As mentioned above, one way to improve approach procedures is to eliminate or at least reduce level flight segments at low altitudes. To quantify how much noise reduction can be achieved, it is necessary to numerically evaluate the community noise impact of these level flight segments as compared with idle-descents. Level flight segments are considered in this subsection. Idle descents are considered in the next subsection. Constant speed level flight requires aircraft engines to maintain certain level of thrust, thus it is of special interest in representing the upper bound of noise levels for approach given all other conditions such as aircraft weight, altitude, and speed equal.
The noise levels of modern commercial transport aircraft are dominated by engine noise. The higher the engine thrust, the higher the engine noise. In constant speed level flight, lift L is equal to aircraft weight mg, and the thrust required Tr is equal to drag D. The lift coefficient Cl can thus be determined as,
S V
mg S
V C L
r r
l 2 2
2 2
U
U
(2-4)whereU is the ambient air density, Vr is the True Airspeed (TAS), and S is the reference wing area.
It is seen that given altitude (which determines ambient air density) and aircraft weight, the lift coefficient is inversely proportional to the square of TAS. The smaller the TAS, the higher the lift coefficient would be needed to maintain constant speed level flight. The aircraft lift to drag ratio L/D is given by,
d l
C D C
L/ (2-5)
where Cd is the drag coefficient. The L/D ratio is a function of the lift coefficient and the flap configuration (defined by flap/slat and landing gear positions). The flap configuration determines the drag polar – the relationship between drag coefficient and lift coefficient. A typical drag polar is shown in Fig. 2-3.
For a given configuration, the L/D ratio increases as the lift coefficient increases from zero, until the maximum L/D ratio is reached. From that point on, the L/D ratio decreases as the lift coefficient increases, until the stall occurs. Commercial transport aircraft are optimized for cruise operational conditions. As the aircraft decelerates to lower speeds to prepare for approach, the lift coefficient will eventually increase to values above the point corresponding to the maximum L/D ratio, and the L/D
ratio will start to decrease. In addition, as the aircraft decelerates further, flaps/slats need to be extended to lower positions to provide high lift coefficient needed to maintain level flight. This results in the drag polar shifting to the right hand side, thus yielding an even lower L/D ratio.
Slope L/D ratio
Cd
Cl Max L/D ratio
Figure 2-3 Drag polar.
The thrust required for maintain constant speed level flight is given by,
D L D mg Tr
/ (2-6)
It is seen that the thrust required is inversely proportional to the L/D ratio. Based on the above discussion, it can be expected that the noise impact from an aircraft performing constant speed level flight would increase with the decrease of the airspeed during approach.
The fast-time aircraft simulator described in Appendix A was used to simulate constant speed level flight segments at altitudes at 500 ft intervals from sea level to 10,000 ft, and over a range of Calibrated Airspeeds (CAS) from 140 kts to 240 kts. The actual altitude simulated for the sea level case was at 50 ft.
The altitude range was selected so as to cover the possible range of altitudes at which level flight may be performed during the approach within the terminal area. The speed range was selected to cover the possible speeds during the approach within the terminal area before the aircraft is established on the final approach. Note that Indicated Airspeed (IAS) 250 kt is the regulatory upper speed limit for turbine aircraft operating below 10,000 ft. Most onboard Flight Management Systems (FMSs) use CAS 240 kt as the default speed restriction below 10,000 ft. Modern FMS equipped aircraft have air data computers, and the IAS is corrected to be identical to the CAS. Thus, CAS is used in this analysis.
Two aircraft types were simulated, UPS B757-200 with RB211-535E4 engines and UPS B767-300 with CF6-80C2B6 engines. Aircraft weights for the B757-200 aircraft and the B767-300 aircraft were set to values that are above average UPS package aircraft landing weights but close to average landing weights for passenger aircraft of the same types. They are therefore believed to be representative of the nominal landing weights for the majority of aircraft of these two types. Aircraft flaps/slats were extended at speeds recommended by aircraft operation manuals7by the pilot agent built into the fast-time aircraft simulator.
The FAA Integrated Noise Model (INM) Version 6.22,8 was used to compute aircraft noise impact.
The FAA INM is widely accepted as a standard tool for evaluating community impact of aircraft noise.
