F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment - Joint Base Elmendorf ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment 2.0 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2.2-2. Current and Projected F-22 Altitude Use Altitude (feet) Percent of Flight Hours: F-22 >30,000 MSL 70% 10,000-30,000 MSL 25% 5,000-10,000 MSL 3% 2,000-5,000 AGL 1.5% 1,000-2,000 AGL .25% 500-1000 AGL 0.25% Additional F-22 operational aircraft would fly training flights in one or more of the Alaskan training airspaces, as do the existing F-22s. Activities in the training airspace are termed sortieoperations. A sortie-operation is defined as the use of one airspace unit by one aircraft. Each time a single aircraft flies in a different airspace unit, one sortie-operation is counted for that unit. Thus, a single aircraft can generate several sortie-operations in the course of a mission. The JBER affected airspace units consist of MOAs and ATCAAs currently used by the F-22s for routine training. Figure 2.2-2 presents these airspaces. ATCAAs overlie nearly all of the MOAs. Figure 2.2-3 presents a closer view of Restricted Areas with the air-to-ground ranges currently used for F-22 air-to-ground missions. The additional F-22s would employ supersonic flight to train with the full capabilities of the aircraft as do the existing F-22s. All supersonic flight would occur at altitudes and within airspace already authorized for such activities. The augmented F-22 squadrons would continue to fly approximately 25 percent of the time spent in MOAs and ATCAAs at supersonic speed. The F-22 has greater performance capabilities than either the F-15C or F-15E, and pilots must train to use those capabilities. 2.2.1 F-22 Training Flights Within Alaskan Airspace The F-22 has the potential to use missiles or a gun in air-to-air engagements. Training for the use of these weapons is predominantly simulated. Simulating air-to-air attacks uses all the radar and targeting systems available on the F-22, but nothing is fired in Alaskan airspace. F-22 live-fire air-to-air training would continue to occur during specialized training or exercises at ranges authorized for these activities. The current sortie-operations in JBER MOAs within Alaska are presented in Table 2.2-3. The existing 36 F-22s use the Fox, Stony, and Susitna MOAs and associated ATCAAs for 65 percent of their training sortie-operations. Table 2.2-4 compares existing MOA training of JBER-based F-22 aircraft with the proposed training activity of the augmented squadrons of F-22 aircraft. The F-22 aircraft do not train in MTRs, and they are not projected to do so with current missions. F-22 training does include incidental training in the Blying Sound Warning Area (W-612) (see Figure 2.2-2). A Warning Area is an over-water airspace similar to range airspace over land. Operational pilots must continually train to maintain skills essential for combat. Existing Alaskan airspace would meet the training needs of F-22 pilots based at JBER. Page 2-12
Page 2-13 Table 2.2-3. Baseline and Projected Annual Sortie-Operations in Regional MOAs Airspace Unit Floor Ceiling 1 FY 2009 Use Current Year Use - BASELINE 2 Proposed Use 2 (feet AGL) (feet MSL) F-22 3 F-15C Other Total F-22 3 F-15C Other Total F-22 4 Other 5 Total Birch 500 5,000 0 0 2,149 2,149 0 0 2,149 2,149 0 2,149 2,149 Buffalo 300 7,000 0 0 2,150 2,150 0 0 2,150 2,150 0 2,150 2,150 Delta 6 3,000 18,000 378 360 2,377 3,115 378 171 2,377 2,926 456 2,548 3,004 Eielson 100 18,000 1,284 1,145 4,613 7,042 1,284 503 4,613 6,400 1,550 5,116 6,666 Fox 1 5,000 18,000 1,284 1,145 4,613 7,042 1,284 503 4,613 6,400 1,550 5,116 6,666 Fox 2 5,000 18,000 1,284 1,145 4,613 7,042 1,284 503 4,613 6,400 1,550 5,116 6,666 Fox 3 5,000 18,000 1,307 1,204 3,854 6,365 1,307 551 3,854 5,712 1,577 4,405 5,982 Galena 1,000 18,000 16 200 40 256 16 192 40 248 19 232 251 Naknek 1/2 3,000 18,000 95 205 10 310 95 158 10 263 115 168 282 Stony A/B 100 18,000 1,565 1,321 8 2,894 1,565 539 8 2,112 1,889 547 2,435 Susitna 5,000 AGL or 10,000 18,000 1,202 901 15 2,118 1,202 300 15 1,517 1,451 MSL, whichever is higher 315 1,766 Viper 500 18,000 392 384 3,999 4,775 392 188 3,999 4,579 473 4,187 4,660 Yukon 1 100 18,000 392 384 3,999 4,775 392 188 3,999 4,579 473 4,187 4,660 Yukon 2 100 18,000 392 382 3,026 3,800 392 186 3,026 3,604 473 3,212 3,685 Yukon 3 A/B 7 100 18,000 392 382 2,636 3,410 392 186 2,636 3,214 473 2,822 3,295 Yukon 4 100 18,000 392 382 2,582 3,356 392 186 2,582 3,160 473 2,768 3,241 Yukon 5 8 5,000 18,000 386 372 2,447 3,205 386 179 2,447 3,012 466 2,626 3,092 Notes: 1. ATCAAs overlie all MOAs in the table. 