The picture below shows a potential solution that moves PADRZ to the southern tip of the Mission Beach peninsula. The proposed solution is designated Alt 1 C. The end of the runway is shown with a yellow pin at the bottom right corner of the picture. The blue line is the proposed solution A1 C. The objective of this solution, actually all of the solutions, is to delay the turn to the right, although for this solution, the end point is Alt 1 INT that is not as far out is is south of WNFLD. The blue line goes from the end of the runway to a flyover waypoint A1 FCO which is almost 1.2 miles from the end of the runway and then on to A1 INT.

The yellow line is a boundary for PADRZ, that is departures to be compliant with PADRZ need to stay north of the yellow line. The blue and yellow lines lie upon one another out to A1 FCO, at which point they diverge a maximum of 0.2 miles at the A1 INT intercept. It is believed that any shift in the 2026 noise contour will be minimal for this alternative.

There are a couple of assumptions in the 2026 contour AEDT analysis that need to be checked that they were done correctly:

  1. Most important, there need to be two different headings, one representing the 290 and the other PADRZ. If this was not done, then the analyses are flawed, such that the calculation of shift south is too large,

  2. The PADRZ needs to be adjusted so that it is as close as possible to the yellow line; if it is not, then it will overestimate the shift south.

Note that the blue line crosses Mission Beach at the southern tip. While noise levels in Mission Beach would still be significant, there would be a big difference if the PADRZ is moved south.

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All