Boston Logan International Airport Operational Overview Presentation to the Massport Community Advisory Committee June 8, 2017 Updated 12/07/17
Content Overview of Logan Runway Designations Runway Configurations and Community Overflights Appendix background material 2
Based on wind/weather and other operational considerations, the FAA uses Logan runways in combinations to safely and efficiently coordinate aircraft landings and takeoffs The FAA is responsible for choosing which runways to use For safety, aircraft land and depart into the wind 15R 15L 22R 22L Boston experiences varied wind/weather conditions 33R Current and forecasted weather is primary 27 Other operational factors include runway closures, fleet mix, demand 14 4L 9 4R 33L 32 3
Runway designations are based on compass headings. Runways are oriented based on primary weather patterns. BOS experiences all major weather patterns R 22R R 22L R 15R R 15L R 33R R 4L R 9 R 14 R 27 R 4R R 33L R 32 4
. LAX does not experience varied weather, simple runway layout Runway Use 6% Westerly Easterly 94% 5
The FAA utilizes a subset of available runways. In general, the FAA looks to utilizes 3-runways at a time; primarily 2 for arrivals and 1 for departures NW 6
Aircraft In-flight Create Wake Vortices that can Cause Problems for Trailing Aircraft As a result the FAA Air Traffic Controllers separate aircraft The bigger the aircraft the greater the wake it creates Having two arrival runways allows for separating larger aircraft from smaller aircraft Departing aircraft need to also accommodate wake turbulence Bad weather or closing a runway for maintenance or for an emergency reduces the throughput of the airport. Mixing smaller aircraft with bigger aircraft increases separation requirements Aircraft also have different performance characteristics based on size, weight, and destination and other factors 7
Boston Logan major runway configurations jet use (in CY 2016) NW Flow R27 Arr & Dep R33L Arr & Dep R33R Arr R32 Arr (wind restricted) Jet Flights SW Flow R27 Arr R22L Arr & Dep R22R Dep (& nonjet Arr) NE Flow R4R Arr & Dep R4L Arr (& nonjet dep) R9 Dep NW, 102,804, 31% NE, 114,013, 34% SW, 104,129, 31% SE, 12,849, 4% SE Flow R15R Arr R15L Arr (very limited) R9 Dep R14 dep (very limited) Source: Massport Noise Abatement Office. Annual jet use by runway 8
Boston Logan major runway configurations jet use (in CY 2016) Major Operating Direction Northwest Flow Southwest Flow Arrival Runway R27 R33L and R33R R32 Arr (wind restricted) R27 R22L R22R (nonjet only) Runways in Use Departing Runway % of Use (Jet only 2016) R27 R33L 31% R22L R22R 31% Northeast Flow R4R R4L R4R R4L (nonjet only) R9 34% Southeast Flow R15R R15L (very limited) R15R R9 R14 (very limited) 4% 9
Based on which configuration the FAA selects, different communities are impacted. Some communities are overflown by multiple runways under varying operating conditions 10
Southwest Flow Operating Configuration 104,000 Jet Flights in 2016 (31%) Arrivals to R 22L and 27 Departures from R 22L and 22R Non-Jet Runway 22R Runway 22L Runway 27 Arrivals Departures 11
Southwest Flow Operating Configuration (104,000 in 2016) Arrivals to Runways 22L & 27 Departures from Runways 22L & 22R Flight Tracks For Period 20-27 Dec 2016 (Jets Only) R22L Arr 41,000 R27 Arr 15,000 R22R+22L Dep 48,000
Southeast Flow Operating Configuration 13,000 jet flights in 2016 (4%) Non-Jet Arrivals to R 15R, 15L(limited) Departures from R 15R, 14 (limited) and 9 Limited Throughput- 2 intersecting jet runway configuration; intersection at departure ends; challenging, long runway departure sequencing; narrow weather window Runway 15L Runway 15R Runway 9 Runway 14 13
