26 at 6000ft ALT. Via DTY VOR: Climb straight ahead. At I-BIR D4.5 turn left onto DTY R302 to DTY VOR. Cross DTY D16 at 4000ft or above, Cross DTY D12 at 5000ft or above, Cross DTY D9 at 6000ft ALT Say hello to even more world. 48