DOCSLIB.ORG

Development of the Statewide Aircraft Inventory for 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development of the Statewide Aircraft Inventory for 2020 Eastern Research Group, Inc. Development of the Statewide Aircraft Inventory for 2020 Final Prepared for: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Air Quality Division Prepared by: Eastern Research Group, Inc. May 13, 2019 ERG No. 0345.00.019 DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATEWIDE AIRCRAFT INVENTORY FOR 2020 TCEQ Contract No. 582-15-50416 Work Order No. 582-18-82508-19 Prepared for: Cody McLain Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Bldg. E, Room 335S Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Prepared by: Roger Chang Eastern Research Group, Inc. 1600 Perimeter Park Drive Suite 200 Morrisville, North Carolina 27560 May 13, 2019 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Emission Projection Procedures ........................................................................ 2-1 3.0 Summary of Texas Airport Emissions ............................................................... 3-1 4.0 References .......................................................................................................... 4-1 Appendix A Projection Factors ..................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B Quality Assurance ...................................................................................... B-1 i List of Tables Table 3-1. Controlled and Uncontrolled Daily Criteria Emissions (Tons Per Day) ........ 3-1 Table 3-2. Controlled Daily Criteria Emissions by Type (Tons Per Day) ........................ 3-1 Table 3-3. Uncontrolled Daily Criteria Emissions by Type (Tons Per Day) ................... 3-1 Table 3-4. Controlled Daily Criteria Emission by County (Tons Per Day) ..................... 3-2 Table 3-5. Uncontrolled Daily Criteria Emission by County (Tons Per Day) .................3-9 Table A-1. Projection Factors ........................................................................................... A-1 Table B-1. Counties with the Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions ............ B-7 Table B-2. Airports with the Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Counties ........................................................................................ B-8 Table B-3. Example Comparison for 2011 Inventory between AEDT and EDMS at the Airport, Aircraft, Engine, and Pollutant Level .............................................................. E-10 Table B-4. SCCs With the Highest Absolute Percent Change in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Airport/County Combinations .................................................... B-12 Table B-5. Airport/SCC Combinations Within the Top 25 Airports with the Highest Activity ............................................................................................................................ B-13 Table B-6. Comparison of Revised Military Criteria Emission Factors1 to the Previous Generic Military Emission Factors2 (tons/LTO)* ........................................................ B-20 Table B-7. Comparison to Confirm All Aircraft Were Included in the New Inventory B-21 Table B-8. Airports in the 2011 Inventory that were not included in the 2017 Inventory (closed) .......................................................................................................................... B-29 Table B-9. Airports (Opened) in 2017 That Did Not Have Activity in 2011 .................. B-31 Table B-10. Counties with The Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions ....... B-42 Table B-11. Airports with the Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Counties ...................................................................................... B-44 Table B-12. SCCs With the Highest Absolute Percent Change in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Airport/County Combinations ................................................... B-45 Table B-13. Airport/SCC Combinations Within the Top 25 Airports the Highest Activity ....................................................................................................................................... B-46 Table B-14. Comparison to Confirm All Aircraft Were Included in AEDT Run .......... B-54 Table B-15. Comparison of Controlled and Uncontrolled 2017 Emissions ................... B-61 Table B-16. Counties with the Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions ........ B-62 Table B-17. Airports with the Highest Absolute Percent Changes in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Counties. ............................................................................... B-63 Table B-18. SCCs With the Highest Absolute Percent Change in Emissions Within the Previously Identified Airport/County Combinations. .................................................. B-64 Table B-19. Airport/SCC Combinations Within the Top 26 Airports the Highest Activity. ............................................................................................................ B-65 Table B-20. Comparison to Confirm All Aircraft Were Included in AEDT Run .......... B-72 Table B-21. Comparison of Controlled and Uncontrolled 2020 Emissions ................. B-79 ii 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this study is to develop a set of average summer weekday (tons per day) emission inventories (EI) for Texas airport activities based on a 2017 base year for the 2020 attainment year. The inventories include all counties in Texas and provide both controlled and uncontrolled ozone precursor emissions datasets. Eastern Research Group (ERG) developed emissions inventories for criteria and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The inventory will be used to support the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and other airport-related inquiries. The emissions associated with airport activities are attributed to the following sources with associated source classification codes (SCC): Commercial aviation (SCC: 2275020000) Air taxis Piston driven (SCC: 2275060011) Turbine driven (SCC: 2275060012) General aviation Piston driven (SCC: 2275050011) Turbine driven (SCC: 2275050012) Military (SCC: 2275001000) Auxiliary Power Units (SCC: 2275070000) Ground Support Equipment Compressed natural gas (CNG)-fueled (SCC: 2268008005) Diesel-fueled (SCC: 2270008005) Gasoline-fueled (SCC: 2265008005) Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)-fueled (SCC: 2267008005). To estimate emissions from these sources, ERG projected the base year emissions inventory obtained for Work Order 582-18-82508-19 for calendar year 2017 which included controlled and uncontrolled emissions. The 2020 emissions were projected based on growth factors from the FAA’s 2017 TAF data1. In 2017, general aviation aircraft outfitted with piston engines account for 50% of the total aircraft activities. Commercial aircraft, General aviation aircraft outfitted with jet engines, military aircraft, air taxi aircraft outfitted with jet engines, and air taxi aircraft outfitted with piston engines account for 20%, 19%, 7%, 3%, and 1% of the total aircraft activities, respectively. Harris County and Tarrant County had the highest aircraft activity, accounting for 13.4% and 12.8% respectively of all Texas activity. 1-1 2.0 Emission Projection Procedures The 2017 base year controlled and uncontrolled inventories were projected to 2020 based on growth factors from the FAA’s 2017 TAF data1. The TAF data included aircraft operations data by airport and general aircraft type (AT, GA, MIL, AC). A takeoff and a landing are two separate operations, and the two operations combined equal an LTO cycle. Therefore, the operations data were converted into LTO data by dividing by 2. Growth factors were calculated by dividing the projected 2020 year LTO data by the 2017 base year LTO data. This provided growth factors by airport and generic aircraft type. Where the airport/generic aircraft type data did not link up to the base year inventory, generic aircraft type growth factors were developed. These factors are listed in Appendix A. Quality assurance checks implemented for this project are summarized in Appendix B. These factors were then applied to the 2017 controlled and uncontrolled base year inventories to project the controlled and uncontrolled inventories for 2020. For more detailed information on the development of the 2017 base year inventories, please see the 2017 Texas Statewide Aircraft Emissions Inventory. 2-1 3.0 Summary of Texas Airport Emissions The results of implementing the emissions projection procedures for the year 2020 are presented in Table 3-1 through Table 3-5. Table 3-1. Controlled and Uncontrolled Daily Criteria Emissions (Tons Per Day) Controlled Uncontrolled Pollutant Emissions Emissions CO 109.05 109.42 NOX 43.81 44.15 PM10-PRI 2.12 2.17 PM25-PRI 1.85 1.90 SO2 4.53 4.58 VOC 11.35 11.38 Table 3-2. Controlled Daily Criteria Emissions by Type (Tons Per Day) Type CO NOX PM10-PRI PM25-PRI SO2 VOC Air Taxi, Piston 1.47 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 Air Taxi, Turbine 2.12 0.91 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.41 APU 0.64 0.52 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 Commercial 34.30 31.24 0.22 0.22 3.24 4.35 General Aviation, Piston 39.71 0.21 0.76 0.53 0.03 0.50 General Aviation, Turbine 12.26 0.47 0.28 0.28 0.11 1.09 GSE 7.39 0.86 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.26 Military 11.16 9.59 0.60 0.58 0.91 4.67 Total 109.05 43.81 2.12 1.85 4.53 11.35 Table 3-3. Uncontrolled Daily Criteria Emissions by Type (Tons Per Day) Type CO NOX PM10-PRI PM25-PRI SO2 VOC Air Taxi, Piston 1.47 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 Air Taxi, Turbine 2.12 0.91 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.41 APU 1.00 0.86 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.08 Commercial 34.30
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “I Have the Fokker in Sight!”
