Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport

NOISE AND FLIGHT PATH MONITORING SYSTEM YEARLY REPORT

January - December 2008

BAe Hawk 127 Lead-In Fighter

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18C

Pilatus PC-9

DEFENCE PROJECT NUMBER: CNN93 AIRSERVICES AUSTRALIA REPORT No: DOD YWLM08 September 2009

Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Report No: DoD YWLM8 Unclassified Yearly Report January – December 2008

DISCLAIMER

This report contains a summary of data collected over the specified period and is intended to convey the best information available from the NFPMS at the time. The system databases are to some extent dependent upon external sources and errors may occur. All care is taken in preparation of the report but its complete accuracy can not be guaranteed. Airservices Australia does not accept any legal liability for any losses arising from reliance upon data in this report which may be found to be inaccurate.

Prepared by Airservices Australia

Defence Project Number: CNN937 Airservices Australia Report Number: DOD YWLM08

Contact Details

Senior Environmental Manager Defence Support Central & Northern NSW Region RAAF Base Williamtown

Phone 02 4964 7339

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 5 1 Introduction...... 7 2 The NFPMS System...... 7 2.1 System Overview...... 7 2.2 Noise Monitors and Locations...... 8 3 System Performance...... 11

Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page 2 Report No: DoD YWLM8 Yearly Report January – December 2008

3.1 System Outages...... 11 3.2 Improvements to the NFPMS...... 12 4 Aircraft Operations...... 13 4.1 Aircraft Flight Paths...... 13 4.2 Aircraft Movements...... 13 5 Aircraft Noise Levels...... 14 5.1 Aircraft noise data...... 14 5.2 EMU Performance Summary...... 15 5.3 Daily N70, N80 and N90 values...... 15 5.4 L90 and Maximum Aircraft Noise by Hour...... 16 5.5 Aircraft Noise Level Summary...... 17 6.0 Conclusion...... 17 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...... 19 APPENDIX A: AIRCRAFT FLIGHT TRACKS...... 23 APPENDIX B: AIRCRAFT MOVEMENT NUMBERS...... 28 APPENDIX C: NOISE DATA SUMMARY FOR EACH EMU...... 30

Tables Table B1 Military movements by aircraft type for 2008...... 29 Table B2 Night military movements by aircraft type for 2008...... 29 Table C1 System outages and EMU performance summary broken down by quarter for 2008...... 30 Table C2 Daily N70, N80 and N90 at each EMU location for 2008...... 32 Table C3 The average LAmax values and standard deviation (in brackets) at each monitor for all the military aircraft types and key civilian aircraft types operating at the base for the calendar year 2008...... 35

Figures

Figure 1 Runway configuration for RAAF Base Williamtown...... 7 Figure 2 Location of Williamtown NFPMS Environmental Monitoring Units (EMUs)10 Figure A1 Civil jet (Boeing 737 and Airbus A320) arrivals during the 2008 Lochard to update)...... 23 Figure A2 Civil jet (Boeing 737 and Airbus A320) departures during 2008 (Lochard to update)...... 24 Figure A3 Locally based military jets (FA18 and HAWK) for 2008 (Lochard to update)...... 25 Figure A4 Track density pattern for locally based military jets (FA18 and HAWK) for 2008 (Lochard to update)...... 26 Figure A5 Operation for locally base PC9 turbo propeller aircraft 2008 (Lochard to update)...... 27 Figure B1 Daily Military and Civil Aircraft movements for the calendar year 2008.....28 Figure C1 Graph of showing daily N70 resulting from civilian and military aircraft operations at each EMU location for the monitoring periods of 2008...... 31 Figures C2-C7..Graphs comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Grahamstown, Willamtown, Salt Ash, Medowie, Raymond Terrace and FerodaleEMUs.. 33

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following the completion of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Introduction of the Hawk Aircraft at RAAF Base Williamtown (WLM) and Salt Ash Air Weapons Range (SAWR), the Minister for Defence issued 25 conditions under the now repealed Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974. Condition number 3 stated that “The environmental management strategies at both Williamtown and the Range will include long-term noise monitoring. The impacts of noise will be reviewed periodically.”

The Department of Defence contracted Spotless who sub-contracted Airservices Australia to install and manage a Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System (NFPMS) at RAAF Base Williamtown. The purpose of the NFPMS is to identify noise emissions associated with civil and military aircraft operations at Williamtown and military aircraft operations at SAWR. Further, it provides information to the general public on aircraft noise emissions from the Base and SAWR in a format that is easy to read and understand.

This report provides a summary of the data collected by the six operational Environmental Monitoring Units (EMUs) of the NFPMS at RAAF Base Williamtown and SAWR during the 2008 calendar year. The data detailed in this report relates to both military and civilian aircraft operations at the base.

During 2008 the NFPMS recorded 37,005. Of these 14,761 were military arrivals, departures and over-flights at RAAF Base Williamtown and SAWR, of which 554 were performed during the night period (2200 to 0600). There were a total of 4 days of missing noise and operational data within the NFPMS caused by radar outages.

Aircraft noise events exceeding 70dBA are considered loud enough to compromise communication (Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, 2000, “Expanding Ways to Describe and Assess Aircraft Noise”, pp 23-45). The daily number of aircraft noise events exceeding 70dB(A) detected at each noise monitor averaged over the quarter, i.e. N70, are reported in each quarterly report. During 2008 the N70 varied between 1.9 at Ferodale (Q1) and 65.6 at Williamtown Primary (Q3).

In reviewing the noise data collected over the past 24 months, Airservices Australia has noted that the noise characteristics of military aircraft are vastly different to that for civilian aircraft. As a result, some aircraft noise may not have been detected by the Williamtown NFPMS. The possibility that the number of aircraft noise events was under-reported has led Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence to conduct data integrity checks that involve a quality control/quality assurance process during 2006 and 2007. The results of these checks has lead to adjustments to the NFPMS settings and detection algorithms.

Environmental noise varies over time and may be reported in terms of a noise level that is exceeded for a certain percentage of the total measurement time. The noise level exceeded for 90% of the time (L90) is a reliable estimate for the non-aircraft noise level (background level) at the monitoring sites associated with the Williamtown NFPMS. A noise level that is 10 dB(A) above the L90 value is considered to be noticeable. For all the monitored sites, the daytime difference between the aircraft noise levels and L90 (effective background noise level) is between 10dBA and 20dBA. The impact during nighttime operations is greater with the difference between aircraft noise and the L90 night value (background) being in the range of 30dBA to 40dBA at Salt Ash, Medowie, Raymond Terrace and Ferodale.

