I. Introduction
1. The Community started to legislate on noise from individual aircraft almost 20 years
ago. At each stage the legislative process has been composed of two interrelated steps:
firstly the prohibition of
the addition of non-compliant aircraft to the fleets of Community air carriers, followed
by the
obligation to gradually phase-out these non-compliant aircraft at Community airports.
This legislation
is considered to constitute a fair compromise between what it is acceptable for the air
transport
industry and the need for environmental protection.
2. Thus, initial action to reduce noise from aircraft was taken by the Community through
Council
Directive 80/Sl/EECI on aircraft noise, which prevented any further non-noise
certificated transport
aircraft from being added to the civil air registers of Member States and required the
removal of
such aircraft already on the registers by 31 December 1986. An exemption enabled a
small number
of these aircraft to continue flying until 31 December 1988. An amendment, Council
Directive
83/206/EEC2, has prevented foreign registered non-noise certificated aircraft landing in
the
Community since 1 January 1988, although some exemptions were granted until 31
December 1989.
Since that final cut-off date non-noise certificated transport aircraft have stopped to be
an
environmental nuisance in the Community.
3. On 4 December 19893 the Council adopted a non-addition
rule for civil subsonic jet aircraft that
do not meet the standards specified in Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on
International
Civil Aviation.
4. As a next step in its policy of reduction of aircraft noise at source the Council adopted
on 2
March 19924 a Directive which provides for the gradual phase-out between 1 April 1995
and 1 April
2002 of all Chapter 2 aircraft. Certain technical amendments to this Directive have
recently been
adopted by the Commission5.
5. That Community initiative has already resulted and will continue to result in an
improvement of
the noise climate around airports, due to resultant changes in fleet composition.
Currently about 85
% of the fleet of all Community air carriers is composed of Chapter 3 aircraft.
However, despite the benefits resulting from the disappearance of Chapter 2 aircraft at
Community
airports the growth in air transport has increased the frequency of exposure to aircraft
noise for
many people. In addition, there appears to be a growing sensitivity nowadays to any
increase in air
transport noise.
OJ n- L18, 24.01.1980, p. 26.
2 oJ n- L117, 04.05.1983, p. 1983.
3 OJ n- L363, 13.12.1989, p. 27.
4 OJ n- L76, 23.03.1992, p. 21.
5 COM(96)413 final, 04.09.1996.
V11 411775/96
MT/gs
11.11.1996
The large number of letters received by the Commission from individuals or associations
expressing
concern about aircraft noise and its impact on human health and quality of life is
evidence of the
dissatisfaction of people living around airports about existing noise abatement
measures.
On the other hand due consideration needs to be given to the legitimate interest of the
air transport
industry to have adequate airport capacity available for its operations. The increasing
number of
representations by air transport operators complaining about additional operational
restrictions on
environmental grounds at airports affirm the concern about the impact of such
restrictions on scarce
airport capacity.
6. With the view to ensuring an adequate level of protection against noise for the
population living
in the areas surrounding airports, while enabling the air transport industry to plan its
operations in
an environment of legal certainty, the following policy instruments are available
This Paper has been prepared by the Directorate-General for Transport in close
cooperation with
the Directorates-General for Industry, Environment and Research and
Development.
II. Future development
9. Although future growth rates for air transport vary depending on their source, time
horizon, geographical area and service characteristics as well as the underlying macro
economic assumptions,
the general trend seems to be that air transport will grow faster than any other sector of
transport
in the next 10 to 20 years. The predicted annual growth rates vary between 3.6% and 6%
for
passengers, 6.5% and 7.4% for cargo and between 3.2% and 6% for aircraft movements.
A summary
of the various forecasts figures in Annex 1.
