/ Rev. B
i LIST OF CONTENTS: PAGE: 0. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 1. INTRODUCTION... 2 1.1. General... 2 1.2. Objectives... 3 2. SUMMARY... 4 2.1. Observations... 5 2.2.1 General... 5 2.2.2 Weather conditions... 5 2.2.3 Navigation... 6 3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS... 9 3.1. General... 9 3.2. Conclusions... 9 3.2.1. General... 9 3.2.2. Bulk Carrier, quay B and C... 9 3.2.3. LPG Carrier, quay D... 9 3.2.1. 220 m Cruise vessel, quay 28/29... 9 3.2.2. 113 m Fast-Ferry... 9 3.2.3. Cruise vessel, conventional driven, quay A and B... 9 3.2.4. Cruise vessel, AziPod driven, quay A and B... 10 3.3. Recommendations... 10 4. METHODOLOGY... 11 4.1. Set-up, simulations and debriefing... 11 4.2. Outcome... 12 5. AREA DEFINITION... 13 5.1. phase 2 area... 13 5.2. Area model description... 13 5.3. Water depths... 13 5.4. Current... 14 5.5. Wind... 15 5.6. Waves... 15 6. DESIGN SHIPS... 16 6.1. Ships... 16 6.2. Ship 3206 particulars... 17 6.3. Ship 3427 particulars... 18 6.4. Ship 3555 particulars... 19 6.5. Ship 3674 particulars... 20 6.6. Ship 3655 particulars... 21 6.7. Ship 3558 particulars... 22 6.8. Simulation procedure... 23 6.9. Output from simulations... 24 7. DOCUMENTATION OF SIMULATIONS RUN LIST... 25 8. GEOGRAPHICAL PLOTS OF MANOEUVRES AND COMMENTS... 27 Report phase 2 final 116-25500
ii APPENDICES: I: Plots and Time Series II: Ship Descriptions III: Area database description IV: Wind definitions in simulator V: Evaluation Analysis Ronne phase2 Instructor and Pilot Report phase 2 final 116-25500
1 0. Executive summary FORCE Technology, Division for Maritime Industry (DMI) has been contracted by Port of Roenne through NIRAS A/S to conduct a qualitative full-mission simulation study in order to assess the new layout of, phase 2. The phase 2 consists of: Removal of old breakwaters New breakwaters New turning basin Two new multipurpose quays An LNG terminal at the inside of the south breakwater See Figure 1-1 for the new phase 2 layout with names for each quay. The simulations were carried out during the period 9 th of October to 14 th of October 2016. Two Cruise vessels were used to evaluate the new Cruise terminal in the northern part of the port and the multipurpose quay at the southern part of the port. One small Cruise vessel was used to evaluate arrival/departure from quay 28 and 29. One Bulk Carrier was used to evaluate arrival/departure from quay B and C. One LPG Carrier was used to evaluate arrival/departure from quay D. One Fast-Ferry was used to evaluate arrival/departure conditions through the new harbour basin. The background of the study is that wish to expand in order to allow large Cruise vessels into the port along with the other commercial traffic such as Bulk vessels and LNG vessels. At the same time, the existing ferries from Ystad should not be affected. The present study is the second phase of the expansion of. NIRAS has delivered drawings and information on wind, current and waves in the form of statistics and Mike21 calculations. The outcome of the simulations was: The phase 2 layout is well designed and suitable for the ships tested. The operational limit for calling at the port is the vessels ability to manoeuver, including number and size of assisting tugs, and not the proposed port design. The distance between the breakwaters is adequate for safe passage of the vessels tested. Entering or leaving the port in the tested wave patterns, current directions and speeds with the design vessels tested was viable. The turning basin is sufficient for the vessels tested even with vessels berthed at either side. If the vessels can be lifted off the berth on departure, they can also depart from the port. See specific conclusions and recommendations in section 3. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
2 1. Introduction 1.1. General FORCE Technology, Division for Maritime Industry (DMI) has been contracted by through NIRAS A/S regarding an assessment of the phase 2 development of. The assessment should address future environmental limitations of arriving to or departing from the new with different vessel types to and from different quays. The objective of the study is to establish the information required to assess the phase 2 development of with respect to the environmental influence, i.e. wind, current and waves, from a navigational perspective. A qualitative full-mission simulation study was set up in order to assess the environmental limits. The simulations were carried out in week 40 (Sunday) and week 41, 2016 (9 th to 14 th of October). The layout of phase 2 of is shown in Figure 1-1 below. Data for the study were delivered by NIRAS in the form of drawings of the layout and calculations of current and waves based on a normal situation, i.e. two-year return period. Figure 1-1 The phase 2 of Report phase 2 final 116-25500