The maximum noise level (LAmax) data collected at each EMU allows the noisiest aircraft types and operations to be identified. For the 2008 calendar year the noisiest jet was the Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page 4 Report No: DoD YWLM8 Yearly Report January – December 2008

FA18 Boeing Hornet military fighter jet, whilst the noisiest non-jet was the Lockheed C- 130J Hercules four engine military heavy transport.

1 Introduction Following the completion of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Introduction of the Hawk Aircraft at RAAF Base Williamtown (WLM) and Salt Ash Air Weapons Range (SAWR), the Minister for Defence issued 25 conditions under the now repealed Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974. Condition number 3 stated “The environmental management strategies at both Williamtown and the Range will include long-term noise monitoring. The impacts of noise will be reviewed periodically.”

The Department of Defence contracted Spotless who sub-contracted Airservices Australia to install and manage a Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System (NFPMS) at RAAF Base Williamtown. The purpose of the NFPMS is to:  identify noise emissions associated with military and civil aircraft operations at Williamtown and military aircraft operations at SAWR, and  provide information to the general public on aircraft noise emissions and typical flight paths that occur at the Base and SAWR in a format that is easy to read and understand. The airfield at Williamtown consists of a single runway oriented in the 120o-300o magnetic direction. The runway configuration and directions for arrivals and departures are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Runway configuration for RAAF Base Williamtown

2 The NFPMS System

2.1 System Overview The NFPMS at RAAF Base Williamtown is a state-of-the-art fully automated installation.

Operation of the system is managed from Airservices Australia’s Head Office in Canberra, under a contractual agreement with the Department of Defence through Spotless. The NFPMS and its operating procedures are outlined below.

A number of environmental monitoring units (EMUs) are situated in the area surrounding the airfield which may be permanently located or portable. An EMU consists of a microphone atop a mast and an electronics box. The noise level to which the microphone is exposed over the range 30 to 130 dB(A) is continuously measured and then transmitted via the telephone network to the NFPMS central computer where it is processed and stored for later analysis. Apart from measuring the aircraft noise, the EMU also continuously monitors the background noise levels.

Through the air traffic control radar system, the NFPMS acquires flight tracks from aircraft Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) transponders. This form of radar information contains details of aircraft height and speed at each location as the aircraft flies through the Williamtown airspace (approximately 70km radius centered at the Base). Identification of aircraft types is facilitated by:  For those movements that are flight planned through TAAATS (the civilian air traffic system operated by Airservices Australia), the flight plan details (including the aircraft type) is automatically linked with the track data,  For local military movements, each aircraft has a unique SSR code. The NFPMS assigns the aircraft type (FA18, PC9 or Hawk) according to the SSR code the aircraft transponder is set to.

The NFPMS collects noise and flight path data 24 hours per day, seven days per week. The incoming data is stored on a central computer and can be recalled to display the tracks flown by any selection of aircraft operations, together with the noise levels recorded by the EMUs for those operations. The track information includes aircraft identity, altitude and speed.

Further details concerning the Williamtown NFPMS can be found within the regular quarterly reports.

2.2 Noise Monitors and Locations The Williamtown NFPMS has a total of six EMUs, to monitor aircraft noise at various sites around RAAF Base Williamtown and SAWR. Figure 2 shows the location of the EMUs (red stars) and the correlation zones (red circles). A more detailed explanation of a correlation zone is included in Section 4.

Also included in Figure 2 are the boundaries for SAWR and RAAF Base Williamtown (shown in yellow lines) as well as the runway configuration (black lines and labels).

The selection of an EMU location is based on siting criteria that Airservices Australia has developed for the management of the NFPMS. These sites should be: 1. Close to regularly used aircraft flight paths; 2. In a quiet location to ensure aircraft noise is detectable above the background noise; 3. Within line-of-sight from the microphone to the aircraft; 4. Located as far as practicable from tall buildings or steep terrain; 5. Accessible to electrical power and telephone lines or mobile phone coverage; and 6. Secure from malicious damage.

Using the above selection criteria, four EMU sites are used to monitor the impact of aircraft arrivals and departures at RAAF Base Williamtown. They are located at: Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page 7 Report No: DoD YWLM8 Yearly Report January – December 2008

EMU 1. Grahamstown Primary School, Hasting Drive, Raymond Terrace; EMU 2. Williamtown Primary School, Cabbage Tree Road, Williamtown; EMU 6. Outer Marker for RAAF Base Williamtown, Raymond Terrace; and EMU 7. Private residence, Pacific Highway, Ferodale.

Two EMU sites were selected to monitor the impact of aircraft noise associated with operations over SAWR: EMU 3. Salt Ash Primary School, Salt Ash Avenue, Salt Ash; and EMU 5. Wirreanda Primary School, corner of Ferodale and Brocklesby Roads, Medowie.

 EMU 7 SAWR

 EMU 6

 EMU 5

 EMU 1

Rw y 12  EMU 3 WLM

Rw y 30

 EMU 2

0 2.5 5 kilometers Figure 2 Location of Williamtown NFPMS Environmental Monitoring Units (EMUs)

3 System Performance

3.1 System Outages The outages that affect the Williamtown NFPMS fall into 2 groups, EMU outages and radar outages. EMU outages for 2008 were due to: broken phone lines, power outages, microphone out of calibration (usually due to extreme weather conditions) and preventative maintenance. The details for outages at each EMU site are:  The EMU at Grahamstown was off line for the period 22/6/08 to 27/6/08 (6 days) due to power outage.  The Williamtown EMU was off line 1/1/2008 to 4/3/2008 (5 days) and 19/12/2008 to 31/12/2008 (13 days), both occasions due to a landline phone outage.  The Medowie EMU suffered a microphone fault between 18 and 19 January.  The microphone for the monitor at Raymond Terrace was out of calibration 6 March.  The Ferodale EMU (EMU 7), located on private property, was off line for the periods 2/2/2008 to 13/3/2008 (30 days), 8/6/2008 to 18/6/2008 (11 days) and 18/10/2008 to 14/11/2008 (28 days) all due to power outages.

For 30.1% of the year, the Ferodale monitor was inactive due to the resident inadvertently switching the unit off. Due to the access difficulties at the Ferodale site a recommendation was been made to DoD late 2007 (and again early in 2008) to relocate this monitor.