10. This strong growth will put pressure on airport capacity and affect the noise
environment around
airports. In the context of the activities of the ICAO Committee on Aviation
Environmental
Protection (CAEP) case studies of a small sample European and American airports have
been
carried out with a view to assessing the noise climate around airports after the
completion of the
Chapter 2 phase-out, namely between 2003 and 2015. The outcome of these case studies
does not
allow a definitive conclusion concerning the general trend after 2003. Much will depend
on local
circumstances, such as the existence of capacity constraints at the airport, restrictions on
the growth
of aircraft movements, requirements concerning the fleet composition and the
implementation of
land-use control measures.
11. Despite this lack of precision on the future noise climate around airports, the
Commission
services note that, whenever public consultation on airport development plans takes
place, the
expected increase in aircraft noise is perceived by the local communities as the most
important
environmental issue associated with the extension of airport capacity and the ensuing
growth of air
transport activities.
12. The air transport sector should contribute to "sustainable mobility"' and
show that it is responsive
to concerns about quality of life as perceived by the population living around airports.
The
Commission services feel that the appropriate and most cost effective noise abatement
measures
should be taken at each level of responsibility: the aircraft manufacturing industry, the
air transport
industry, the local, regional and national authorities as well as the Community working
whenever
possible in the wider context of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) and
ICAO.
III. Future noise stringency
Technical feasibility
Short term
13. Existing Community legislation has had a significant impact on the overall noise of
aircraft fleets
through the elimination of older aircraft types. However, perceived nuisance from
aircraft is a
function not only of the noise emitted by individual aircraft but also the volume of air
traffic as well
as the time of day or night at which the noise occurs.
In the light of the predicted growth of air transport, the Commission services believe that
due
consideration should be given to progressively increasing the stringency of the permitted
noise
standards for aircraft newly added to the civil subsonic fleet of Community air carriers to
a level
which realistically represents the current noise performance attainable by the majority of
modern
aircraft.
To this end, both the Commission services and ECAC have been studying the feasibility
of new
non-addition rules. Initially the focus has been on the so-called "hush kitted"
aircraft. These aircraft
would have normally been retired to comply with Council Directive 92/ 14/EEC but have
been
modified acoustically to meet Chapter 3. They are marginal Chapter 3 aircraft and with
the phased
withdrawal of the Chapter 2 aircraft will be the noisiest types flying.
In terms of transport policy sustainable mobility can be defined as a policy
based on a global approach which aims at ensuring both the effective functioning of the
Community's transport systems
and the protection of the Environment.
Medium term
14. It is recognised that the short term measures could only be regarded as an
intermediate step
aimed essentially at avoiding any increase in the perceived noise nuisance from aircraft.
However,
the international nature of the aircraft industry means that global rules are, in general,
the best way
to ensure that distortions of competition are avoided. As a future step, therefore, the
Community
should work through ICAO towards further technically feasible and economically
reasonable increase
in the stringency levels of the noise certification standards.
15. When considering the next steps, it should also be borne in mind that the
Commission services
adopted a position on increased stringency for the CAEP negotiations prior to the
plenary meeting
in December 1995, namely:
. an increase in stringency of 3 EPNdB at the fly-over measurement point
. no change at the lateral measurement point
. an increase in stringency of 3 EPNdB at the approach measurement point.
In the light of the progress made in aircraft design over the 20 years since Chapter 3 was
adopted
this seemed feasible and economically reasonable. Accordingly due cons deration should
be given
to the most appropriate means of perusing these objectives.
Long term
Targets put forward by the Task Force on New Generation Aircraft and R&D
activities on noise
abatement.
16. The challenge is to respond to current and future public concerns related to aircraft
noise by
initiating appropriate R&D (research and technology development) activities related
to aircraft noise
abatement in the future.
In order to match the pressure both from the society for quieter or even
"whispering" aircraft and
international competition, the European aeronautics industry recently - in the framework
of the Task
Force on New Generation Aircraft established by the Commission in 1995 - identified a
present and
future need for R&D on the Environmentally Friendly Aircraft' covering also the
noise issue.
