dc ward 3 concerns...palisades evaluation before and after rnav (rnp) rwy 19 change effective...

DC Ward 3 concerns

Andrea Ramirez

3 Goals.

• #1 - Allow the FAA to discuss south flow landings that only impact Ward 3 outside the roundtable.

• #2 - Agree in roundtable to correct LAZIR departure to target the West bank of the Potomac River.

• #3 - Move quickly to discuss overall growth, operating hours, and fleet mix of concern to all members.

#1 Landings.

• Palisades has always had a disproportionate share of airplane noise due to landings, with promise of NextGen approaches over the river.

• In 2013, FAA showed marked decrease in these overland approaches by a new RNP approach targeting the east bank of the Potomac.

• But in 2014, the overland approaches became very heavily used again, as many carriers are not equipped for RNP vs carriers say ATC is barrier.

• Other options exist but our attempts to gain more information have been denied by the FAA who now insist they must engage the whole roundtable.

• See FAA presentation.

Palisades

Evaluation

Before and after RNAV

(RNP) RWY 19 change

effective 3/07/2013

Presented by: Terminal ServicesBy:Date: 5/13/2013

Federal AviationAdministration

Palisades Volume

The Palisades Volumedepicted in yellow wasdrawn to capture all flightsthat transition thecommunity north and eastof the Potomac Riverlanding runway 19

• The evaluation includesbefore and afterdemand for the 5 topdays in February andApril of 2013

Federal AviationAdministration

Overview

• Data used: PCT DCA Runway 19 Arrivals

• Top 5 dates by traffic count:

February April

2/4/2013 271 4/8/2013 413

2/7/2013 277 4/10/2013 394

2/10/2013 288 4/15/2013 417

2/19/2013 277 4/16/2013 405

2/22/2013 360 4/24/2013 396

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 ArrivalsTop five days Feb, 20131473 aircraft

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days Feb, 2013834 aircraft (56.6% of total)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 ArrivalsTop five days April, 20132025 aircraft

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days April, 2013948 aircraft (46.8% of total)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades Volume Zoomed InTop five days Feb, 2013834 aircraft (56.6% of total)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days Feb, 2013452 flights in white out of 834 aircraft (54% of Palisades volume)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days Feb, 2013452 Flights through the Middle of the Palisades volume

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades Volume Zoomed InTop five days April, 2013948 aircraft (46.8% of total)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days April, 201357 flights in white out of 948 aircraft (6% of Palisades Volume)

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrivals through Palisades VolumeTop five days April, 201357 Flights through the Middle of the Palisades Volume

Federal AviationAdministration

DCA Runway 19 Arrival Comparison for Evaluation Period through the Middleof Palisades Volume Represents a 48% reduction in Overflights

Top five days Feb, 2013 Top five days April, 2013452 flights (54% of Palisades volume) 57 flights (6% of Palisades volume)

Federal AviationAdministration

Summary

• RNAV (RNP) RWY 19 Arrival changed effective

3/07/2013

• Runway 19 arrivals evaluated for top 5 days

before and after approach change

• 10% reduction in percentage of flights

transitioning the Palisades Volume that landed

runway 19

• 48% reduction in flights transitioning the middle

of the Palisades Volume north and east of the

Potomac River

Federal AviationAdministration

Appendix A

• RNAV (RNP) RWY 19 Approachchanges effective March 7th, 2013

Federal AviationAdministration

River visual and RNAV approach as discussed in 2004

>>>>> From: Nuno Martins [mailto:nmartins85@gmail.com]>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 8:13 AM>>>>> To: Jeck, Mike;

>>>>> Subject: Request for information>>>>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Jeck,>>>>>>>>>> The hell continued all night until now, and is still going.>>>>> I would like to kindly ask you to provide the numbers of LDA>>>>> and RNP landings during the period between 7 pm and midnight for>>>>> yesterday August 10th. Please also provide these numbers>>>>> for today between 5 am and 7 am.>>>>> After finally being able to sleep we woke up at midnight>>>>> with an airplane BLASTING its engines over our home. It>>>>> was horrible.>>>>> I am looking forward to hearing back from you,>>>>> Nuno>>>>>