Preventative maintenance is performed on each EMU on an annual basis. This involves full calibration of the EMU (to meet appropriate Australian Standards). As part of the preventative maintenance the microphone is replaced. In some cases the site owner may have made changes to the site or trees may have grown which could compromise the acoustic measurement. Performing the preventative maintenance regularly is an opportunity to review the site for its suitability as a monitoring site. Preventative maintenance of the NFPMS EMUs was conducted on the following dates: EMU 1 Grahamstown: 7 March 2008 EMU 2 Williamtown: 7 March 2008 EMU 3 Salt Ash: 4 March 2008 EMU 5 Medowie: 6 March 2008 EMU 6 Raymond Terrace: 5 March 2008 EMU 7 Ferodale: Was not performed due to access issues.

Radar outages for 2008 occurred when the RAAF radar feed into the civilian Air Traffic Control system was temporally unavailable due to conflicts between the two radar systems, this is further explained at 3.2. The radar outages during 2008 were:  Q1 – 2 days (12/1/2008 to 13/1/2008)  Q3 – 2 days (16/8/2007 to 17/8/2007)

Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page Report No: DoD YWLM08 10 Yearly Report January – December 2008

3.2 Improvements to the NFPMS Radar Outage Due to radar conflicts between the RAAF and the civilian radar systems, the Williamtown NFPMS did not have access to the RAAF radar for three periods totaling 4 days, or 1.1% of the year 2008. The NFPMS relies on the RAAF radar for track data below 3000ft above sea level. For the outage period aircraft tracks captured by the NFPMS start and end several kilometers from the runway. This reduces the number of noise events that can be correlated to an aircraft track and the number of tracks that can be assigned an arrival or departure. For this reason periods of radar outages are excluded from the NFPMS reports. The performance of the RAAF radar at Williamtown has been the subject of much work between Defence and Airservices. Currently a “work around” solution, where the civilian ATC system ignores RAAF radar data outside a set distance from the Base, is used. This “work around” solution has resulted in fewer radar outages since it was introduced in November 2007.

SSR Lookup Table The aircraft type assignment for locally based military aircraft relies on a set SSR code being used by the RAAF for each aircraft during the monitoring period. In practice these SSR codes can change creating a likelihood for the measured noise levels to be incorrectly assigned to the wrong aircraft type. To mitigate against this the SSR code list is checked against the actual SSR codes used prior to any reporting. If a change to the SSR list has occurred, the data in the NFPMS is re-processed using the corrected SSR list. During 2008 there were no changes to the SSR code list.

Noise Data In reviewing the noise data collected over the past 24 months, Airservices Australia has noted that the noise characteristics of military aircraft do not suit the standard remote monitoring configuration settings used for aircraft noise detection. As a result, some aircraft noise events may not have been detected by the Williamtown NFPMS. The likelihood that the number of aircraft noise events is being under reported has led Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence to conduct data integrity checks that involve a quality control/quality assurance process. The results of these checks has lead to adjustments to the NFPMS settings and detection algorithms, the latest occurring during quarter 2 2008.

There are also other reasons why the NFPMS may not detect a correlated noise event, which are beyond the control of the system, these include:  Atmospheric conditions such as a temperature inversion or extreme wind conditions can affect the sound propagation so that the sound energy is very much reduced at the EMU location;  The aircraft generated noise is below the EMU threshold level (see Section 5.1);  Multiple aircraft formations, where only the lead aircraft has its SSR transponder active, will result in only 1 correlated noise event;  Aircraft flying in close formation may generate a multi-peak noise event (each peak corresponding to an overpass of an aircraft in the formation) which will only be correlated to 1 of the aircraft.

4 Aircraft Operations

4.1 Aircraft Flight Paths Civil operations at the Base are similar to that at most other regional airports around Australia. Typical civilian aircraft operating out of the airfield are Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 passenger jets, De Havilland Dash 8 passenger turbo-propeller, Beechcraft Super King Air small commuter propeller and a variety of smaller jets and general aviation (GA) aircraft. The arrival tracks and the departure tracks for the civil jets (Boeing 737 and Airbus A320) for the calendar year 2008 are shown in Figures A1 and A2 respectively.

The military aircraft operating out of Williamtown are, in the main, jet fighter aircraft (FA18 and HAWK) and advanced turbo propeller trainers (PC9). Occasionally other military aircraft visit the Base, for example F111 jet fighter-bomber or C17 jet transport, C130 turbo-propeller transport and P3 Locheed Martin Orion turbo-propeller maritime patrol. By their nature military aircraft will operate differently from civilian aircraft. A considerable proportion of the airspace about the region of the base is occupied by military aircraft conducting training activities; for example simulated bombing runs at Salt Ash Air Weapons Range. A significant proportion of these training operations are recorded as over-flights by the NFPMS. An overflight is recorded when an operation does not start or finish on the runway. At the Base this occurs when the aircraft SSR transponder is activated a distance after leaving the runway or deactivated a distance from arriving onto the runway. The usual practice for a multi aircraft training operation at Williamtown is; the leading aircraft is the only one to have an active SSR transponder during the departure (and arrival) phase of the multi aircraft sortie. In these cases only this leading aircraft will be visible to the NFPMS during the departure (or arrival) phase. Figure A3 shows the full 2008 year track data for the FA18 and HAWK operations (arrival, departure and overflight). As a large proportion of the aircraft in Figure A3 have activated their transponder a distance from the airfield, the NFPMS for these aircraft will not determine operational nature (arrival/departure/overflight) correctly. For this reason arrivals, departures and overflight are not plotted separately. Further examples of tracks flown by civil and military aircraft during 2008 can be found in the individual quarterly reports for 2008.

Due to the large number of tracks in Figure A3 it is difficult to determine any pattern. A track density plot can be used to distinguish flight path patterns for aircraft operations. In a track density plot the area about the airfield is segmented into a grid, the number of tracks passing directly overhead of each grid element is summed and pseudo coloured according to the value of this sum. The actual values corresponding to each colour is not important when discerning the flight patterns. Figure A4 shows the track density for the FA18 and HAWK aircraft operations during 2008. The grid element size is 200m x 200m. Dark blue is used for lower track density values and red for higher values. In the track density of Figure A4 the individual operation modes can be identified. In particular the TACAN approach from the north, bombing runs at SAWR and the training runs out over the ocean can be easily identified, see Figure A4.