Southeast Flow Operating Configuration (13,000 in 2016) Arrivals to Runways 15L & 15R Departures from Runways 09, 14 & 15R Flight Tracks For Period 12-19 Dec 2016 (Jets Only) R15R Arr 1,000 R9 Dep 1,000 R15R Dep 11,000
Arrivals to Runways 4L and 4R Departures from R 9, 4L, and 4R Northeast Flow Operating Configuration 114,000 jet flights in 2016 (34%) Non-Jet Runway 4L Runway 4R Runway 9 15
Northeast Flow Operating Configuration (114,000 in 2016) Arrivals to Runways 04L & 04R Departures from Runways 09, 04L & 04R Flight Tracks For Period 01-07 Dec 2016 (Jets Only) RR Dep 7,000 R9 Dep 49,000 R4R/L Arr 58,000
Northwest Flow Operating Configuration 103,000 jet flights in 2016 (31%) Arrivals to R 33L, 33R (limited), 32 and 27 Departures from R 33L and 27 Runway 33R Non-Jet Runway 33L Runway 27 Runway 32 17
Northwest Flow Operating Configuration (103,000 jet flights in 2016) Arrivals to Runways 33L, 33R, 32 & 27 Departures from Runways 33L & 27 Flight Tracks For Period 08-13 Dec 2016 (Jets Only) R33L Dep 30,000 R27 Arr 23,000 R27 Dep 21,000 R33L + R32 Arr 29,000
Late Night, Opposite Direction Configuration Arrivals to R 33L Departures R 15R Runway 15R Runway 33L 19
Late Night Opposite Direction Configuration Arrivals to Runways 33L Departures from Runways 15R For period Jan-Dec 2016 (jet only)
Change in Runway Use and Shift in Noise: Example from BLANS Assumption Reduce use of NE (4s/9) and SW (27/22s) by 2% each (total -4%) and increase use of NW (33/27/32) by +4% Results DNL Cumulative Change in Population DNL 50+ +41,815 DNL 60+ +4,221 DNL 65+ +1,269 Source: BLANS Final Report, page 5-35 21
Appendix Background Material 22
Overflights - Principals Safety for passengers and people on the ground Weather is the primary factor With other operational considerations including fleet mix, demand, available runways Data driven Regional perspective across metropolitan area Massport CAC as regional voice 23
Although flights fluctuate year to year, over the long term Logan Airport is serving more passengers on fewer flights 40 35 Passengers (millions) 36.3 550,000 500,000 Total Aircraft Operations 507,449 30 26.5 450,000 400,000 391,222 25 350,000 20 300,000 15 250,000 10 1998 2016 200,000 1998 2016 24
Long term trend in Logan flight levels 25 yr. snapshot 550,000 500,000 9/11 & Recession 450,000 400,000 Trend Line (Best Fit) 2008 Great Recession Recovery 350,000 300,000 Airline consolidations, move to larger aircraft, higher load factors 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 25
Passenger demand is highly correlated to economic conditions and other socio-economic factors 10% 5% 0% -5% Change to Logan Passengers 8% -10% -15% -20% -9% -18% 9/11 & Recession 2008 Recession 2015 to 2016 26
Because of Logan s urban location, Massport has developed a comprehensive noise abatement program. Noise abatement departure procedures Late night opposite direction operations Decibel restriction on R4L departures and 22R arrivals Unidirectional/Wind restriction use R14/32 Residential and School Soundproofing Program Engine run-up restrictions Limited time Specific locations Encourage use of single engine taxiing and reverse thrust 24/7 noise complaint line 617-561- 3333 State of the art Noise Monitoring System Near live flight tracking on website http://www.massport.com/environment/environmental_re porting/noise%20abatement/overview.aspx 27