    “I have the Fokker in sight!” After some delays caused by tropical cyclone “Gita” the first of our two Fokker F27 Friendship aircraft arrived from New Zealand on Monday 27 February. Now registered VH-EWH, the Friendship departed Auckland on Sunday 26 February, stopping to refuel at Norfolk Island before proceeding to Coolangatta to clear customs. The intention was to proceed to Wollongong that same day, but bad weather in the Illawarra dictated an overnight stay at Coolangatta. The second aircraft will be ferried sometime in the next few months. In Australian service the Fokker F27 Friendship was operated from the late 1950’s by many of the domestic and regional airlines. Some of the Australian airlines which operated the type include Trans Australia Airlines, Ansett ANA, East West, Queensland Airlines, Bill Peach’s Aircruising Australia and Airlines of NSW. The type was also operated by the Department of Civil Aviation and CSIRO. The Fokker F27 was developed during the early 1950’s and was intended to compete with or replace piston engine aircraft such as the DC-3. It uses Rolls Royce Dart turboprop engines, is pressurised and, in typical configuration seats around 50 passengers. Our F27s were most recently in service with a company that provided services to New Zealand Post and our Kiwi readers would be well familiar with the sight and unique sounds of the F27s as they made their way around the mail runs. Convair CV-440 progress The return to flight project for our Convair CV-440 made significant progress this month with completion of the new engine installation.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Forecast Model for Global Air Traffic Emissions
    Forschungsbericht 2012-08 Development of a Forecast Model for Global Air Traffic Emissions Martin Schaefer Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt Institut für Antriebstechnik Köln 235 Seiten 137 Bilder 70 Tabellen 133 Literaturstellen Development of a Forecast Model for Global Air Traffic Emissions Dissertation zur Erlangung des Grades Doktor-Ingenieur der Fakultät für Maschinenbau der Ruhr-Universität Bochum von Martin Schaefer aus Nürnberg Bochum 2012 Dissertation eingereicht am: 07. März 2012 Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 29. Juni 2012 Erster Referent: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Reinhard Mönig (Ruhr-Universität Bochum) Zweiter Referent: Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Johannes Reichmuth (RWTH Aachen) PAGE I CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................. V LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................. XI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...............................................................XIV PREFACE.....................................................................................XIX 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................1 1.1 Objectives of this Study ..............................................................................................1 1.2 Abstract of Methodology .............................................................................................1 1.3 Summary of Results ...................................................................................................4 1.3.1 Overview
    [Show full text]
  • Dressed to Impress South Wales Charter Operation Adds Bespoke Service to Match the King Air’S Impressive Ramp Appeal
    A MAGAZINE FOR THE OWNER/PILOT OF KING AIR AIRCRAFT JULY 2020 • VOLUME 14, NUMBER 7 • $6.50 Dressed to Impress South Wales charter operation adds bespoke service to match the King Air’s impressive ramp appeal King July 2020 VolumeAir 14 / Number 7 A MAGAZINE FOR THE OWNER/PILOT OF KING AIR AIRCRAFT 2 Contents EDITOR Kim Blonigen EDITORIAL OFFICE 2779 Aero Park Dr., Traverse City MI 49686 2 Phone: (316) 652-9495 Ramped Up – King Air 200 E-mail: [email protected] series’ ramp appeal impresses PUBLISHERS Dave Moore charter passengers Village Publications by MeLinda Schnyder GRAPHIC DESIGN Rachel Wood PRODUCTION MANAGER Mike Revard 12 Ask The Expert – Treat Your PUBLICATIONS DIRECTOR Jason Smith King Air Kindly ADVERTISING DIRECTOR by Tom Clements 20 John Shoemaker King Air Magazine 2779 Aero Park Drive 28 Traverse City, MI 49686 Phone: 1-800-773-7798 Fax: (231) 946-9588 E-mail: [email protected] ADVERTISING ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR AND REPRINT SALES Betsy Beaudoin Phone: 1-800-773-7798 E-mail: [email protected] ADVERTISING ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT Shannon Martin 28 Phone: 1-800-773-7798 Value Added Email: [email protected] 12 SUBSCRIBER SERVICES Rhonda Kelly, Mgr. Kelly Adamson 30 Jessica Meek Technically... Jamie Wilson 20 P.O. Box 1810 In History – Beechcraft – Traverse City, MI 49685 1-800-447-7367 Diversify or Die by Edward H. Philips 32 ONLINE ADDRESS www.kingairmagazine.com Advertiser Index SUBSCRIPTIONS King Air is distributed at no charge to all registered owners of King Air aircraft. The mailing list is updated bi-monthly. All others may sub scribe by writing to: King Air, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • FOKKER F27 FRIENDSHIP PERFORMANCE PROFILE, ENGINE MANAGEMENT and FLYING TIPS CHART Chart Produced by the Vapor Trail