>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------->>>>> From: Jeck, Mike <Mike.Jeck@mwaa.com>>>>>> Date: Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:20 AM>>>>> Subject: RE: Request for information>>>>> To: Nuno Martins <nmartins85@gmail.com>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Martins,>>>>> According to my data, there were:>>>>>>>>>> 1. Approximately 84 arrivals that used the LDA, and 30 arrivals that used the RNP on August 10, 2015 between 7pm and midnight.>>>>>>>>>> 2. Approximately 12 arrivals that sued the LDA and 1 arrival that used the RNP on August 11, 2015 between 5am and 7am.>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,>>>>>>>>>> Mike

>>>>> Mike Jeck>>>>> Airport Noise Office>>>>> Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority>>>>> 1 Aviation Circle, MA-15.2>>>>> Washington, DC 20001-6000>>>>> T 703 417.1204

>>>>> From: Andrea Havens Ramirez [mailto:andrea.havens@gmail.com]>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 5:09 PM>>>>> To: Brown, Laura J (FAA); katharina@gmail.com; Holsclaw, Curtis (FAA); Nuno Martins>>>>> Cc: Lauren.Dudley@mail.house.gov; 9-AWA-NoiseOmbudsman (FAA); Burleson, Carl (FAA); Ray, Elizabeth (FAA); McCarthy, Jodi (FAA)>>>>> Subject: Re: COMPLAINT AGAINST LANDING OVER OUR HOMES>>>>>>>>>> And more time passes with silence from the FAA- please see the exchange below between one of the residents I represent and MWAA- in one evening, 76% of flights flew over densely populated areas, and less than 25% used the Next Gen RNAV approach over the river. Many of these aircraft are equipped and trained to do so. Why is this happening?

>>>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:27 PM, <Elizabeth.Ray@faa.gov> wrote:>>>>> Andrea ->>>>> We continue to work with MWAA on the noise concerns around the Georgetown Reservoir. As we committed to do at the meeting in early July, we have a group of folks looking at design possibilities for departures to try and keep a/c over the river and even higher percentage than they are now. When the new roundtable is up and running, we should be in a good position to support that MWAA discussion. We also committed to study arrivals related to LDA vs RNP use as I recall and I have asked for an in-depth look at July 17 and July 29 along with some historical data. That is underway and I'm hopeful I will have something in the next two weeks to provide to MWAA. Percentages are really not all that helpful if you don't know the breakdown of equipped a/c and that mix can vary by the hour. We are also working with ATC to increase awareness and better understand why certain choices are made when approaches are offered. We've seen an indicator or two in spot checking complaints and data, that there are times - even when the weather requires an instrument approach - when a less intrusive over water approach could be used. It's unclear why that choice is not being made and we are working to find out. There are many, many times however when those same spot checks of complaints show the choice was justified by the forecast or reported weather or other factors. More to understand there as well both on the controller and pilot side. There are many things that are not black and white-but simply a reflection of the variability in operations as both controllers and pilots make the choices they believe are the safest for flight. When I have the data I've asked for, I will provide it to MWAA.>>>>> Lynn Ray

>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:17 PM, <Elizabeth.Ray@faa.gov> wrote:>>> Andrea ->>> As we've noted before, the information and analysis we are doing on procedural options will be used to support MWAA's Roundtable. DCA arrival and departure options will be worked in that venue; working with individual communities and interests is not an effective way to address the systemic nature of airspace operations and possible procedural changes. We will provide information related to historical usage and the specific days studied to MWAA when complete. >>>>>> Lynn

Request #1.

• Ward 3 requests the FAA engage with us directly as this flight routing has no impact on other roundtable members and we’ve been waiting over 6 months. Other roundtable members are welcome to join in discourse, but further obstruction of information to our communities is ridiculous.

# 2 Northern Departures

• Inquiring with the noise office- the planes are much farther east than usual… what’s up?

133 slides!

2015

100%

Question: where is Foxhall Village?

Finally we had a meeting in May, 2015 organized by the Congresswoman with MWAA and the FAA…

H

i

s

t

o

r

i

c

d

i

s

t

r

i

c

t

Original departureFlight path

Bears burden of LDA arrivals

Commercial area high background noise highways and metro and

buses

Very quiet area, high density residential small single family homes and townhomes built > 100 years ago, low background noise except arriving planes prior to LAZIR

Aim of NextGenArrival Path

Proposed aim of NextGen Departure Path

Current LAZIR

Request #2 : Fix LAZIR immediately

• Stop using the LAZIR and go back to the 328 until you can fix it.

• Turn sooner before ADAXE

• Fly slower

• Fly higher

• Departures prioritized to the South until LAZIR can be modified.