17. Considerable effort has already been devoted to techniques for minimising the
generation of
aircraft noise. For example, the introduction of the turbofan engine 20 years ago, and
subsequently
the high bypass turbofan with about 10 decibels lower noise level than their predecessor,
the pure
turbojet engine, was a major advance and enabled the ICAO Chapter 3 standard to be
implemented.
TEFA-Final Core Team Report presented to the Comrnission in December l99S.
18. Research funded by the Community in the field of jet aircraft exterior noise has until
now been
rather limited. Only one project, "FANPAC" (APAS-94), has been
undertaken with the aim of
developing technologies to reduce fan noise in high bypass ratio engines by optimising
acoustic liners.
This has been supplemented by national actions with the development of aeroacoustic
design
methods, feasibility studies of the development and application of active noise controllers
and
definition of directional measurement systems. It should also be noted that Europe has
world class
facilities of anechoic windtunnels operated by research establishments and developed
through the
last 15 years with the help of national funds.
However, the last 20 years of design optimisation have resulted in a further average
reduction of 4
decibels in certificated noise levels, with very little improvements in recent years, and it is
unlikely
that further reductions will occur unless a significant effort is initiated.
19. Thus, at present time a coordinated strategic approach at European level is essential
and major
efforts need to be devoted to techniques for further reduction of exterior aircraft noise
to overcome
today's technology barrier. Hence, the objective for R&D is to enable a
breakthroughs in noise
control strategy.
It is worth noting that the European effort is now lagging behind the effort initiated two
years ago
in the US with a yearly budget for the next 7 year period of 30 million dollars on noise
abatement
research specifically dedicated to subsonic jet aircraft.
In order to match this, the target is to obtain sufficient funding for European
Community R&D to
enable an improvement of 4 to 6 decibels in the short term (5-10 years) and possibly of 7
to 10
decibels in the longer term (10 to 15 years).
20. While fan and jet noise are the major sources of noise on today's high bypass ratio
turbofan
aircraft, turbine machinery noise and airframe noise need special attention as they will
increase on
the even higher (very and ultra high) bypass ratio engines and very high capacity aircraft
being
developed.
The reduction and control of noise at source requires improved areoacoustic codes to be
developed
and validated; as well as the analysis of noise generation by the propulsion system and
the airframe
itself, the latter being particular important for the emerging high or very large capacity
aircraft.
The validation of improved prediction codes must include state of the art measurements
on static
component rigs, in wind tunnels and in flight tests, if all the interrelated effects of engine
noise
sources and of the airframe are to be understood, for generating the necessary
technological
breakthrough.
As a complementary approach, assessment and investigation of the potential for noise
reduction
through use of specific flight procedures and active control technologies should be
pursued.
Operational noise measurement
21. Should it prove impossible to work within the ICAO framework the
Commission services together with ECAC could consider future rules based primarily on
operational rather than
certificated noise. A recent ECAC group summarised the problem thus;
Accordingly consideration could be given to making the margin of compliance for the
nonaddition
rule more stringent to ensure that Community air carriers can no longer add to their
fleet older,
hush-kitted aircraft which, although certificated to Chapter 3, only just meet Chapter 3
limits.
"It is clear that European aviation would benefit from a standard European
classification. Therefore,
the concept of noise classification needs to be supplemented by additional classification
limits ... on
the basis of the ranking of noise levels actually produced by aircraft operations in the
vicinity of
airports."
Such a scheme would necessitate an objective comparison of available noise certification
data and
noise monitoring results around European airports.
Accompanying measures
Noise abatement operational procedures
22. These methods of noise abatement complement progress in other areas of aircraft
noise
reduction, by actually operating the aircraft in the quietest way consistent with safety. In
general,
such methods appear to be cost-effective and intervene the least with both the interests
of the air
transport industry and the population living around airports. Operating procedures have
been
developed, and are still being continuously improved, to ensure that the safety of flight
operations
is maintained while minimizing exposure to noise on the ground.