    FOKKER F27 FRIENDSHIP PERFORMANCE PROFILE, ENGINE MANAGEMENT AND FLYING TIPS CHART Chart produced by the Vapor Trail FL250 Maximum Cruise Level Ceiling: FL250 due to limitations of pressurization system. Max engine operational altitude 35,000ft Cruise Speeds: Manufacturer’s Vno: 225knots Cruise: Airline Vno: 200 knots FL 200 for best economy / airframe pressure Manoeuvring Speed: 169 knots 13,800 rpm Speed in Turbulence: 179 - 163knots (high - TGT 500°C + OAT/2 low aircraft weight). IAS 179 - 169 knots (GS 245 - 232 knots) Transition: If 200 knots is reached use fuel trimmers to Vno = never exceed speed. Climb to 200ft above cruise altitude, level out, then slowly descend to cruise thottle back to recommended airspeeds. FL200 450hPa altitude allowing speed to increase to cruise during descent. Upper Limit of Normal Cruise Altitudes Descent: Fully decrease the fuel trimmers then decrease the throttle to: 12,000 RPM after 17,500ft 11,00RPM after 15,000ft Cruise: to reach 180knots and If strong headwinds are encountered 1000ftpm. choose a lower cruise altitude towards FL140 600hPa FL140 Lower Limit of Normal Cruise Altitudes Taxi between 9,800 Holding: and10,400 RPM At 130 knots. Climb: 13,800 RPM Take O: 140 knots Check V speeds, fuel TGT 520°C trimmers, Flap 16°. Approach: Apply full power. Below 170 knots lower gear as ILS Approach: Circuit: Hold brakes and spool speedbrake. Below 144 knots select Gear down, Flaps 26°, 110 knots. Fly at 1000ft AGL engines up. Flap 16°. Reduce power to 100 psi Until 400ft. Release brakes when torque. During turn onto approach at stable.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Transport
    The History of Air Transport KOSTAS IATROU Dedicated to my wife Evgenia and my sons George and Yianni Copyright © 2020: Kostas Iatrou First Edition: July 2020 Published by: Hermes – Air Transport Organisation Graphic Design – Layout: Sophia Darviris Material (either in whole or in part) from this publication may not be published, photocopied, rewritten, transferred through any electronical or other means, without prior permission by the publisher. Preface ommercial aviation recently celebrated its first centennial. Over the more than 100 years since the first Ctake off, aviation has witnessed challenges and changes that have made it a critical component of mod- ern societies. Most importantly, air transport brings humans closer together, promoting peace and harmo- ny through connectivity and social exchange. A key role for Hermes Air Transport Organisation is to contribute to the development, progress and promo- tion of air transport at the global level. This would not be possible without knowing the history and evolu- tion of the industry. Once a luxury service, affordable to only a few, aviation has evolved to become accessible to billions of peo- ple. But how did this evolution occur? This book provides an updated timeline of the key moments of air transport. It is based on the first aviation history book Hermes published in 2014 in partnership with ICAO, ACI, CANSO & IATA. I would like to express my appreciation to Professor Martin Dresner, Chair of the Hermes Report Committee, for his important role in editing the contents of the book. I would also like to thank Hermes members and partners who have helped to make Hermes a key organisa- tion in the air transport field.
    [Show full text]
  • Flight Safety Digest April 1991
    Use of Flight Data Recorders To Prevent Accidents in the U.S.S.R. Analysis of flight recorder information has proven a valuable tool both for investigating accidents and improving the level of flight safety since 1965. by Dr. V. D. Kofman, Deputy Director Scientific Research Laboratory State Supervisory Commission for Flight Safety of the Council of Ministers of the U.S.S.R. (Gosavianadzor) Civil aviation flight safety in the U.S.S.R. is for objective control of technical flight charac- one of the most important challenges that con- teristics of the aircraft and the recording of fronts designers, manufacturers and operators acoustic information aboard civil aircraft in of aviation equipment. Measures directed to- the U.S.S.R. began approximately 25 years ago. ward safety improvements include continu- The first recording devices were primitive ous improvement in the construction of air- emergency data recorders with a limited amount craft and equipment, improvement of opera- of recorded information. At present, the U.S.S.R. tional parameters of critical equipment com- uses modern modular systems for recording ponents in case of emergencies, and improve- and storing information with unlimited possi- ment of professional training of flight crews. bilities for further expansion. They satisfy the airworthiness standards in this country as well The recording and analysis of objective infor- as abroad. mation about the “airplane/flight crew/envi- ronment” system are important to the solu- Since 1965, 12-channel flight data recorders of tion of these problems. At present, flight pa- the MSRP-12 type and their modifications have rameters and crew member conversations are been installed in civil aircraft of the U.S.S.R recorded, along with the corresponding pa- for the storage of flight accident information.
