For years, aircraft and airport noise have been the core issue of discussion when it comes to environmental concerns. Even though the aviation industry delivers one of the most valuable social and economic benefits in the world, the noise produced during operations negatively affects public perception because of its adverse effects. Since this noise affects a significant part of a nation’s population, it is imperative for private, local, and federal authorities to develop measures that would mitigate the effects of sound pollution in airports. The implementation of noise abatement procedures is essential because it reduces aircraft noise along the departure path and in the communities living near an airport. Noise disturbance poses danger to neighboring societies because it interferes with communication, disrupts learning activities, interrupts sleep, and affects physiological and psychological cognitive abilities. In most contexts, this noise becomes annoying in such a way that it disrupts the normal routine of daily activities. Individuals living near airports usually find it hard to concentrate because they do not live peaceful lives. Consequently, noise abatement procedures were designed to reduce the impact of aircraft noise on the community. This includes the designation of noise abatement areas, reduction of flights over residential areas, and proper procedures for the use of runways and flight paths. According to Clarke (2000) , noise abatement procedures can be defined as the measures that are taken to reduce and protect individuals from exposure of any unacceptable sounds and vibrations. In an attempt to reduce the effects of this form of environmental pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency instituted noise abatement bodies that are tasked with the responsibility of investigating the sources of airport noise and determining the psychological and physiological effects on humans ( Girvin, 2009 ). These agencies also examine the impact on public welfare and wildlife from surrounding communities. Reducing noise in airports maintains the industry’s license and ability to operate effectively and grow without any setbacks. The aviation industry, therefore, needs to address the noise issues raised by surrounding communities because the latter influence most of the environmental and planning decisions that are made by federal and local governments. The approaches for managing airport noise must be reviewed if a viable solution to the problem is to be found ( Visser, 2005 ). There are a number of approaches that can be implemented to reduce the impact of this form of sound pollution. These include the reduction of noise at the source, implementing operational restrictions, noise-reducing operational procedures, and land use planning. Stakeholders can also implement an additional approach of involving the community because they are an important part of the operations within an airport ( Black et al., 2007 ). According to Prats, Puig & Quevedo (2011) , the development and implementation of two-segment landing approach paths for aircraft by the FAA is a significant approach when it comes to monitoring flight operations. This entails the use of steeper gliding slopes at the early stages of the approach, which should then be followed by the stabilization of aircraft on the normal 3-gliding slope for final touchdowns ( Espey & Lopez, 2000 ). A steeper approach implies that an aircraft will be higher from the ground and will therefore require less engine power. This will in the turn reduce the amount of noise produced at distances that are close to surrounding communities. The use of minimum certified flaps as proposed by the EPA will abate airplane noise as a viable regulatory action ( Nelson, 2004 ). This approach reduces aerodynamic drag and reduces an aircraft’s engine thrust. Consequently, the reduced thrust will not only save fuel but also reduce the source noise of an aircraft over the approach phase. It serves as a stabilized measure that can be implemented as a part of noise abatement procedures in airports. The successful management of aircraft noise is therefore a critical issue and a key context of sustainability that must be achieved for the growth of the aviation industry. It is important for airports to implement operational technologies and procedures with the consent of stakeholders as a measure of reducing the effects of noise on the community ( Nijland et al., 2003 ). These techniques include continuous descent operations, tailored arrivals, and managing thrust and departure path alternation. Reduced landing fees for quitter aircraft will attract higher numbers of more conservative aircraft, which will in turn reduce the level of noise in the facility. In addition to this, airports can implement quotas to limit by minimizing the amount of noise that is produced at night. Land use planning serves as a very efficient method of minimizing the impact of aircraft noise. Erkelens (2000) notes that this procedure ensures that land is not developed for uses that are incompatible with current or likely future aircraft noise impacts. Noise metrics can be implemented in the decision-making process as a means of developing sound procedures for conservative operations. Balancing aviation sustainability can only be achieved if airports engage with local communities through complaints management response systems ( Cohen et al., 1981 ). This guides the industry to adopt operational principles and recommended activities for better interactions in terms of effective communication and transparency.
References
Black, D. A., Black, J. A., Issarayangyun, T., & Samuels, S. E. (2007). Aircraft noise exposure and resident's stress and hypertension: A public health perspective for airport environmental management. Journal of Air Transport Management , 13 (5), 264-276.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Clarke, J. P. B. (2000). Systems analysis of noise abatement procedures enabled by advanced flight guidance technology. Journal of aircraft , 37 (2), 266-273.
Cohen, S., Krantz, D. S., Evans, G. W., Stokols, D., & Kelly, S. (1981). Aircraft noise and children: Longitudinal and cross-sectional evidence on adaptation to noise and the effectiveness of noise abatement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 40 (2), 331.
Erkelens, L. J. (2000, August). Research into new noise abatement procedures for the 21st century. In Proc. of the AIAA GNC Conference .
Espey, M., & Lopez, H. (2000). The impact of airport noise and proximity on residential property values. Growth and Change , 31 (3), 408-419.
Girvin, R. (2009). Aircraft noise-abatement and mitigation strategies. Journal of Air Transport Management , 15 (1), 14-22.
Nelson, J. P. (2004). Meta-analysis of airport noise and hedonic property values. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP) , 38 (1), 1-27.
Nijland, H. A., Van Kempen, E. E. M. M., Van Wee, G. P., & Jabben, J. (2003). Costs and benefits of noise abatement measures. Transport policy , 10 (2), 131-140.
Prats, X., Puig, V., & Quevedo, J. (2011). A multi-objective optimization strategy for designing aircraft noise abatement procedures. Case study at Girona airport. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment , 16 (1), 31-41.
Visser, H. G. (2005). Generic and site-specific criteria in the optimization of noise abatement trajectories. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment , 10 (5), 405-419.