Examples of existing noise abatement restrictions Towing of aircraft repositioning Decibel Restrictions 4L takeoffs 22R landings Runway 14/32 Unidirectional and Wind Restricted Engine Run Up Location Away from communities, time restricted 28
Examples of existing noise abatement procedures benefiting communities. But these may impact other communities R22R and R22L are primary SW departure runways Peak use is during summer periods 2 nd busiest departure runway flow in 2016, 29% of all departures or about 48,000 jet flights Implemented in the early 1980s 29
Examples of existing noise abatement procedures benefiting communities (cont.) Overnight Head-to-Head Procedure Depart 15R, Land 33L, Late night (about midnight to 5AM) However, procedure does result in overflights to South Shore Second CAT III Runway R33L, alternative option to R4R 30
Runway use, and which community is impacted, is highly dependent on weather and reflects seasonal variations 20.0% 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Departures by Runway As a % of all Jet Activity Winter (Jan-15) Year (2014) R9 R22R R33L R27 Other 20.0% 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Arrivals by Runway As a % of all Jet Activity Winter (Jan-15) Year (2014) R22L R27 R33L R4R Other 31
Case Study (1)- August 2016, FAA selection of runways and wind direction Aug 2016 Arrivals by Runway 32, 1.3% % 15R, 0.3% 4L, 5.3% 22R, 0.0% Aug 2016, Wind Direction 33L, 9.2% 22L, 31.9% 15.8% 11.5% 6.9% 4.4% 15.6% N - 6.9% NE -4.4% E -15.6% 27, 22.6% 4R, 29.4% 26.6% 8.7% 10.5% SE - 10.5% S - 8.7% SW - 26.6 % W - 15.8% NW - 11.5 % Runway 4R is a NE facing runway Total Northerly/Easterly Wind = 27% 32
Case Study (2) - Use of the NW departure runways in February is generally particularly heavy, again reflecting the winter weather pattern Weather (Wind Direction) Runway Use Calm 1% Northeast 18% Other, 8% Northwest 54% Southwest 27% R22R, 14% R9, 16% R27, 35% 33L, 28% Jet Departures only as a percentage of all departures. 33
In the short term FAA utilization of runways, fluctuates significantly, primarily due to weather leading to persistent used over narrow periods R4R % of Jet Arrivals 50% 45% 2016 2015 40% 35% Long Term Average 32% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug YTD 34
Over the long term, FAA s relative use of some runways has not changed dramatically (example R4R arrivals) Boston Logan RW4R Arrivals Historical Usage Year Number of Arrivals Percentage of Arrivals 1998 58,996 41% 2006 44,874 30% 2007 47,917 30% 2008 44,876 30% 2009 43,142 31% 2010 40,698 28% 2011 54,395 36% 2012 48,838 34% 2013 42,838 29% 2014 45,072 30% 2015 45,461 29% 2016 51,858 31% Long Term Average 47,413 32% Source: Massport, jet activity. 2016 35
or there maybe one time shifts in runway use that remain due to unique events: 1. Construction of Runway 14/32 balance of use between R33L departures and R27 departures 2. FAA temporary suspension late night opposite direction operations- R15R departures/33l arrivals and other runways 3. NTSB based FAA change to converging runway operations (CRO)- R22L arrivals versus R27 arrivals 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Example R22L and R27 Arrivals 22L Arr 27 Arr 2010 2015 36
Other examples of runway use overtime: R4R/4L arrivals and R22L & R27 arrivals. 50% 45% Runway 4R & 4L Arrivals % of all arrivals 4R 4L 50% 45% Runway 22L & 27 Arrivals % of all Departures 27 22L 40% 40% 35% 35% 30% 30% 25% 25% 20% 20% 15% 15% 10% 10% 5% 5% 0% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 R33L Closure R33L Closure Source: Massport, Jets Only. 37