3 1.2. Objectives The nautical simulations for have the following objectives: Assess the viability of arrival and departure to/from quay A and B with large Cruise vessels ( Voyager, 311 m, and Princess, 306 m) under influence of wind, current and waves. Assess the viability of arrival and departure to/from quay 28/29 with medium size Cruise vessel ( Costa Classica, 220 m) under influence of wind, current and waves. Assess the viability of arrival and departure to/from quay B and C with Bulk Carrier under influence of wind, current and waves. Assess the viability of arrival and departure to/from quay D with an LPG Carrier under influence of wind, current and waves. Assess whether the new port design with Cruise vessels alongside all Cruise terminals will impede safe operation of Fast Ferries to and from the Fast-Ferry Terminal in the northeastern part of the port. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
4 2. Summary For carrying out the study, a database of phase 2 of was generated including new bathymetries, new breakwaters and new quays. The database was generated on the basis of data received from NIRAS. A database consists of two types of data: 2D data describing the depth, current, wind and waves. Land contours, buoys and lighthouses are also represented in the 2D description. 3D data describing the visual model of the area in question, including land, navigation lights, buoys, marks etc. Photo textures are applied to all fixed or moving objects, thus creating a highly realistic view out of the bridge windows. The ship models representing the vessels used in the simulations were: The simulations were conducted with: Table 2-1 Vessels used in the simulations Wind: from NW, SW, S, NE, W, N, SE up to 24 m/s, dependent on vessel and berth to be simulated. Current: N-going or S-going with factors up to 2.0 corresponding to 0.6 m/s (1.2 kn) N-going and 0.5 m/s (1.0 kn) S-going (see current charts in Appendix III). Waves: from NW or SW up to 3.0 m and periods up to 6s. (see wave charts in Appendix III). A program for the simulations was developed by FORCE Technology based on information from and accepted by prior to the simulations. Additional runs were developed during the simulations based on findings and the participants requests. See list of runs in section 7. The following participated in the simulations: Henrik Sørensen Captain RCCL Poul Pedersen Captain Mols-Linien Henrik Laursen Captain Mols-Linien Klaus Lind Pilot DanPilot Ulla Kiersgaard Head of Maritime Services Niels Lundberg Cruise & Security Manager Reno Kure Traffic Coordinator Jess Persson Board member Arne Mejer Senior Instructor, Captain FORCE Technology Niels Arndal Senior Project Manager, M. Sc. FORCE Technology Allan Walbum Facility Manager, Marine Eng. FORCE Technology Table 2-2 Participants Report phase 2 final 116-25500
5 2.1. Observations 2.2.1 General During the six days study, a total of 60 evaluation simulations were carried out. For the purpose of this study alone, the different quays were named as can be seen in Figure 2-1. Figure 2-1 Naming of the different quays. After each run, the Captains or the Pilot filled in a form with their comments on the executed run. These, together with the FORCE Instructor s evaluation of the run, form the basis for conclusions on the runs. After each day s simulation runs, results and evaluations were summed up, and a joint conclusion on the runs was made. The comments on each run from the Captains and the Pilot can be found in Appendix A. 2.2.2 Weather conditions The wind directions used in the simulations were chosen as representing the worst possible directions, i.e. wind across the vessel s course during approach, departure or manoeuvring alongside, and the most frequent directions, i.e. wind from westerly directions. This was agreed with the participants. The current was chosen as the worst possible direction across the entrance. The simulations were carried out in: Winds: up to 24 m/s Current: up to 1.2 knots Waves: up to Hs of 3 m Report phase 2 final 116-25500
6 2.2.3 Navigation 2.2.3.1 Bulk Carrier Seven arrival and three departure simulations were carried out to/from quay B and C with the Bulk Carrier. During the manoeuvring, the vessel was assisted by two 60 Tons Bollard Pull (TBP) tugs. The strategy for arrival was to maintain a relatively high speed through the breakwaters in order to negotiate the forces of wind and current. One tug was connected in centrelead aft to check the speed and assist in steering. The vessel was then stopped in the port, turned 180 deg. and manoeuvred stern first to the berth. The second tug connected when the vessel was inside the breakwaters. In the run with southwestern wind, the vessel came close to the western breakwater when reversing the engine in order to check the speed. Keeping the vessel easterly in the leading line during the approach counteracted this tendency. The runs were all carried out in a controlled and safe manner. The strategy for departure was to let the tugs pull the vessel sideways from the berth, turn the bow towards the entrance and sail straight out. The Bulk Carrier was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 14 and 16 m/s West 18 m/s Northwest 16 and 18 m/s Northeast 18 m/s South 18 m/s 2.2.3.2 LPG Carrier Five arrival and two departure simulations were carried out to and from quay D with the LPG tanker. In four of the runs, a 13 TBP tug was assisting during berthing. The strategy for arrival was to maintain a relatively high speed through the breakwaters in order to negotiate the forces of wind and current. The