2. Current and future year use expected to be same as FY 2009 use except for reduction in F-15C operations resulting from 19th Fighter Squadron (19 FS) relocation from JBER-Elmendorf completed in FY10. The number of sortie operations conducted by 19 FS is assumed to be approximately equal to the sorties conducted by a single F-22 squadron. Each of the two F-22 squadrons at JBER-Elmendorf was assumed to fly 1/2 of the FY09 F-22 sortie-operations. Therefore, current year F-15C sortie operations by transient aircraft were estimated to be the number of F-15C operations in FY09 minus half the FY09 number of F-22 operations. 3. Numbers in this column are for 2 F-22 squadrons (36 primary aircraft). 4. Numbers in this column are for 2 plus-up F-22 squadrons (42 primary aircraft). 5. ‘Other’ aircraft include F-15C aircraft as well as other transient aircraft types 6. Delta MOA sortie-operations are derived from historic use of the Delta T-MOA. 7. Consists of Yukon 3A (100 AGL-10,000 MSL); Yukon 3B (2,000 AGL-18,000 MSL). 8. Used for MFE only. AGL = above ground level; MSL = mean sea level; ATCAA = Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace; MOA = Military Operations Area. F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment 2.0 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
Page 1 and 2: F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 3 and 4: Cover Sheet ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEN
Page 39: F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 91 and 92:
F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 3-51 Table 3.8-1. Special Use
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Table 5.1-1. Past, Present, and Rea
Page 141 and 142:
Table 5.1-2. Past, Present, and Rea
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix A Characteristics of Chaff
Page 159 and 160:
APPENDIX A CHARACTERISTICS OF CHAFF
Page 161 and 162:
Table 2. Characteristics of RR-188
Page 163 and 164:
they demonstrate ejection of 98 per
Page 165 and 166:
Appendix B Characteristics and Anal
Page 167 and 168:
APPENDIX B CHARACTERISTICS AND ANAL
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 1. MJU-10/B Flare F-22 Plus-
Page 171 and 172:
Flare failure would occur if the fl
Page 173 and 174:
4.2 Flare Strike Risk Residual flar
Page 175 and 176:
and velocity. A slug is defined as
Page 177 and 178:
The S&I device maximum momentum wou
Page 179 and 180:
Appendix C Public and Agency Outrea
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184:
Senator Lisa Murkowski ATTN: Karen
Page 187:
New Koliganek Village Council ATTN:
Page 211 and 212:
Alaska Department of Natural Resour
Page 213 and 214:
Eklutna Native Village ATTN: Doroth
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 229 and 230:
Appendix D Aircraft Noise Analysis
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Appendix E Sec 7 (ESA) Compliance W
Page 263 and 264:
SECTION 7 (ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT)
Page 265 and 266:
not require additional construction
Page 267 and 268:
Other diet items include cod, pollo
Page 269 and 270:
1.5.6 Northern Sea Otter—Southwes
Page 271 and 272:
Most sound is actually transmitted
Page 273 and 274:
The visual experience of an F-22 ov
Page 275 and 276:
Figure 2. Water Surface Area Below
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
approached by projected sound level
Page 285 and 286:
whale are considered to be possible
Page 287 and 288:
_____. 2010c. Proposed Critical Hab
Page 289 and 290:
APPENDIX 1. NOISE IMPACTS ASSESSMEN
Page 291 and 292:
important in determining whether an
Page 293 and 294:
SPL (dB) Frequency (Hz) Figure 2. U
Page 295 and 296:
e 1 µPa, 125-130 dB re 1 µPa, and
Page 297 and 298:
1.18 Appendix 1 References Blackwel
Page 299 and 300:
APPENDIX 2. INFORMATION ON BELUGA W
Page 301 and 302:
Delphinapterus leucas, after exposu
Page 310 and 311:
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
F2.1 Ungulates Wild ungulates appea
Page 316 and 317:
F2.2 Waterfowl and Other Waterbirds
Page 318 and 319:
leaving an aircraft during training
Page 320 and 321:
Cavedo, A. M., K. S. Latimer, H. L.
Page 322 and 323:
Perry, E. A., D. J. Boness, and S.
Page 324 and 325:
show all

F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment - Joint Base Elmendorf ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?