INM is capable of computing many of the three families of noise metrics, including LAMAX as selected for this analysis. The ground level where noise metric was to be computed was assumed to be at sea level to simplify both the aircraft simulation and noise computation. Because B767-300 with CF6-80C2B6
engines is not available in INM, only the B767-300 with PW4060 engines, the B767-400ER with CF6-80C2F engines was used as a substitute. The principal differences between the -300 and -400ER models are in the shape of the wing tips and the fuselage length. Because community impact of aircraft noise is dominated by noise from the engines, this substitution should be close enough for comparing noise between level flight and idle descent for the same aircraft type.
Outputs from the fast-time aircraft simulator, presented as time history of aircraft state variables, engine thrust and fuel flow in text format, were converted into aircraft profiles in the format required by INM. INM studies2 were created for the corresponding cases (different altitudes and speeds) simulated using the aircraft simulator. LAMAX at grid points along the simulated straight-line flight path was computed using INM. Results from INM were extracted to form tables of LAMAX at the CAS values and altitude values used in the simulation. The results are presented in Fig. 2-4 and Fig. 2-7 as equal LAMAX contours for B757-200 and B767-300 respectively. Contours were drawn at 5 dBA intervals. A color map was used in these two figures to present gradual changes in LAMAX between contour lines.
The dark blue color represents LAMAX of 30 dBA and blow, and the dark brown color represents LAMAX of 110 dBA and above. The gradual color shade change from dark blue to dark brown represents the gradual LAMAX increase from 30 dBA to 110 dBA.
By examining the vertical profiles of vectored arrival flights similar to that shown in Fig. 2-2 and crosschecking with Fig. 2-4 and Fig. 2-7, the noise impact of the constant speed level flight segments in vectored trajectories can also be estimated. For example, due to the level segments at 3,000 ft, it can be estimated that residential communities up to 20 nm (along-track distance) away from the runway could experience noise levels of up to 62 dBA (from B757-200) and 66 dBA (from B767-300). Those communities are mostly in suburban areas where quietness is expected. Note that these INM estimates were based on the assumption that the ground elevation is at mean sea level. If the ground elevation is actually higher, which mostly will be the case, the noise level will be somewhat higher.
It is seen from Fig. 2-4 and Fig. 2-7 that the LAMAX on ground decreases nonlinearly with the increase in altitude. Thus, these results provide information about noise reductions that can be achieved by increasing the altitude of constant level flight segments. At any given speed, the altitude difference between any two adjacent equal LAMAX contours gives the altitude increase that would be needed to reduce noise level by the amount equal to the interval between contour levels (i.e. 5 dBA as in Fig. 2-4 and Fig. 2-7). For the B757-200 aircraft, the altitude of the level segment should be increased from about 1,000 ft to about 1,600 ft (approximately a 600 ft increase) in order to reduce the noise level on ground from 75dBA to 70 dBA. The altitude should be increased from about 1,600 ft to about 2,400 ft (approximately a 800 ft increase) in order to reduce the noise level on ground from 70 dBA to 65 dBA.
For the heavier B767-300 aircraft, the altitude should be increased from about 1,400 ft to about 2,200 ft (approximately a 800 ft increase) in order to reduce the noise level on ground from 75dBA to 70 dBA.
The altitude should be increased from about 2,200 ft to about 3,200 ft (approximately a 10,00 ft increase) in order to reduce the noise level on ground from 70 dBA to 65 dBA.
Notice that for both aircraft (Fig. 2-4 and Fig. 2-7), the LAMAX on ground increases with the decrease in CAS. This is evidenced by the monotonic increase in altitude for equal LAMAX lines as CAS decreases. The reason for this is that as airspeed decreases, aircraft drag increases and engine thrust must compensate, as explained earlier in this section. This observation suggests that if constant speed level flight segment is not avoidable, they should be conducted at higher speeds.
A third observation is that if the constant speed level flight is conducted above a certain altitude, the noise level on ground could fall below levels that can be viewed as acceptable. For example, if the constant speed level flight were conducted above 5,000 ft, LAMAX would fall below 60 dBA for both B757-200 and B767-300 most of the time. The LAMAX 60-dBA threshold is recommended as a night
time limit by World Health Organization9 (WHO) to prevent sleep disruption. If the constant speed level flight were conducted above 7,000 ft, LAMAX would fall below 55 dBA for both B757-200 and B767-300 most of the time. Reducing noise level from 60 dBA to 55 dBA would significantly reduce the annoyance because noise levels below 55 dBA are generally tolerable to the human ear. This suggests that vectoring above 7,000 ft may be acceptable from a community noise point of view.