    [Show full text]
  • THE INCOMPLETE GUIDE to AIRFOIL USAGE David Lednicer
    THE INCOMPLETE GUIDE TO AIRFOIL USAGE David Lednicer Analytical Methods, Inc. 2133 152nd Ave NE Redmond, WA 98052 [email protected] Conventional Aircraft: Wing Root Airfoil Wing Tip Airfoil 3Xtrim 3X47 Ultra TsAGI R-3 (15.5%) TsAGI R-3 (15.5%) 3Xtrim 3X55 Trener TsAGI R-3 (15.5%) TsAGI R-3 (15.5%) AA 65-2 Canario Clark Y Clark Y AAA Vision NACA 63A415 NACA 63A415 AAI AA-2 Mamba NACA 4412 NACA 4412 AAI RQ-2 Pioneer NACA 4415 NACA 4415 AAI Shadow 200 NACA 4415 NACA 4415 AAI Shadow 400 NACA 4415 ? NACA 4415 ? AAMSA Quail Commander Clark Y Clark Y AAMSA Sparrow Commander Clark Y Clark Y Abaris Golden Arrow NACA 65-215 NACA 65-215 ABC Robin RAF-34 RAF-34 Abe Midget V Goettingen 387 Goettingen 387 Abe Mizet II Goettingen 387 Goettingen 387 Abrams Explorer NACA 23018 NACA 23009 Ace Baby Ace Clark Y mod Clark Y mod Ackland Legend Viken GTO Viken GTO Adam Aircraft A500 NASA LS(1)-0417 NASA LS(1)-0417 Adam Aircraft A700 NASA LS(1)-0417 NASA LS(1)-0417 Addyman S.T.G. Goettingen 436 Goettingen 436 AER Pegaso M 100S NACA 63-618 NACA 63-615 mod AerItalia G222 (C-27) NACA 64A315.2 ? NACA 64A315.2 ? AerItalia/AerMacchi/Embraer AMX ? 12% ? 12% AerMacchi AM-3 NACA 23016 NACA 4412 AerMacchi MB.308 NACA 230?? NACA 230?? AerMacchi MB.314 NACA 230?? NACA 230?? AerMacchi MB.320 NACA 230?? NACA 230?? AerMacchi MB.326 NACA 64A114 NACA 64A212 AerMacchi MB.336 NACA 64A114 NACA 64A212 AerMacchi MB.339 NACA 64A114 NACA 64A212 AerMacchi MC.200 Saetta NACA 23018 NACA 23009 AerMacchi MC.201 NACA 23018 NACA 23009 AerMacchi MC.202 Folgore NACA 23018 NACA 23009 AerMacchi
    [Show full text]
  • Especificación A-SSIM A-SSIM Specification
    MINISTERIO DE FOMENTO Especificación A-SSIM A-SSIM Specification INDICE / INDEX Reglas generales / General rules 2 Especificación de los mensajes / Message specification 2 A-Cabecera / Heading 3 SMI (Standard Message Identifier) 3 Línea de referencia del creador / Creator reference line 3 Temporada IATA / Applicable IATA season 3 Fecha del mensage / Date of message 4 Aeropuerto Base / Clearance-Advice Airport 4 Referencia opcional del mensaje entrante / Optional Incoming Message Reference 4 B-Líneas de operación / Schedule Information Data Lines 4 Código de acción / Action code 5 Identificador del vuelo/ Flight information 5 Fecha, periodo de operación y frecuencia/ Period, Frecuency Information 6 Información de equipamiento / Equipment Information 6 Información de ruta y programación / Routing and tiem information 7 Tipo de servicio / Service type 8 C-Líneas de información adicional / Additional schedule information lines 8 D- Pié del mensaje / Footer 10 Ejemplos de mensajes A-SSIM / A-SSIM examples Nuevos vuelos chárter / New non-scheduled (charter) flights 11 Sustitución de aeronave / Aircraft replacement 11 Modificación de las datos de un vuelo / Change in the characterictics of one flight 12 Código compartido / Code sharing 13 Vuelo de carga con mercnacías peligrosas / Cargo flight with dagerous goods 14 Anexo – Códigos IATA (SSIM Apéndice A) de aeronaves frecuentes / IATA Codes (SSIM Appendix) of common aircraft 15 Pº DE LA CASTELLANA 67 28071 MADRID Especificación A-SSIM / A-SSIM Specification Esta especificación está basada en el This specification is based upon Standard Standard Schedules Information Schedules Information Manual (SSIM) Manual (SSIM) de IATA, en particular es by IATA, in particular it is an adaptation of una adaptación del procedimiento SCR SCR (Slot Clearance Request/Reply) (Slot Clearance Request/Reply) de procedure about airport coordination coordinación de horarios aeroportuarios.