23. The procedures are of two basic types:
. horizontal, through the establishment of noise preferential routes, that is routing the
aircraft away
from populated areas, or where that is not safe or practicable, rationing the impact of -
noise
between populated areas, either by concentration or dispersion.
The development of advanced flight management systems (FMS) in combination with
advanced Area
Navigation (RNAV), global navigation satellite system (GNSS), and datalink technologies
are all
helping to improve the accuracy of the implementation of horizontal noise abatement
procedures.
The Community is funding considerable research into the development of these systems
in Europe.
. vertical, that is using approach and climb-out procedures which either:
keep the aircraft high as long as possible before landing and as soon as possible after
take-off, so
that the noise source is further from the ground; and/or
o use thrust management techniques in co-ordination with aircraft configuration so as to
reduce the
volume of noise produced.
Until relatively recently, the emphasis on noise abatement through the development of
operational
procedures in the vertical dimension has been on the take-off phase of flight, since that
was broadly
the most intrusive in terms of the emission of noise and its perception on the ground.
Procedures
for thrust and configuration management are already highly developed, being of two
basic
objective-related types:
. the Distant Procedure (A), aimed at the abatement of noise in a distant
community
. the Close-in Procedure (B), aimed at the abatement of noise close to the airport.
More attention is now being given to noise during landing, and noise abatement
approach
procedures developed such as raising the glideslope intercept altitude. This procedure
has been
adopted at Heathrow, for instance, so that aircraft join the Instrument Landing System
(ILS)
glideslope at 3000 feet rather than 2500 feet, and being higher have a lesser noise impact
on the
ground.
24. In studying and applying the potential of navigational technologies to horizontal
procedural
measures, and researching the most effective and safe vertical measures appropriate to
changing
aircraft technology, the Commission services are of the opinion that due consideration
should be
given to the international dimension. Air transport is a global industry, and the
procedures, hardware
and techniques appropriate to defining and implementing noise abatement criteria at
European
airports must be compatible with world-wide standards and aircraft equipment.
25. That ICAO is the appropriate forum for this work, and that the Procedures for Air
Navigation
Services - Aircraft operations (PANS-OPSl) is the authoritative expression of
internationally
acceptable procedures, is confirmed by the noise abatement procedures incorporated in
the proposed
ECAC Joint Aviation Requirements - Commercial Air Transportation (Aeroplanes),
(JAR-OPS 1).
JAR-OPS comprise common technical requirements and procedures for commercial air
transportation developed by the national aviation authorities within the Joint Aviation
Authorities.
JAR-OPS 1.235 states that "an operator shall establish operating procedures for
noise abatement
during instrument flight operations in compliance with ICAO PANS-OPS Volume
1". They add that
"take-off climb procedures for noise abatement specified by an operator for any
one aeroplane type
should be the same for all aerodromes".
Noise measurement and noise monitoring
26. The general framework of the Commission's overall noise policy is set out in the
forthcoming
Green Paper entitled "Future Noise Policy".
In its White Paper on the future development of the Common transport policy2 the
Commission
stressed the need to ensure that the areas surrounding the airports are adequately
protected against
an increase in noise volume, due to the growth in air transport, and that no new
noisesensitive
activities are allowed near airports. To that effect measures were announced with a view
to
. introducing a standard noise exposure index
. establishing a standard method of calculation of noise exposure levels
. implementing noise monitoring, noise zoning and land-use rules around airports.
It was further highlighted that such measures would need to give due consideration to
the
characteristics of individual airports.
27. A study' into the indices and methodologies which are in use in the Community for
determining
the noise exposure due to aircraft operations in the vicinity of airports has shown that a
large
PANSOPS - ICAO Document 8168.
2 CO M(92)494 final of 2 December 1992.
A study into existing methodologies for the calculation of noise exposure levels in and
around
airports, National Aerospace laboratory, the Netherlands, 1992.
variety of indices and methodologies are used in the different Member States. The
Commission
services see great merit in introducing a common noise exposure index2 as well as a
standard
methodology for the calculation of noise exposure around airports in the Community.