4.2 Aircraft Movements A total number of 37,005 movements took place at the Base in 2008, of which 14,761 (39.9%) were military movements. The night period is a sub-set of the day operations referring to those operations occurring between 22.00 and 06.00 (as per the Newcastle Airport Operating Agreement with Defence). For the 2008 calendar year the total number of operations detected by the NFPMS during the night period was 554, of which 179 were military movements.

Appendix B contains a summary of all the movements detected by the NFPMS, including periods of radar outage for 2008. Figure B1 compares the movement numbers for military and civil operations. The NFPMS coverage includes numerous small non-military airfields about the region. An operation from one of these non-military airfields will be detected as a civilian overflight by the NFPMS. In contrast, any military operation detected by the NFPMS will originate at the Base. Consequently, in Figure B1 the civil daily movement numbers are restricted to arrivals and departures, whereas overflights are included in the military daily movement numbers. As discussed previously, during the period of a radar outage (where tracks will start and end well short of the runways) the NFPMS cannot identify an operation as an arrival or departure, however overflights are still detected.

Weekend days are indicated by a triangle-symbol in Figure B1. If a military operation occurred on a weekend then a blue line intersecting a triangle will appear in Figure B1, otherwise a single blue triangle will be located on the x-axis. As can be seen from this figure, military operations occurred on approximately 19 weekends. With the exception of two cases the number of daily (weekend) military movements were less than 10 movements. In most cases where weekend military operations did occur, less than 4 individual movements took place.

The aircraft types, operation type and numbers for military operations that flew during 2008 are given in Table B1. Note this table includes the radar outage periods. Of the military aircraft that operated at the base during 2008, 50.5% were FA18, 37.5% were HAWK and 9.2% were PC9.

The military aircraft that operated during the night period, of which there were 179, were mainly FA18 Boeing Hornet military fighter jet (87.7%). A list of military aircraft that operated during the night period (2200 to 0600) are provided in Table B2.

5 Aircraft Noise Levels

5.1 Aircraft noise data As an aircraft overflies a noise monitor, the noise level will increase from the ambient level (or background level) to a peak and decrease back to the ambient level. Typically for a civilian aircraft, the noise level will be above the ambient value for 10 to 30 seconds, depending on the ambient level, the height and configuration of the aircraft. In the case of a military jet fighter, eg FA18 or HAWK, the noise event can be many times longer than this. To assist in analysing the noise data attributed to aircraft, the NFPMS is setup to detect individual events at each EMU.

A noise event at an EMU occurs when the noise level that it is exposed to exceeds a preset threshold value for a minimum duration and ends when it returns to the threshold value. In the case of the noise monitors used in the Williamtown NFPMS, the threshold value is set to 60dBA. The NFPMS stores a complete record (for example noise level for each second of the noise event) of every noise event detected at each EMU.

Each EMU has a correlation zone associated with it. These are displayed as a red circle in Figure 1. If the radar track of an aircraft passes through an EMU correlation zone at the time of the noise event detected by the EMU, the NFPMS links the noise event to the aircraft and attributes the noise event to that aircraft. A noise event that is linked to an aircraft is referred to as a correlated noise event (CNE). The correlation zone for EMUs 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 is a cylinder of height 4.5km (15,000ft) and a radius of 3.5km centred on the

EMU. EMU 2 is positioned close to the runway to capture aircraft noise from circuit operations and therefore it requires a smaller correlation zone (2km radius).

As part of the continued improvement of the Williamtown NFPMS, the settings used to detect aircraft noise within each EMU were changed to improve the detection of multi- aircraft sorties. This change was to halve the maximum length for a single noise event. This had the effect of generating 2 or more individual noise events for each overflight of a military jet. Only one of these noise events will contain the true maximum noise value (LAmax). To account for this an additional filter of the data to include only the maximum value of the LAmax for each overflight had to be included prior to averaging the LAmax values for each aircraft type. Note, this was introduced in Q4 2007.

5.2 EMU Performance Summary The performance for each EMU over the calendar year 2008 is summarized in Table C1 of Appendix C. This table also details the radar and EMU outages that affected measurements at each site. The percentage of total time that an EMU is exposed to aircraft noise (referred to as uptime in Table C1) is calculated by dividing the sum of the duration time for each correlated noise event by the total available time for the EMU.

EMU 2 at Williamtown Primary recorded the highest percentage of time exposure, i.e. 2.80% during Q3.

Ignoring power and communication outages all EMUs during 2008, except that at Ferodale, were above 95% (the Ferodale EMU uptime was 93.6%).

Also recorded in Table C1 is the average quarterly noise level, LAeq, at each EMU. During 2008 the highest LAeq, for all but EMU 5 and EMU 3, occurred in Q3 (Q2 for EMU 5 and Q1 for EMU 3). Note Q3 is the period with the highest daily movement number. The night time average noise level is less than the day time value for all EMU sites, the difference being between 1.0dB(A) at Ferodale EMU Q1 and 12.0dB(A) at Williamtown EMU Q3.

Based on the number of noise events detected, the monitoring sites fell into two groups. Monitors at Salt Ash, Medowie and Ferodale recorded similar CNE per day over the year (5 to 30), whereas the other monitors recorded significantly higher daily averages (50 to 140).

The monitors at Williamtown and Ferodale had significant EMU outages during Q4.

5.3 Daily N70, N80 and N90 values The level of disturbance from aircraft noise can be deduced from the number of CNEs equal or greater than 70 dB(A) detected by an EMU over a 24 hour period. This is referred to as the N70 value. The level of 70 dB(A) represents the maximum external sound level which “should cause no difficulty with reliable communication from radio, television or conversation in a typical room with windows open” (Reference – Department of Transport and Regional Services, 2000, Expanding Ways to Describe and Assess Aircraft Noise, pp23-35). Therefore noise above this level may cause some interference to indoor communication.

A noise level of 70dB(A) would interfere with outdoor communication to the extent that a person would have to raise their voice noticeably. To communicate over a noise level of

80dB(A) would require a shout and communication would be extremely difficult when the noise level is above 90dB(A). The N80 is the number of correlated noise events equal to or greater than 80dB(A) over a 24 hour period and similarly the N90 is the number of correlated noise events equal to or greater than 90dB(A) in a 24 hour period.

