¶ … Aircraft Noise Abatement Act of 1968 states, how it is used and the impact it has had on the industry and on those affected. A conclusion is given at the end. A list of works cited is also given.
The Congress has, through legislation, tried to develop a uniform countrywide noise abatement plan that was to be implemented and monitored under one agency - the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Unfortunately, their efforts were not successful. This is because when the FAA tried to limit federal government liability it failed to implement the function that was envisaged in the federal government legislation (Werlich and Krinsky, 1981). Additionally, there have been two factors that must be considered. The first of these is the recent trend in which law courts have made decisions holding airport proprietors liable for the property damages and personal injury caused by aircraft noise. The second is the 'retreat' by congress from its initial policy that advocated for financial aid to noise impacted airports. Thus there appears to be an undermining of the movement towards a uniform countrywide aviation noise abatement plan.
Unfavorable court decisions, abdication from leadership of the aviation industry by the FAA, and the cutting down of federal financial aid have left the proprietors of airports to cater for themselves. Driven by the increase in noise lawsuits, many local airport owners have, in a legitimate effort to reduce their liability exposure, adopted noise abatement policies and regulations that are anchored on local and/or parochial instead of national interests (Werlich and Krinsky, 1981). These local regulations, have also in turn, resulted in further hindrances towards the effort to form a uniform countrywide aviation noise abatement plan.
Aircraft Noise Abatement Act of 1968
The Aircraft Noise Abatement Act of 1968 mandates the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop, monitor, or enforce safe standards for aircraft generated noise. In coming up with these noise...
Federal Government noise control regulations define aircraft noise based on three categories: Stage 1, Stage 2, and Stage 3 (Garcia). Stage 1 aircraft are the loudest; Stage 2 aircraft are intermediate; and Stage 3 aircraft make the least amount of noise. However, all Stage 1 aircraft were phased out of commercial use; in the same context, all Stage 2 aircraft that weighed over 75,000 pounds were phased out by the 31st of December 1999, as required by the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. Similarly, all Stage 3 aircraft that are still in operation must meet set standards for sidelines, runway takeoffs, and landings, ranging from 89 to 106 dB (a) based on the number of engines and the weight of the aircraft. Another piece of legislation, the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979, gives the Federal Aviation authority the power to award grants under the Airport Improvement Program for the purposes of noise mitigation (Garcia). Airport proprietors applying for such grants are required to create noise exposure maps and noise reduction programs that restrict the noise levels in affected areas on the map to between 65 and 75 dB (a). According to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, the number of people exposed to airport noise levels that were higher than 65 dB (a) decreased from 7 million to less than half a million from 1975 to 2000 as a result of the phasing out of Stage 2 aircraft. In the Act, the administrator of the FAA has been authorized to prescribe the following in if he or she deems it necessary to relive or protect the public health from aircraft noise:
I. To prescribe standards to be used to assess aircraft noise and sonic boom; and II. To prescribe regulations to be used to control and mitigate aircraft noise and sonic boom.
(B) The administrator shall allow for the participation of a representative of the EPA on such advisory committees that advise the administrator on issues related to the environmental impacts of aircraft noise.
(2) The administrator of the FAA may set or prescribe standards, policies and regulations under this subsection only after consultations with the administrator of the EPA. These standards and regulations must be applied when issuing, modifying,…
S. However, Russia continues to treat noise exposure as a minor problem. American physicians have associated some seemingly unrelated conditions to sound exposure. Long-term exposure to transportation noise has been associated with increased cardiovascular risk (Babisch, 2006). Hearing loss can occur at even low levels of sound that occur for an extended time (Sisto et al., 2007; Reuter et al., 2007; Dobie, 2007). Noise related hearing loss can occur in
("Air France KLM corporate social responsibility statement," n. d.) After their agreement in the Global compact of the UN and depending upon their 'vision of long standing business management', 'AIR France KLM' encourages setting 'corporate social responsibility' norms 'in the airline industry'. They perform this by exercising 'a set of' properly indicated assurances to make certain that viable development continue with 'quality of environment' as well as 'social' development. 'AIR
At the time, the industry sought to examine both oil pollution in general and ocean dumping as well as land-based sources of ocean pollution. According to Wang, "More significant was the rapid technological development in the design of large-sized oil tankers which required constant rule changes. By 1973 it was evident that the 1954 convention provisions were inadequate or outdated, and by then the likelihood of the 1954 convention
20th century has been one of remarkable technological advancements and of increased need to further improve human existence and the speed through which man runs about its everyday life. These ideas alone have demonstrated an immense capacity of man to research and invent new ideas, mechanisms, and to elaborate on the most important technological evolutions to set these mechanisms in motion. However, these evolutions have not been without flaws
Aviation & Human Factor Aviation "The history of the development and progress of Human Factors in aviation, highlighting areas of significant change" Development in Aviation field is an essential element from defense prospective of any country. Advancement in assembly of an aircraft is always a result of some human error in handling. Error handling while pilot is operating an aircraft is an unrecoverable action in some cases. Human handling for safety of aircraft,
Furthermore, subjective feelings of fatigue can be inconsistent with performance (Holding, 1983), sometimes exhibiting a greater sensitivity to sleep loss than the performance measures (Haslam, 1981). While different studies have produced variable results about the effects of fatigue inducing elements in flight performance and aviation errors, yet there is on the whole general agreement among researchers that fatigue is negative factor in aviation, particularly when it comes to military operations.