CLT Continued Aircraft Operations Evaluations Airport Community - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

CLT Continued Aircraft Operations Evaluations

Airport Community Roundtable Presentation

August 15, 2018

ACR Requests of the CLT Technical Consultant

• Continued review of open ACR motions
• Increase Base Leg Altitudes on Arrival into CLT (ACR Motion 01-18/02-18)
• Optimized Profile Descents into CLT (ACR Motion 01-17)
• Delay Runway 18L Turnout on Departure (ACR Motion 00-18)

2

Increase Base Leg Altitudes on Arrival into CLT (ACR Motion 01-18/02-18)

3

36R CLT Altitude Profiles – East Downwind

4

2014 2017

36R CLT Altitude Profiles – East Downwind

5

2014 2017 Downwind Portion Downwind Portion

CLT North Flow East Downwind – 2014 Altitude Profiles

6

Airport Elevation: 748

South North

2nm 5nm 8nm 11nm 14nm 17nm 21nm 24nm 27nm

CLT North Flow East Downwind – 2017 Altitude Profiles

7

Airport Elevation: 748

South North

2nm 5nm 8nm 11nm 14nm 17nm 21nm 24nm 27nm

CLT North Flow East Downwind – 2014 and 2017 Altitude Profile Comparison

8

Airport Elevation: 748

South North

Findings – North Flow East Downwind Altitude Analysis

• Downwind altitudes were higher in 2014 (pre-metroplex) than 2017 (post-

metroplex) consistent with prior analysis

• Altitudes at the start of the downwind leg (northeast of the airport) could be

increased without departure traffic conflicts

• No departure traffic conflicts at the middle and end of the downwind leg(abeam

and southeast of the airport), however:

• Increasing altitudes at these locations could result in aircraft flying further southeast
• f the airport to meet glideslope capture as well as aircraft operator and performance

requirements

• Could present sequencing issues during peak traffic periods

9

Optimized Profile Descents into CLT (ACR Motion 01-17)

10

CDA Analysis Methodology – Proposed Procedure Development

• Selected 2017 north flow east downwind operations for evaluation of a

Continuous Descent Approach (CDA)

• Runway 36R
• Potential area for development of a Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approach

procedure

• Generated model flight track of average lateral and vertical profiles for selected
• perations to represent exiting conditions
• Derived from 9,268 flight tracks
• Average vertical profile included aircraft level segment at 6,000 ft. above Mean Sea

Level (MSL) on downwind

• Developed proposed RNP approach with continuous 3-degree descent profile from

start of downwind leg to the runway

11

Runway 36R Continuous Descent Approach (CDA) – Model Flight Track Development

12

6,000’ MSL Level Segment

CDA Analysis Methodology – Noise Modeling

• Modeled and compared noise results for two most common arrival aircraft types

at CLT

• Airbus A321
• Canadair Regional Jet 900 (CRJ9)
• Existing condition model track and proposed RNP approach
• Generated and compared Sound Exposure Level (SEL) Contours for modeled
• perations
• Calculated and compared Maximum Sound Exposure Level (Lmax) at selected

community location near Runway 36R east downwind (SouthPark Mall)

13

A321– 2017 Existing Condition (left) and Proposed RNP CDA (right) SEL Contours

14

CRJ9– 2017 Existing Condition (left) and Proposed RNP CDA (right) SEL Contours

15

Findings – CDA Analysis

• Proposed RNP CDA SEL Contours for both aircraft types are smaller than those for existing

conditions

• Result of reduced aircraft thrust and higher altitudes on downwind leg
• SEL Contours converge as aircraft approach airport due to glideslope and descent

requirements

• Proposed RNP CDA Lmax values at SouthPark Mall for both aircraft types are 3-4 dB less

than existing conditions

• A321
• Existing conditions: 57.0 dB
• Proposed RNP CDA: 52.9 dB
• CRJ9
• Existing conditions: 54.4 dB
• Proposed RNP CDA: 51.4 dB
• Implementation of the RNP CDA as proposed could negatively impact arrival sequencing

during peak traffic periods due to limited altitude flexibility for air traffic controllers

16

Delay Runway 18L Turnout on Departure (ACR Motion 00-18)

17

18L and 18C Departure Turn Gate Analysis

18

• To analyze altitude conflicts, we

developed two analysis gates

• Southeast of CLT in the area where

18L departures turn East

• Southwest of CLT in the area where

18C departures turn West

2014

Departure Gate Analysis (SE) – 2014

19

Southwest Northeast

Departure Gate Analysis (SE) – 2017

20

Southwest Northeast

Departure Gate Analysis (SE) – 2014 Compared to 2017

21

2014 2017 Southwest Northeast Southwest Northeast

Departure Gate Analysis (SW) – 2014

22

Northwest Southeast

Departure Gate Analysis (SW) – 2017

23

Northwest Southeast

Departure Gate Analysis (SW) – 2014 Compared to 2017

24

2014 2017 Northwest Southeast Northwest Southeast

Findings – 18L and 18C Departure Turn Analysis

• Delaying left (southeast) Runway 18L and right (southwest) Runway 18C departure

turns would result in potential traffic conflicts with south flow downwind arrivals

• Turning aircraft later would not result in higher aircraft altitudes due to need to

keep departures vertically separated below arrivals

• Could result in potential extended level flight segments
• Potential to increase aircraft noise
• Delaying Runway 18L and 18C departure turns could potentially be accomplished

by increasing south flow east and west downwind altitudes

25

Discussion

CLT Technical Consultant to the ACR

26