1 / 47

Noise or Annoyance?

Noise or Annoyance?. Is actual jet noise a problem? Or is the problem only present in complaints?. Approaches as portrayed by critics…. Approaches as portrayed by critics…. A300-600 freighter, photographed off end of Runway 22L, camera lens zoomed to 300 mm. Actual Approach over EDH.

maren
Télécharger la présentation

Noise or Annoyance?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Noise or Annoyance? Is actual jet noise a problem? Or is the problem only present in complaints?

  2. Approaches as portrayed by critics…

  3. Approaches as portrayed by critics… A300-600 freighter, photographed off end of Runway 22L, camera lens zoomed to 300 mm Actual Approach over EDH A300-600 freighter, photographed from Ridgeview at point of minimum altitude above ground level in EDH Camera lens at 55 mm, matchingperspective of human vision

  4. Sanity Checks: How does our situation compare with somewhat similar ones elsewhere? • Objective factors • Subjective factors

  5. Locations of publicly vocal complainers

  6. Homeowners reportingno jet noise problem From personal contact while measuring actual noise levels 2 of 2 4 of 4 homeowners contacted at point of Maximum noise in El Dorado Hills

  7. Interwoven Issues • What sound levels do freighter approaches actually produce on the ground? • How much traffic (approaches per day over EDH/Folsom) is there? When? • How will these measures change in the future? • How do complaints about noise relate to actual noise? • What misconceptions are evident in complaints? • How do public agencies affect public perception?

  8. Mather ILS vertical profile

  9. CAMRR 6,500 LDORR 5,000 YOSHE 3,000 Nominal ILS Approach

  10. Nominal ILS Approach EDH East Ridge 4,600 EDH West Ridge 3,900

  11. ILS intercept @ LDORR Plus a burst of afternoon traffic

  12. VFR approach South of US 50

  13. Loudest 2008 freighter approach recorded in WebTrak: Probably about 85 dBA

  14. Approach from south By UPS954 plus other Traffic (week before Christmas)

  15. Approach Usage Data for the week of December 15 through December 22, 2008 -- The week before Christmas, busiest freight week of the year

  16. Approach Noise Exposure Potential Data for the week of December 15 through December 22, 2008 -- The week before Christmas, busiest freight week of the year

  17. OverflightNoise Measurement Measurements on SierraFoot.org use Lmax, the maximum noise level SEL/SENEL – Oakland, Foster City Lmax, Oakland, Foster City SEL/SENEL, EDH West Ridge Lmax, EDH West Ridge

  18. Actual Crossing Altitudes on ILSat Initial Approach FixRescue area, north of Shingle Springs

  19. Actual Crossing Altitudes on ILSat El Dorado Hills west ridge

  20. For comparison: SFO approach at Foster City

  21. For comparison: SFO approach at Foster City

  22. Measured Noise

  23. Measured Noise

  24. Approaches per dayand Noise-Number Indexfor Annoyance

  25. NNI Annoyance & Complaint Rate NNI is the first widely accepted index of annoyance due to exposure to jet noise, adopted by the British more than 40 years ago. Published literature, including documents cited by www.keepthepeace.org, indicate that NNI less than 35 corresponds to insufficient annoyance to produce complaints. Values somewhat above, such as Foster City‘s 46.2, are expected to produce sporadic complaints. This table reports a composite complaint rate for Mather-correlated complaints from Folsom, El Dorado Hills, Rescue, and Shingle Springs. All complaint counts are from the first 7 months of 2008.

  26. Can a single serial complainer dominate complaint statistics? Yes -- Here’s an example from LAX, July 2008:

  27. Serial Complainers & MHR Noise complaint statistics correlated with Mather flights also show highly disparate rates depending on the location of complainers. Average monthly complaints : 45 per Folsom caller, 12 per EDH caller

  28. Serial Complainers & SMF Location-specific complaints also apply to noise attributed to flights to and from Sacramento International Airport. Average monthly complaints: 33 per Folsom caller, 8 per EDH caller

  29. MHR serial complaints by community Complaint percentage distribution for SMF is similar, ± 6% per community

  30. SMF serial complaints by community Complaint percentage distribution for MHR is similar, ± 6% per community

  31. Populace in general Most people in the EDH/Folsom area think we have problems with jets flying too low and too loud. The main exceptions are those who live directly under the ILS approach, who generally indicate no problem exists. The public understanding derives mainly from public dialog and media news coverage. Public agency treatment of the issue as a noise problem has carried strong influence – especially in connection with the City of Folsom‘s 2007 law suit.

  32. Public discourse and public policydetermine public perception.If public agencies treat something as a problem the public perceives it as a problem.

  33. Random sample:Noise under the ILS, west ridge, EDH – loudest point for Mather approaches Afternoon of August 25, 2009

  34. Remaining slides are excerpts from a typical sessionof observing a freighter approach and measuring itsnoise level from Ridgeview, directly under the approach. First, a web tool (FlyteComm in this case) is used to identify air carrier cargo flightsscheduled and en route to Mather. The screen image shown is for a flight UPS 2958,which did not overfly EDH on this day. A different web tool, WebTrak, was used later to check the UPS 2958 actual flight trackin the Sacramento region. After driving to 3270 Ridgeview Dr, directly below the ILS approach to Runway 22L,while waiting a T-38 and a pickup truck were photographed and their noise measured. UPS 2960, a 757-200, was photographed as it flew over on the ILS approach. The sound level meter reading was photographed after it had latched the maximumsound (pressure) level of 61.7 dBA, roughly half as loud as the T-38 and the pickup truck.

  35. UPS 2958 from Louisville: 0 dBA Inaudible from west ridge: Flew VFR approach south of US 50,shortcutting ILS as direct routing from enroute clearance.

  36. UPS 2958 from Louisville: 0 dBA

  37. USAF T-38 at 3,000 ft: 72.8 dBA

  38. Ford F250: 75.3 dBA

  39. UPS 2960 (757-200F): 61.7 dBA

  40. The End… … with the lens zoomedto 300 mm telephoto

More Related