    [Show full text]
  • F.27-200MAR Maritime - 1983, 3X
    F.27-200MAR Maritime - 1983, 3x Philippines Type: Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) Min Speed: 170 kt Max Speed: 330 kt Commissioned: 1983 Length: 23.1 m Wingspan: 29.0 m Height: 8.7 m Crew: 8 Empty Weight: 11204 kg Max Weight: 19773 kg Max Payload: 0 kg Propulsion: 2x Dart RDa.7 Mk.532-7L Sensors / EW: - ELT-263 - ESM, RWR, Radar Warning Receiver, Max range: 222.2 km - CA/APS-504(V)2 - Radar, Radar, Surface Search, Long-Range, Max range: 370.4 km OVERVIEW: The Fokker F27 Friendship is a turboprop airliner designed and built by the defunct Dutch aircraft manufacturer Fokker. DETAILS: VARIANTS: F27-100 - was the first production model; 44 passengers || F27-200 - uses the Dart Mk 532 engine || F27-300 Combiplane - Civil passenger/cargo aircraft || F27-300M Troopship - Military transport version for Royal Netherlands Air Force || F27-400 - "Combi" passenger/cargo aircraft, with two Rolls-Royce Dart 7 turboprop engines and large cargo door || F27-400M - Military version for US Army with designation C-31A Troopship, still in use in 2011 || F27-500 - The -500, had a 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in) longer fuselage, a return to the Dart Mk 528 engine, and accommodation for up to 52 passengers || F27-500M - Military version || F27-500F - A version of the -500 for Australia with smaller front and rear doors || F27-600 - Quick change cargo/passenger version of -200 with large cargo door || F27-700 - A F27-100 with a large cargo door || F27 200-MAR - Unarmed maritime reconnaissance version || F27 Maritime Enforcer - Armed maritime reconnaissance version || F-27 - license-built version manufactured by Fairchild Hiller in the United States || FH-227 - stretched version of the F-27, independently developed and manufactured by Fairchild Hiller in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • 33Rd RESOLUTIONS
    I Mina Trentai Tres Na Liheslaturan Guåhan Resolutions Log Sheet Committee / PUBLIC DATE Date of Date Ofc HEARING COMMITTEE Resolution No. Sponsor Title Date Intro Presentation Referred Referred DATE REPORT FILED Date Adopted Michael F.Q. San Nicolas Relative to recognizing and commending Captain 12/18/2015 12/21/2015 12/18/2015 Michael Wendt for his nearly thirty‐five (35) years of 2:27 p.m. from 7:00p.m service and accomplishments as a pilot with and 9:30 p.m. Continental Airlines, now operating as United Airlines; 251‐33 and to further extending a warm and sincere Un (COR) Dångkolo Na Si Yu′os Ma′åse′ to Captain Wendt for his twenty‐six (26) years of invaluable contributions and dedication as a pilot and mentor in the airline and aviation industries of Guam and throughout the Micronesian region. Intro/Ref/History 12/22/201511:41 AM l 1}//NA 'TRENTAI TRES NA LIHESLATURAN GUAHAN 2015 (FIRST) Regular Session Resolution No. 251-33 (COR) Introduced by: l'v1ichael F.Q. San Nicolas R. J. Respicio T. C. Ada V. Anthony Ada FRANK B. AGUON, JR. Frank F. Blas, Jr. B. J.F. Cruz James V. Espaldon Brant T. McCreadie Tommy Morrison T. R. Muna Barnes Dennis G. Rodriguez, Jr. Mary Camacho Torres N. B. Underwood, Ph.D. Judith T. Won Pat, Ed.D. Relative to recognizing and commending Captain Michael Wendt for his nearly thirty-five (35) years of service and accomplishments as a pilot with Continental Airlines, now operating as United Airlines; and to further extending a warm and sincere Un Dlingko/o Na Si Yu'os Ma'iise' to Captain Wendt for his twenty-six (26) years of invaluable contributions and dedication as a pilot and mentor in the airline and aviation industries of Guam and throughout the Micronesian region.