The average daily N70 plus/minus 1 standard deviation for each quarter of 2008 at each monitor is shown in Figure C1. The standard deviation gives a reliable indication of the variation at each site. The Grahamstown and Williamtown sites have noticeably higher N70 values than the other monitoring sites. This is an expected result as;  the Grahamstown monitor is inline with, and to the north of, the runway. Any operation to the north will most likely overfly this monitor.  the Williamtown monitor is quite close to the western side of the main runway. As such, virtually every arriving military operation will either perform a pitch and turn over this site as part of its final approach or generates a noise event well above this EMU threshold.

The averaged daily N70, N80 and N90 at each EMU by quarter is contained in Table C2. As expected those monitors closest to the Base (Grahamstown and Williamtown), where the aircraft will generally be closer to the ground, have higher N80 and N90 values. The portion of the year for which the N70, N80 and N90 values were highest (at all monitoring sites) was Q3, which was also operationally the busiest quarter of the year.

5.4 L90 and Maximum Aircraft Noise by Hour Environmental noise varies over time and may be reported in terms of a noise level that is exceeded for a certain percentage (N%) of total measurement time. For example, the L90 level is the noise level that was exceeded for 90% of the measurement period. The L90 value for a site in close proximity to an airfield is a reliable estimate for the non-aircraft noise level (background level) provided that the overall aircraft noise exposure time is less than 10% of the total time. This is the case for the EMU sites located about RAAF Base Williamtown as the greatest percentage of time any EMU was exposed to aircraft noise is 3% (see Table C1).

The difference between a noise event level and the L90 is often used to indicate the likely degree of disturbance. For instance a noise level that is 10dBA above the L90 value is considered to be noticeable (a 10dBA increase is perceived to be a doubling of the loudness). The EMUs are configured to measure the L90 for each hour of operation.

Figures C2 to C7 graphically compares the range (average plus/minus 1 standard deviation) in aircraft peak noise (red) to the effective range (also average plus/minus 1 standard deviation) in L90 (blue). The calculation was done for each hour of the day and averaged over the full monitoring period for 2008.

The peak in the L90 graph at 1300 for the Medowie EMU is due to a regular school activity and not part of the operations at the Base. As such this should be regarded as an aberration in the data.

The site with the lowest L90 was Medowie (35dBA-50dBA). Grahamstown and Raymond Terrace were similar (40dBA-50dBA and 42dBA-48 dBA) whilst Williamtown, Salt Ash and Ferodale had periods of the day where the L90 exceeds 50dBA. For all sites the daytime difference between the aircraft noise level and L90 is between10dBA and 20dBA. The impact during nighttime operations is greater, between 30dBA and 40dBA (depending on the hour) at Salt Ash, Medowie, Raymond Terrace and Ferodale.

5.5 Aircraft Noise Level Summary Table C3 lists the LAmax average and standard deviation (in brackets) for all military aircraft and the louder civilian aircraft that have operated at the Base during 2008. The noise data for military aircraft reported in this table differs from that included in the regular quarterly reports in that it includes noise contributions for all operations (arrival, departure and overflights). The aircraft noise tables that appear in the quarterly reports were limited to arrival and departure flights (ie excluded overflights). Military fighter aircraft (FA18 and HAWK) display a greater range in noise level, indicated by a higher standard deviation, than other military transport or civil aircraft. This is due to the greater variation in how these fighter aircraft are flown as they can be lower, higher and further away from the usual approach and departure paths that are used by other military transport and civil aircraft. The noise data statistics for a given aircraft overflying a monitor can be quantified by knowing the average and standard deviation. For instance 68% of the overflights will generate a noise level between the average ± 1 standard deviation. More telling is that 16% of occurrences are above average +1 standard deviation. These correspond to cases where the aircraft passed close to directly overhead. Therefore the average + 1 standard deviation value would be a good statistical value of the noise level for a pass directly overhead. Applying this to the FA18 overflying the monitors at Grahamstown, Williamtown and Raymond Terrace, the direct overhead noise level is approximately 92dBA. Although only 16% of these actually overfly the monitor, the potential is the other 84% would have been directly overhead at other residential dwellings. The real impact of these operations could be greater than that indicated by the average value of the LAmax. Given the background noise level at any of the monitoring sites never exceeds 55dBA (except for the 1300hr value at Medowie), the noise level for the FA18 passing directly overhead is almost 40dBA higher. The situation for the other fighter aircraft used at the base, i.e. the HAWK, is only marginally less. Its average + 1 standard deviation value is 30 dBA above the background level.

6.0 Conclusion During the 2008 calendar year there were 14,761 military operations (and 22,244 civilian operations) detected by the NFPMS. Of these 88.0% were the locally based FA18 and HAWK jet fighter/trainers with the majority occurring on a weekday. The weekday average for military operations was approximately 60 operations but there were days where in excess of 150 operations took place. The areas about RAAF Base Williamtown which experience the greatest military over-flights were; within a radius of 7-8km of the airfield, north of the airfield (over Grahamstown), south of the airfield between ocean and the runway, SAWR and the TACAN (an arc 25-30km long about 25-30km north west of the airfield).

The N70 value is a measure of the number of times that aircraft can interfere with communication indoors. This metric is the daily average of the number of times aircraft noise is above 70dBA. The N70 value at the EMU locations varied between 1.9 to 65.6 with the higher value occurring at the Williamtown monitor.

EMUs were located about the region of the Base to sample the effects of aircraft operations on the local communities. The daylight hours (0600-1800) background noise levels, as measured by the hourly L90 at each EMU location, varied between 45dBA – Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page Report No: DoD YWLM08 16 Yearly Report January – December 2008