Such common
standards would make it possible to carry out a valid comparison between existing noise
exposure
levels and limits. They would also provide a general reference framework for assessing
the
compatibility of airport capacity provision with environmental objectives.
Community R&D activities should where necessary provide technical support to the
introduction and
the implementation of legislation on common standards.
28. The above-mentioned study recommended the use of the following general form of
noise
exposure index
The single event noise descriptor, i.e. the measure used to quantify the noise of a single
aircraft, that
is used by the majority of the Member States is the sound exposure level, SEL or Lae.
The majority
of Member States use a 24-hour day as their reference period. In most instances this
reference
period has been determined on the basis of a long term average, in general a year. The
weighting
factors in use differ for the different Member States, most Member States use a
weighting factor that
gives a penalty to night time movements.
29. The Commission services feel that the use of this index should be recommended
Community
wide, if necessary during a transitional period parallel to the existing index in use in each
Member
State.
It seems also appropriate to harmonize the day and night time period, for instance, as
follows:
day time : from 07.00 to 23.00
local night time : from 23.00 to 07.00 local
2 A noise index can be defined as an expression to rate noise in terms of
subjective annoyance over a defined period of time.
30. Member States use different methodologies to calculate the noise load around
airports. Recently,
the Commission services have participated in the activities of an ECAC subgroup which
was
responsible for the revision of the methodology set out in ECAC document n- 29 of 1986
"Standard
method for computing noise contours around civil airports". The commission
services are of the
opinion that this common methodology, as revised, should be recommended
Community-wide as
guidance material with the view to establishing noise contours' around an airport.
31. Noise contours are mainly used
A noise contour can be defined as a line of constant value of a noise scale or
index around an airport, due to the noise of a traffic mix of aircraft under normal
operating conditions and using
normal flight paths.
Aircraft noise monitoring can be defined as the routine measurement of noise
levels created by aircraft on and in the vicinity of airports for the purpose of compliance
with and checking the
effectiveness of noise abatement requirements.
When combined with flight data from the airport surveillance radar the noise monitoring
system
allows compliance with prescribed standard flight procedures and tracks to be checked.
Such an
integrated flight track and aircraft noise monitoring system makes it possible to detect
immediately
violations of standard procedures, and to trace offenders against established noise
limits.
In most Member States noise monitoring equipment has already been installed at least
around the
larger airports.
33. The Commission services are of the opinion that a common framework on noise
monitoring
could contribute to ensuring a more adequate level of protection against exposure to
aircraft noise
Such a framework should contain minimum requirements on
. the method of noise monitoring
. the processing of data obtained through the monitoring process
. the presentation of information to the public on the noise situation around
airports.
34. It is worth mentioning that in the context of the Guidelines for the development of
the trans
European transport network one of the priority actions for airports of common interest
concerns
projects for noise and flight track monitoring equipment, noise abatement infrastructure,
noise
information and protection facilities. Such projects are eligible for Community funding as
projects
of common interest in the sense of Article 129C of the Treaty on European Union.
Noise zoning and land-use planning around airports
35. The guidelines on noise zoning as set out in the ICAO airport planning manual'
provide for the
establishment of at least two zones for the purpose of land-use planning with regard to
aircraft noise
in the vicinity of airports.
These zones are
Zone A: where high noise exposure levels may be encountered and as a
consequence, noise sensitive
land-uses need to be restricted, and most such developments not permitted.
Zone B: where moderate noise exposure levels may be encountered and there
may be some need
to restrict land-uses and developments.
These zones can be subdivided for land-use planning purposes or with the view to
identifying
differences in noise insulation requirements.
36. The absence of noise zoning and land-use rules makes it difficult for an airport to
develop its
activities in an environmentally compatible way and does not offer acceptable long term
environmental protection for the local population.