R33L & R27 departures and R22R & R22L departures 50% 45% Runway 33L & 27 Departures % of all Departures 27 33L 50% 45% Runway 22R & 22L Departures % of all departures 22R 22L 40% 40% 35% 35% 30% 30% 25% 25% 20% 20% 15% 15% 10% 10% 5% 5% 0% 0% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 R33L Closure R33L Closure Source: Massport, Jets Only. 38
Massport is experiencing a spike in noise complaints Towns By Complaints and Complainants-2016 Town Complainants Complaints Milton 466 21,796 Hull 220 1,266 Medford 177 1,784 Somerville 153 1,804 Cambridge 128 2,154 Roslindale 103 588 Winthrop 96 271 Arlington 87 1,968 Jamaica Plain 76 434 Belmont 63 501 Other 691 5,480 Total 2,260 38,046 39
Number of complaints do not necessarily correlate to number of flights over a community Number of Flights Community Total 2015 1 East Boston 124,858 2 Winthrop 109,607 3 S. Boston 99,057 4 Hull 90,241 5 Milton 67,747 6 Lynn 59,237 7 Dorchester 52,733 8 Quincy 50,588 9 Randolph 46,099 10 Revere 46,092 11 Winchester 44,416 12 Cohasset 43,310 13 Medford 35,188 14 Chelsea 26,642 15 Belmont 18,369 Note: The data is a representative sample of communities geographically around Boston Logan. This table IS NOT intended as a complete ranking. Source: Massport December-2015-RW-shared.pdf HMMH 2016 Analysis. The Overflight numbers are based on the Jet Runway Use data published by the Noise Office. 40
or altitude Altitude Range Community Aircraft Altitude Ranges (ft) 1 East Boston 250' - 1,000' 2 Winthrop 350' - 1,000' 3 S. Boston 400-1,500 4 Chelsea 450-2,000 5 Revere 500-7,500 6 Dorchester 700' - 4,000' 7 Quincy 800' - 3,000' 8 Hull 1,500-8,000 8 Medford 1,500' - 9,000' 8 Lynn 1,500-12,000 8 Milton 1,500-12,000 9 Winchester 2,000' - 12,000' 11 Cohasset 2,500' - 12,000' 12 Randolph 2,500' - 12,000' 13 Belmont 3,500-11,000' Note: The data is a representative sample of communities geographically around Boston Logan. This table IS NOT intended as a complete ranking. Source: October 2015 Radar Data HMMH 2016 Analysis. October 2015 radar data was evaluated over each community to get the ranges. 41
or noise levels Noise Range Community DNL Range 1 Winthrop 59-71 2 Revere 60-68 3 East Boston 48-67 4 Chelsea 52-64 5 Hull 48-60 6 S. Boston 56-59 7 Dorchester 46-58 8 Quincy 41-58 9 Lynn 40-58 10 Milton 43-57 11 Medford 43-56 12 Randolph 40-48 13 Winchester 40-48 14 Cohasset 40-48 15 Belmont 40-46 Note: The data is a representative sample of communities geographically around Boston Logan. This table IS NOT intended as a complete ranking. Source: 2015 EDR DNL Noise Data HMMH 2016 Analysis. 2015 EDR DNL data was used for the noise values. 42
Research shows that the number of noise complaints often originate from a small number of callers George Mason University, Mercatus Center 43
Although raw complaints do provide a snapshot data can be skewed. For example, in 2016, ten Milton callers accounted for 63% of the Milton calls. Two individuals accounted for 33% of the Milton calls Total Calls from Milton 2016 All Other Callers, 8,152, 37% Top 2 Callers, 7,161-33% By Individual Callers Top 3-10 Callers, 6,483-30% 44
Samples of Pre and Post RNAV Flight Tracks 45
Runway 33L Departures Density Plots 2010 vs. 2015 Pre-RNAV Post-RNAV INSERT DENSITY PLOT SLIDES 46
R22R Departures, Density Plots 2010 vs. 2015 Pre-RNAV Post-RNAV 47
Runway 4R Arrivals, Density Plots 2010 vs. 2015 Pre-RNAV Post-RNAV 48
Comparing pre and post RNAV arrivals and departures (Examples 33L & R4R) March 2010 October 2013 May 2016 R4R Arr December 2010 November 2013 December 2016 R33L Dep