55dBA, with the higher levels recorded at the Williamtown site. At the monitors the aircraft noise is often 20-40dBA above this background level, with military aircraft being closer to the higher end of this range. In ordinary circumstances a difference in noise level of 10dBA is considered noticeable. Noise from civil aircraft operations are approximately 10dBA lower than that of military jets. During evening-nighttime period (1800-0600) the background level drops to 35-48dBA, with Williamtown being the highest. Although far fewer military aircraft operate at night, when they do these can be as much as 40dBA above the background level.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Aerodrome The designated geographical location of an aerodrome. Reference Point (ARP): Altitude: The vertical distance of a level, a point or an object, considered as a point, measured from mean sea level. CNE Correlated noise event dB(A): A-weighted sound level. The A-weighting is a simple circuit which can be incorporated into sound measurement equipment to provide an approximate match to the frequency sensitivity characteristics of the human ear. Elevation: The vertical distance of a point or a level, on or affixed to the surface of the earth, measured from mean sea level. GA General aviation, smaller aircraft that mainly operate outside of controlled airspace Height: The vertical distance of a level, point or an object considered as a point, measured from a specific datum. LAeq LAeq is the average A-weighted noise level LAmax: LAmax is the maximum A-weighted sound level (refer dB(A) above) reached during an aircraft overflight. Missed Approach The procedure to be followed if the approach cannot be continued. Procedure: NFPMS: Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System. RAAF: Royal Australian Air force Night Period The time period 2200 to 0600 Runway Number: The runway number is the runway magnetic heading divided by 10 when viewed from the direction of approach/departure. For example, a runway with a magnetic heading of 148° would be designated as Runway 15, i.e. 148° divided by 10 and rounded to the nearest whole number. Runway The beginning of that portion of the runway useable for landing. Threshold: TACAN: Tactical Air Navigation. An ultra high frequency navigation aid which provides a continuous indication of bearing and distance to the selected TACAN ground station. SSR Secondary Surveillance Radar. A surveillance system of secondary radar using ground transmitters/receivers (interrogators) and airborne transponders. SSR Code The number assigned to a particular reply signal transmitted by a transponder in an aircraft. Track: The projection on the earth's surface of the path of an aircraft, the direction of which path at any point is usually expressed in degrees

from North (true, magnetic or grid). Transponder A receiver/transmitter which will generate a reply signal upon proper interrogation.

Aircraft types used in this report Code Description Military, Civil or Civil-GA A320 Airbus A320 twin engine passenger jet Civil AC50 Rockwell Commander 500 twin engine propeller Civil - GA AS50 Eurocopter AS350 Ecureuil helicopter Civil B350 Beechcraft Super King Air 350 twin engine propeller Civil - GA B703 Boeing 707 Tanker four engine jet Military B712 Boeing 717-200 twin engine passenger jet Civil B732 Boeing 737-200 twin engine passenger jet Civil B737 Boeing 737-700 twin engine passenger jet Civil B738 Boeing 737-800 twin engine passenger jet Civil BE20 Beechcraft Super King Air 200 twin engine propeller Civil - GA BE40 Raytheon Beechjet 400 twin engine corporate jet Civil BE58 Beechcraft 55 Baron twin engine propeller Civil - GA BE76 Beechcraft 76 Duchess twin engine propeller Civil - GA C17 Boeing C-17 Globemaster four engine transport jet Military C130 Lockheed C-130 Hercules four engine transport propeller Military C182 Cessna 182 Skylane single engine propeller Civil - GA C30J Lockheed C-130J Hercules four engine transport propeller Military C310 Cessna 310 twin engine propeller Civil - GA C441 Cessna Caravan 2 twin engine propeller Civil - GA C525 Cessna 525 CitationJet twin engine corporate jet Civil C550 Cessna 550 CitationJet twin engine corporate jet Civil CL60 Canadair CL600 Challenger twin engine corporate jet Civil CT4 Pacific Aerospace CT4 single engine propeller Civil - GA CVLT Convair CV540/580/600/640 twin engine transport propeller Civil DH8A De Havilland Dash 8-100 twin engine passenger propeller Civil DH8B De Havilland Dash 8-200 twin engine passenger propeller Civil DH8C De Havilland Dash 8-300 twin engine passenger propeller Civil E110 Embraer EMB-110 Bandeirante twin engine propeller Civil F16 Lockheed Martin Fighting Falcon single engine multi role Military fighter jet F100 Fokker 100 twin engine passenger jet Civil F111 General Dynamics F111 twin engine Fighter bomber jet Military FA18 Boeing FA18 Hornet twin engine multi role fighter jet Military H25B Hawker Siddeley HS125 Twin engine corporate jet Civil

HAWK BAe Hawk 127 single engine lead-in fighter jet Military JPRO British Aerospace Strikemaster single engine ex-military Civil fighter jet LJ35 Learjet 35 twin engine corporate jet Civil LJ45 Learjet 45 twin engine corporate jet Civil P28A Piper PA28 Cherokee single engine propeller Civil - GA PA30 Piper PA30 Twin Comanche twin engine propeller Civil - GA P3 Locheed Martin Orion four engine propeller maritime patrol Military PA31 Piper PA31 Navajo twin engine propeller Civil - GA PC9 Pilatus PC-9 single engine advanced trainer propeller Military S76 Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Civil SW4 Fairchild Dornier Metro twin engine passenger propeller Civil WW24 IAI Westwind twin engine corporate jet Civil

APPENDIX A: AIRCRAFT FLIGHT TRACKS

Figure A1 Civil jet (Boeing 737 and Airbus A320) arrivals during the 2008 Lochard to update).

Figure A2 Civil jet (Boeing 737 and Airbus A320) departures during 2008 (Lochard to update).

Figure A3 Locally based military jets (FA18 and HAWK) for 2008 (Lochard to update).

Figure A4 Track density pattern for locally based military jets (FA18 and HAWK) for 2008 (Lochard to update).

Figure A5 Operation for locally base PC9 turbo propeller aircraft 2008 (Lochard to update).

APPENDIX B: AIRCRAFT MOVEMENT NUMBERS

Military count

Civil count

0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 e 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------a - - - - l l l l l t t t t t r r r r r r r r r v v v v n n n n n n n n b y y y y g g g g p p p p c c c c d b b b u u u u u a a a p p p p p c c c c c a o o o o a a a u a u u u a e e e e e e a a a u u u u e e e e e e J J J J J J J J J A A A A A J J J J - - - - - O O O O O N N N N F F F F M M M M A A A A S S S S D D D D ------M M M M ------9 6 3 ------2 0 - - - - 7 6 0 2 9 6 3 0 5 3 4 1 8 1 8 5 2 9 5 2 9 6 3 2 9 6 6 0 7 5 3 4 0 0 1 2 3 6 3 0 7 3 0 7 4 0 7 7 4 1 8 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 2 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2

Figure B1 Daily Military and Civil Aircraft movements for the calendar year 2008.