Doc. 9184-AN/902, ICAO airport planning manual, Part 2, Land-use and environmental
control,
second edition 1985 as proposed for amendment at CAEP/3 in December 1995.
The Common Transport Policy Action Programme2 (1995-2000) calls for the
development of a
common framework for land-use rules around airports. The Community has what can be
described
as a shared competence in the area of harmonisation of Member States' land-use
planning rules and
procedures. Under Article 130S of the Treaty of Maastricht, unanimity among Member
States is
required to adopt initiatives in this area.
37. The Commission services feel that it is important to prevent additional encroachment
of
incompatible land-uses as in the short term noise contours might retreat closer to the
airport
boundary due to the gradual phase-out of Chapter 2 aircraft at Community airports, but
as discussed
in Section 1 of this paper the long-term situation is uncertain.
In this context the Commission services endorse the initiative of ICAO, following the
recommendations of the CAEP meeting of December 1995, in addressing a State Letter
to its
Contracting States. This letter highlights the vital role of compatible land-use planning
with a view
to ensuring that the gains achieved by continuous reduction of aircraft noise at source
are not
squandered by further unsuitable residential development and other noise sensitive
activities around
airports.
Also, it urges ICAO Member States to apply land-use planning and control measures
around
airports.
Currently the situation varies widely in the Community. In some Member States
maximum noise
exposure levels for the purpose of establishing noise zones around airports have been set
by national
law. These noise zones are usually subject to land-use rules, which provide for planning
constraints
such as special provisions on noise-sensitive buildings.
The responsibility for the implementation of the land-use rules varies throughout the
Community:
from national, regional and/or local authorities to airports.
IV. Supersonic Transport (SST)
Preliminary thoughts
38. There is a revival both in Europe and the US of the interest in supersonic civil
transport aircraft.
In particular the US is planning and appears to be committed to the introduction of a
second
generation supersonic aircraft after the year 2005 with a predicted fleet of 500 to 1000
aircraft.
Clearly the introduction of the possible future supersonic aircraft fleet has to be in
compliance with
the increasing public concern and demand for environmentally acceptable, sustainable
and
nevertheless cost-effective and efficient air transport. As for subsonic aircraft, this
requires the
development of advanced, environmentally friendly technologies for the possible next
generation
supersonic aircraft.
2 COM(92)302 of 12 July 1995.
39. Since 1989 US has supported its aeronautics industry (mainly Boeing and
McDonnell-Douglas)
through its aeronautical agency NASA, which has initiated a major R&D program
over 10 years with
a budget of 2 billion dollars, called the high speed research program (HSRP). Besides
technology
development and acquisition, the program is devoted to environmental issues related to
possible
impact of such a fleet on the depletion of the ozone layer and to noise issues. Within
ICAO the US
is pressing to achieve an internationally agreed noise standard for the yet unregulated
supersonic
aircraft at the CAEP/4 meeting scheduled in 1998, which would be a major milestone for
going
ahead with the product development phase until 2005.
40. Major efforts need to be devoted now to the development of technologies for
reducing noise
emissions and to meet the above target date.
During subsonic flight phases the goal is to achieve at least noise levels no worse than
those of
today's subsonic jet aircraft.
This implies that during the landing and take-off (LTO) cycle the possible future
supersonic aircraft
should at least meet Chapter 3 of the ICAO regulations or indeed a future increase in
stringency for
subsonic aircraft. To match this a major research effort is needed on variable cycle
engines, i.e. high
bypass ratio turbofan for subsonic and turbojet/low bypass ratio turbofan for supersonic
flight.
For optimum high speed, i.e. supersonic noise, which requires a low bypass ratio cycle
(almost
turbojet engine), there still remains the problem of noise from the high speed exhaust
jet.
Additionally concerning supersonic cruise there is the need to investigate sonic boom
phenomena,
including the most promising methods for their mitigation.
V. Conclusions
41. It seems clear that there is neither a simple nor a single solution to the problem
of aircraft noise nuisance affecting the population living around airports.