Direction of operations

Night of first roundtable… IAD in south flow, DCA in north flow… 11 kt

Plane takes off North at Reagan while plane landing to the south at IAD- explain why North Flow is more efficient for this plane bound for Houston. What would the fuel and emissions savings be if it departed South?

Plane landing at DCA from the north at 12:20 am…

Immediately after same type of plane takes the long way around BWI and lands from the south.FAA- who is making this decision?

#3 Growth, fleet mix, curfew

• Despite MWAA statements of intent to shift traffic to IAD, they have failed and DCA traffic now eclipses IAD by millions.

• MWAA: what are your 5 and 10 year projections for DCA vs IAD?

• Has MWAA considered a curfew on operations to curb growth at DCA?

#3, cont Growth, fleet mix, curfew

• Despite existence of Nighttime Noise Rule at DCA, the FAA has certified nearly all operating planes as ‘quiet’, therefore they fly at all hours.

• Planes should generate no more than 72 dBaat 3.5 NM from start of runway- luckily exactly where the Alexandria noise monitor is!

This plane is certified by the FAA to generate no more than 72 dBa 3.5 miles from start of take off, exactly where this noise monitor is… Comments from FAA and AA?How much louder is 78 dBa than 72 dBa?

#3 Request: CURFEW

• Roundtable should be a formal Part 150 study for Part 161 application

• FAA should immediately stop all flights violating the nighttime noise rule by noise monitors until an investigation can be done into invalid certifications

• 12-6 complete curfew on operations

• 10p-7a restriction to commuter jets < 80 passengers, regardless of certification.

Criteria to impose curfew

• it is reasonable, non-arbitrary, and non-discriminatory, it must apply to all airlines.

• It does not create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce as the much larger Dulles International airport and BWI better serve that purpose.

• It is not inconsistent with maintaining the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace, in fact I ask the FAA to explain how less flights at Reagan would be much safer in such a crowded area.

• This restriction does not conflict with laws or regulations of the United States, in fact likely brings operations into compliance with federal laws protecting our national parks.

• could be open for public comment.• does not burden the national aviation system, in fact relieves what

is often cited as the most crowded, unsafe sky in the country. • It should also help achieve MWAAs stated goal to shift traffic to

Dulles.

American AirlinesDear US Airways and American Airlines- hi, my name is Andrea Ramirez, I live in Washington, DC, near DCA airport, and serve as a representative for our neighborhood board. Recently our neighborhood has noticed a troubling increase of flights over our homes. Specifically, in south flow landing patterns, VMC, planes are leaving the noise abatement River Visual approach mid Potomac, and opting for an ILS/ LDA electronic signal which traverses our neighborhood. For example, on Sunday 11/16/2014, around 2:15pm, flights AWE1734, AWE1992, and AWE1958 chose to leave the River Visual and 'cut the corner' across our homes, schools, and parks. Other airlines flights were keeping the River path or requesting the RNAV/ RNP 19 NextGeneration procedure which also respects the river as planes descend. This again happened at 3:30 and 3:35 with flights AWE595 and AAL2407. Around the same time AWE 1816 'wobbled' towards land then corrected back to the River. We have not observed other airlines with these practices as frequently, recognizing you have more flight volume and the observation may be spurious without complete data, but wondering if this a US Airways/ American Airlines specific standard operating procedure, or if somehow your flights are being directed this way by Potomac Tracon. Please help us understand why these land overflights are occurring. Also, please let us know what percentage of your fleet landing at DCA is equipped for RNAV/ RNP advanced procedures and what percent of your pilots are trained for these NextGeneration, preferred routes. We request your standard operating procedure in VMC south flow be the River Visual, staying the river around our neighborhood as other airlines do despite the option given to pick up an electronic signal, or if pilots are uncomfortable with this route, requesting the RNAV/ RNP 19 if properly trained and equipped. We request your standard operating procedure in IMC be the RNAV/ RNP 19, and avoiding ILS/ LDA overland electronic approaches that put flights as low as 1000 feet over our homes, parks, and schools. The increase in noise and deviation from preferred river routes have been noted by many people on our bustling neighborhood listserve. As our airline noise representative, I hope I can report to our many frequent flyers good noise citizenship from US Airways and American Airlines. Sincerely, Andrea Ramirez, resident of the Palisades Neighborhood and representative of the Foxhall Community Citizens Association

Honey Badger AA319!