Aircraft Type Description Based Arrival Departure Overflight Total

B703 Military jet tanker Visiting 1 2 12 15 Military turbo Visiting from C130 propeller transport Richmond 11 12 34 57 Military turbo Visiting from C135 propeller transport Richmond 1 1 0 2 Visiting from C17 Military jet transport Richmond 33 30 19 82 Military turbo Visiting from C30J propeller transport Richmond 35 29 68 132 C5 Military jet transport 1 1 0 2 Visiting from F111 Bomber Amberley 2 5 75 82 F15 Fighter Visiting 5 7 3 15 Local and a small FA18 Fighter number visiting 2995 2027 2439 7461 H60 Helicopter 3 0 10 13 HAWK Fighter/trainer Local 1797 1559 2185 5541 K35R Military jet tanker Visiting 3 3 0 6 Visiting from P3 Patrol Enborough 5 3 4 12 PC9 Trainer Local 386 363 603 1352 Total 14772 Table B1 Military movements by aircraft type for 2008

Aircraft Type Description Based Arrival Departure Overflight Total Military turbo Visiting from C130 propeller transport Richmond 1 1 0 2 Visiting from C17 Military jet transport Richmond 1 0 0 1 Military turbo Visiting from C30J propeller transport Richmond 1 0 0 1 Visiting from F111 Bomber Amberley 0 0 4 4 Local and a small FA18 Fighter number visiting 125 9 23 157 HAWK Fighter/trainer Local 5 6 2 13 Visiting from P3 Patrol Enborough 1 0 0 1 Total 179

Table B2 Night military movements by aircraft type for 2008

APPENDIX C: NOISE DATA SUMMARY FOR EACH EMU Average Noise Level, LAeq (dBA) Operations Noise % of Total Time EMU is Day Night 2008 EMU Monitoring Uptime, Exposed to 0000- 2200- Movements Military CNE per Night CNE Period Location Outages Days % Aircraft Noise 2400 0700 per day per day day per day Grahamstow Q1 n Radar:12/1-13/1 90 98.8% 1.16% 60.4 52.3 99.6 43.4 61.9 1.9 Q2 EMU: 22/6-27/6 87 98.9% 1.04% 59 47.1 99.9 41.9 56.4 0.4 Q3 Radar: 16/8-17/8 92 100.0% 1.26% 60.6 48.7 121.8 39.3 66.9 0.5 Q4 92 100.0% 0.98% 57.7 49.8 88.4 18.7 56.4 1.1

Radar:12/1-13/1 Q1 Williamtown EMU: 1/1-4/3 28 98.7% 1.48% 62.6 53.8 320.3 139.6 77.0 0.8 Q2 91 100.0% 1.76% 62.2 53.3 95.5 40.1 90.4 0.3 Q3 Radar: 16/8-17/8 92 100.0% 2.80% 65.5 53.5 121.8 39.3 138.1 0.4 Q4 EMU: 19/12-31/12 79 99.9% 1.42% 61.8 52.3 88.0 31.3 75.4 0.5

Q1 Salt Ash Radar:12/1-13/1 90 98.9% 0.55% 57.3 51.4 99.6 43.4 26.0 0.2 Q2 91 100.0% 0.37% 55.8 52.9 95.5 40.1 21.0 0.1 Q3 Radar: 16/8-17/8 92 100.0% 0.49% 56.2 48.7 121.8 39.3 26.5 0.0 Q4 92 100.0% 0.32% 54.6 49.6 88.4 18.7 18.2 0.3

Radar:12/1-13/1 Q1 Medowie EMU:18/1-19/1 & 3/3 87 98.7% 0.39% 61.1 48.4 103.1 44.9 19.5 0.5 Q2 EMU: 26/6-30/6 91 95.7% 0.53% 59.6 48.3 101.0 41.9 25.7 0.4 Radar: 16/8-17/8 Q3 EMU: 14/7-18/7 87 97.7% 0.66% 58.3 49.2 128.8 41.6 32.6 0.5 Q4 EMU: 17/10-27/10 81 98.7% 0.47% 58.3 53 100.4 21.2 24.2 0.5

Kings Hill: Raymond Radar:12/1-13/1 Q1 Terrace EMU: 6/3 89 98.8% 0.93% 60.8 53.6 100.8 43.9 53.7 1.1 Q2 91 100.0% 0.90% 60.2 50.2 95.5 40.1 52.5 0.5 Q3 Radar: 16/8-17/8 92 100.0% 0.95% 61.3 53.2 121.8 39.3 53.7 0.6 Q4 92 100.0% 0.90% 59.8 51.6 88.4 18.7 53.1 1.2

Kings Hill: Radar:12/1-13/1 Q1 Ferodale EMU: 2/2-31/3 33 93.6% 0.12% 57.3 56.3 271.7 118.4 6.0 0.4 EMU: 1/4-17/4, 8/6- Q2 18/6 & 26/6 66 99.4% 0.27% 56.2 52.3 131.7 55.3 14.4 0.0 Q3 Radar: 16/8-17/8 92 99.6% 0.40% 57.7 53.3 121.8 39.3 20.7 0.1 Q4 EMU: 18/10-14/11 65 98.7% 0.20% 55.7 53.3 88.0 31.3 10.8 0.1 Table C1 System outages and EMU performance summary broken down by quarter for 2008

N70 at Each EMU Location

70 67.5 65 62.5 60 57.5 55 52.5 50 47.5 45 42.5 40 37.5 35 32.5 30 27.5 25 22.5 20 17.5 15 12.5 10 7.5 5 2.5 0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 EMU 2 EMU 2 EMU 2 EMU 2 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 EMU 5 EMU 5 EMU 5 EMU 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 EMU 7 EMU 7 EMU 7 EMU 7 EMU 1 EMU 1 EMU 1 EMU 1 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 EMU 3 EMU 3 EMU 3 EMU 3 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 EMU 6 EMU 6 EMU 6 EMU 6 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Figure C1 Graph of showing daily N70 resulting from civilian and military aircraft operations at each EMU location for the monitoring periods of 2008 (by daily it is meant the total number of CNE divided by the total number of days in the report period)