This Paper has explored several policy instruments, which can individually or in concert
contribute
to preventing a further increase in aircraft noise nuisance due to the expected growth in
the demand
for air transport.
It is obvious that for each of these instruments due thought needs to be given to their
technical
feasibility, economic reasonableness and environmental benefits.
The possible solutions lie in the areas of
. appropriate R&D activities
. stringency standards for noise emissions from individual aircraft
. noise monitoring and zoning as well as land-use rules around airports
. noise abatement operational procedures.
42. As regards 'technical standards' the Commission services believe
that
. in the short term, there may to be scope for Community legislation on a non-addition
rule for
'hushkitted', and marginally compliant Chapter 3 aircraft to ensure that new additions
reflect most
recent technology
. in the medium term, the Community should work through ICAO for the adoption of
more
stringent, technically feasible and economically reasonable noise certification
standards
. for the long term, Community R&D activities should be intensified to provide the
means for a
technological breakthrough enabling further reductions in subsonic aircraft noise and
hence, an
increase in stringency of 4 to 6 decibels within a 5 to 10 years time-horizon and possibly
of 7 to 10
decibels within a 10 to 15 years time horizon
. for any possible future supersonic aircraft the research efforts should lead to the
development of
an aircraft which should at least meet the current ICAO Chapter 3 noise standards or
any new
increase in stringency for subsonic aircraft during the landing and take-off (LEO)
cycle.
43. The Commission services feel that it is worthwhile to explore, preferably within an
international
framework, the scope for operational noise measurement.
The international framework appears also to be the most appropriate one for the
further development of noise abatement operational procedures.
44. In the area of noise measurement, monitoring zoning and land-use
rules the Commission services are of the opinion that there is merit in introducing
Community framework legislation covering a
standard noise exposure index, a standard method of calculation of noise exposure levels
and
minimum requirements for noise monitoring.
Community R&D activities should where necessary provide technical support to the
introduction and
the implementation of such legislation.
With the view to establishing long term environmental protection for the population
living around
airports the introduction of noise zoning and land-use rules appears to be the
key issue.
In addition to these measures at Community level, complementary actions need to
be taken at other levels to offer the best protection to European citizens.
45. The Commission services involved in this Consultation Paper invite all parties
concerned to
submit before 28 February 1997 their observations on this Paper to the
Directorate-General for
Transport.
Annex 1
TABLE: SUMMARY OF AIR TRANSPORT FORECASTS
AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE .
SOURCE FORECAST
GEOGRAPHICAL
PERIOD
PASSENGERS
CARGO
AlRCRAFT
AREA COVERED
MOVEMENTS
DG Vll study' 1990-2005
3.6%
Europe
Financial 1992-2003
5 %
6.5 %
World
Times2
Airbus3 1992-2011
5.4%
7.4%
World
Boeing4 1996-2015
4.6 %
6.7 %
Europe
Mc Donnell 1993-2013
5.7%
7.3%
3.2%6
World
Douglas5
AEA7 1996-2008
6 %
6 %
Europe
IATA8 1993 -2010
4.5 %
Europe
Eurocontrol9 1994-2001
4.5 %
Europe
Mittel und Langfristprognosen der Personenverkehrsnachfrage, Ifo Institut fur
Wirtschaftsforschung, Munchen, Marz 1995.
The future of international Air Passenger Transport, into an era of dynamic change.
Michel
Donne, FT Management Report, London 1995.
3 Airbus Industrie, February 1993 Market perspectives for civil jet aircraft.
4 Boeing 1996 Current market outlook.
5 Mc Donnell Douglas, 1995 Outlook for commercial aircraft
1994-2013.
6 Scheduled passenger services only.
7 Association of European Airlines, Yearbook 1996.
8 Air Transport Action Group, European traffic forecasts,
1980-2010, 1996 edition.
9 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation,
June 1995 Doc. no. 95.70.10.