    [Show full text]
  • Warsaw Chopin Airport Quota System Table
    WARSAW CHOPIN AIRPORT QUOTA SYSTEM TABLE No Aircraft type IATA Arrival Departure Code QC points QC points 1. Fokker 100 100 0,25 0,5 2. Hawker Siddeley HS125 H25 2 8 3. BAe 146-100 141 0,5 0,5 4. BAe 146-200 142 0,25 0,25 5. BAe 146-300 143 0,5 0,5 6. BAe 146 146 0,5 0,5 7. BAe 146 Freighter 14F 0,5 0,5 8. BAe 146 Freighter 14X 0,25 0,25 9. BAe 146 Freighter 14Y 0,25 0,25 10. BAe 146 Freighter 14Z 0,25 0,25 11. Airbus A310 310 1 2 12. Airbus A310-200 312 1 2 13. Airbus A310-300 313 1 2 14. Airbus A318 318 0,25 0,25 15. Airbus A319 319 0,25 0,5 16. Airbus A310-200F 31X 1 2 17. Airbus A310-300F 31Y 1 2 18. Airbus A320-100/200 320 0,5 1 19. Airbus A321-100/200 321 0,5 2 20. Airbus A320 (winglets) 32A 0,5 1 21. Airbus A319/A320/A321 32S 0,5 2 22. Airbus A330 330 0,5 2 23. Airbus A330-200 332 0,5 2 24. Airbus A330-300 333 0,5 2 25. Airbus A340 340 1 2 26. Airbus A340-200 342 0,5 2 27. Airbus A340-300 343 0,5 2 28. Airbus A340-500 345 1 2 29. Airbus A340-600 346 1 2 30. Airbus A380 380 0,5 2 31. Airbus A380-800 388 0,5 2 32.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated List of Noisy Aircraft Types
    List of Noisy Aircraft Types The following list addresses the requirement of Proposed Town Code §75- 38 A.(4)(a) for the Airport Director to maintain on the Town website a current list of “noisy aircraft” defined to be “any airplane or rotorcraft for which there is a published Effective Perceived Noise in Decibels (EPNdB) approach (AP) level of 91.0 or greater.” 1 The list is presented in terms of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aircraft type codes and an accompanying commonplace aircraft type description. Commonplace Aircraft Description ICAO Aircraft Note: Published data for shaded aircraft types include ranges of noise levels that extend across the 91.0 EPNdB threshold. These ranges result from multiple published noise levels for varying aircraft configurations (e.g., Type differing powerplants, maximum operating weights, etc.). For these types, aircraft owners must provide the Code Airport Director with noise level information from the individual aircraft’s flight manual, if the owner believes the aircraft in question should not be classified as noisy. A109 Agusta A-109 AW119 Agusta AW119 MKII A124 Antonov An-124 A139 Agusta AB-139 A189 AgustaWestland AW189 A306 Airbus A300B4-600/A300C4-600 A30B Airbus A300B2/A300B4-100/A300B4-200 A310 Airbus A310-200/A310-300 A318 Airbus A318-100 A319 Airbus A319-100 A320 Airbus A320-100/A320-200/A320-200neo A321 Airbus A321-100/A321-200/A321-200neo A332 Airbus A330-200 A333 Airbus A330-300 A342 Airbus A340-200 A343 Airbus A340-300 A345 Airbus A340-500 A346 Airbus A340-600 A359 Airbus A350-900 A388 Airbus A380-800 A3ST Airbus A300-600ST Beluga A400 Airbus A400M A748 BAe HS748 AN26 Antonov An-26 AN72 Antonov An-72, An-74 Updated September 30, 2015 List of Noisy Aircraft Types Page 2 Commonplace Aircraft Description ICAO Aircraft Note: Published data for shaded aircraft types include ranges of noise levels that extend across the 91.0 EPNdB threshold.
    [Show full text]