EMU Location Quarter Complete Daily N70 Daily N80 Daily N90 No Days of Operation Military Civil Total Military Civil Total Military Civil Total EMU 1: Grahamstown Q1 85 88 19 8.2 27.2 9.4 0.6 10 2.6 0.2 Q2 91 86 17.7 7 24.7 9.2 0.4 9.6 1.9 0.1 Q3 80 92 26.7 6.8 33.5 13.5 0.4 13.9 2.8 0.1 Q4 54 92 12.3 8.4 20.7 4.8 0.3 5.1 1 0 EMU 2: Williamtown Q1 85 27 24.4 4.4 28.8 11 0.8 11.8 2.4 0 Q2 91 91 25.3 7.6 32.9 11 1.3 12.3 2.5 0.1 Q3 81 92 56.7 8.9 65.6 29.6 1.9 31.5 7.2 0.4 Q4 22 79 17.5 5.5 23 6.6 0.6 7.2 0.7 0.1 EMU 3: Salt Ash Q1 87 89 5.1 2.4 7.5 2 0.1 2.1 0.2 0 Q2 91 91 6.1 2.3 8.4 1.9 0.1 2 0.1 0 Q3 81 92 6.7 2.5 9.2 1.8 0.1 1.9 0.1 0 Q4 54 92 3.4 2.2 5.6 0.9 0.2 1.1 0.1 0 EMU 5: Medowie Q1 77 85 4.4 1.4 5.8 0.5 0.2 0.7 0 0.1 Q2 81 87 5.8 3.5 9.3 1.5 0.2 1.7 0.1 0 Q3 81 81 7.9 3.6 11.5 2.7 0.1 2.8 0.4 0 Q4 52 80 3.2 3.1 6.3 0.5 0.2 0.7 0 0 EMU 6: Raymond Terrace Q1 86 87 11.7 7.4 19.1 4.8 0.5 5.3 1.8 0 Q2 88 90 10.6 9.9 20.5 4.8 0.7 5.5 1.8 0 Q3 81 92 13.5 8.7 22.2 5.9 0.4 6.3 2 0.1 Q4 53 92 9.3 10 19.3 3.2 0.5 3.7 1.1 0.1 EMU 7: Ferodale Q1 88 28 1.5 0.4 1.9 0.3 0 0.3 0 0 Q2 87 62 4.9 1.2 6.1 2.7 0.1 2.8 0.3 0.1 Q3 80 92 7.8 2.4 10.2 3.1 0.1 3.2 0.3 0 Q4 25 64 2.6 1 3.6 1.1 0 1.1 0.2 0

Table C2 Daily N70, N80 and N90 at each EMU location for 2008

Grahamstown EMU Williamtown EMU 100 100

80 80 A A B

70 B 70 d d

, , l l e e v v 60 e 60 e L L

30 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

L90 Aircraft LAmax Hour of the day L90 Aircraft LAmax Hour of the day

Figure C2 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Grahamstown EMU. Figure C3 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Wiliamtown EMU.

Salt Ash EMU Medowie EMU 100 100

80 80 A A

B 70 B 70 d d

, , l l e e v v

e 60 e 60 L L

30 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Figure C4 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Salt Ash EMU. Figure C5 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Medowie EMU

Raymond Terrace EMU Ferodale EMU 100 100

80 80 A A B 70 B 70 d d

, , l l e e v v e 60 e 60 L L

30 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Figure C6 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Raymond Terrace EMU. Figure C7 Graph comparing the range in L90 and aircraft LAmax at Ferodale EMU.

Monitor Raymond Aircraft Description Grahamstown Williamtown Salt Ash Medowie Ferodale Terrace FA18 Military Jet 81.6 81.6 74.2 74.4 81.1 76.6 Fighter (9.1) (9.7) (8.5) (7.7) (10.8) (9.0) HAWK Military Jet 76.2 77.1 71.7 70.5 75.1 72.6 Fighter (7.1) (7.5) (6.6) (5.7) (6.9) (7.0) F111 Military Jet 75.0 80.7 0.0 0.0 75.6 0.0 Bomber (5.5) (9.4) (0.0) (0.0) (6.5) (0.0) C17 Military Jet 76.5 69.5 69.6 67.3 77.3 67.1 Transport (5.2) (4.8) (5.4) (3.8) (4.3) (5.3) B703 Military Jet 79.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tanker (12.9) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) C130 Military Prop 74.5 67.9 0.0 66.5 73.2 66.9 Transport (6.8) (1.6) (0.0) (4.3) (5.5) (3.6) C30J Military Prop 68.8 66.5 68.7 68.8 72.9 64.5 Transport (3.4) (5.1) (3.9) (4.2) (4.4) (2.0) PC9 Military Prop 67.9 69.8 66.5 67.9 70.9 67.1 Trainer (4.7) (6.7) (4.8) (4.5) (5.5) (5.7) A320 Civil Jet 69.3 68.0 68.8 66.6 70.6 66.7 Passenger (3.2) (3.9) (4.4) (4.1) (3.5) (4.2) B732 Civil Jet 71.1 72.3 72.7 71.0 72.3 69.8 Passenger (5.0) (8.0) (6.2) (6.6) (4.5) (8.1) B737 Civil Jet 70.3 67.2 66.8 66.9 71.0 65.9 Passenger (3.1) (4.3) (4.1) (4.0) (3.7) (4.3) B738 Civil Jet 71.2 66.6 68.4 67.0 71.1 66.6 Passenger (3.5) (4.3) (4.0) (4.0) (3.6) (3.9) WW24 Civil Corporate 68.0 66.6 66.1 65.6 70.0 68.4 Jet (4.3) (3.8) (3.4) (3.2) (4.8) (4.6) DH8A Civil Prop 69.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 68.7 0.0 Passenger (4.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (4.7) (0.0) DH8B Civil Prop 67.8 62.8 0.0 0.0 67.5 0.0 Passenger (4.0) (1.8) (0.0) (0.0) (1.7) (0.0) DH8C Civil Prop 67.7 65.1 66.2 67.9 68.7 66.8 Passenger (3.9) (5.3) (3.5) (6.2) (4.1) (5.2) E110 Civil Prop 66.7 67.4 67.0 0.0 69.6 67.9 Passenger (3.9) (6.0) (4.7) (0.0) (4.3) (3.9) SW4 Civil Prop 65.9 65.0 64.8 65.9 69.2 69.0 Passenger (4.3) (4.7) (2.5) (3.8) (5.0) (7.2) JS32 Civil Prop 66.4 65.4 65.1 66.6 68.1 64.9 Passenger (4.2) (4.7) (3.4) (5.6) (4.1) (4.2) Table C3 The average LAmax values and standard deviation (in brackets) at each monitor for all the military aircraft types and key civilian aircraft types operating at the base for the calendar year 2008.

Prepared by Environment and Climate Change Unit Page 34 Report No: DoD YWLM08