vessel was then stopped in the port, turned 180 deg. and manoeuvred stern first to the berth. The tug was pushing amidships when assisting. The strategy for departure was to let the tug pull the vessel sideways from the berth, manoeuvre stern first to the turning basin and turn the vessel 180 deg., aim the bow towards the entrance and sail straight out. The runs were all carried out in a controlled and safe manner. In Run 205, the vessel came very close to the western breakwater. The approach strategy was then changed, and the vessel was berthed after conducting a 360 turn to starboard. Entry into and manoeuvring in the port is possible, but in strong winds the final pushing/pulling against the wind is the limiting factor. This is dependent on the power of the tugs used. The LPG Carrier was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 14, 16, 18 and 20 m/s Northeast 20 m/s Report phase 2 final 116-25500
7 2.2.3.3 220 m Cruise vessel Eight arrival and two departure simulations were carried out to and from quay 28/29 with the 220 m Cruise vessel. The strategy for arrival was to maintain a relatively high speed through the breakwaters in order to negotiate the forces of wind and current. The vessel was then stopped inside the port, turned approximately 30 deg. to starboard and manoeuvred stern first to the berth. In two runs, the turn to starboard was carried out in the eastern part of the port, and in one run, the vessel was sailed through a port turn to the berth and moored with port side alongside. Approach, stopping and turning in the port could be carried out safely in all runs, and departure runs were also carried out safely. Some close passages of the breakwaters due to unfamiliarity with the port, simulator and vessels occurred, but the limitation during the final berthing manoeuvre was the thruster capacity of the vessel. The 220 m Cruise vessel was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 10, 12 and 16 m/s Northwest 10 m/s North 18 m/s Northeast 14 m/s 2.2.3.4 113 m Fast-Ferry (HSC) Seven arrival and four departure simulations were carried out to and from the port with the 113 m Fast-Ferry. The speed was kept low at about 7 knots when passing the breakwaters. In some runs, this gave a very large drift angle, but this was handled safely due to the available distance between the breakwaters. Passage through the port was controlled and safe and not affected by the moored Cruise vessels at berth A and the old Cruise terminal. The runs were stopped when the vessel was in position to commence the final approach to the berth. The departures were controlled and safe. The 113 m Fast-Ferry was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 16, 20 and 24 m/s Northwest 20 m/s Northeast 20 and 22 m/s East 20 m/s Southeast 20 and 22 m/s 2.2.3.5 Conventional Cruise vessel Eight arrival and three departure simulations were carried out to and from quay A and B with the conventional Cruise vessel. The approach, passage of the breakwaters and stopping inside the port was carried out safely and controlled in all runs. The port design gave sufficient space for turning and manoeuvring towards the berths. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
8 The thruster power of the vessel sets the limit in terms of wind speeds. Exposed to perpendicular winds, the thrusters are able to cope with a maximum wind of 14 m/s. During departure runs, the eastern breakwater was passed too close. This was due to inexperience with the vessel and the limited visual view of objects close to the bow of the simulated vessel. The conventional Cruise vessel was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 14, 16, 18 and 20 m/s Northwest 18 m/s Northeast 16 and 18 m/s 2.2.3.6 Azipod Cruise vessel Nine arrival and two departure simulations were carried out to and from quay A and B with the Azipod Cruise vessel. This vessel is very powerful, and the approach, passage of the breakwaters and stopping inside the port was carried out safely and controlled in all runs. The port design gave sufficient space for turning and manoeuvring towards the berth. The vessel could cope with perpendicular winds up to 20 m/s. In run 611 during departure from berth A, an alternative departure strategy was tried, but due to inexperience with the Azipod manoeuvring system of the vessel, the vessel came too close to the Cruise vessel at the old Cruise terminal at first and subsequently grounded at the eastern breakwater. The remaining departures in similar environmental conditions were controlled and safe. The Azipod Cruise vessel was tested in wind conditions: Southwest 18, 20 and 24 m/s Northwest 20 m/s Northeast 18 and 20 m/s Southeast 20 m/s Report phase 2 final 116-25500
9 3. Conclusions and recommendations 3.1. General The simulations demonstrated that the layout of the phase 2 of the development of is excellent for the purpose of receiving vessels as the simulated types and sizes, i.e. Tankers, Bulkers, Fast Ferries and Cruise vessels. It is merely the manoeuvring abilities of the vessels that set the limitation, not the layout of the port. 3.2. Conclusions 3.2.1. General The distance between the breakwaters is adequate for safe passage of the vessels tested. Entering or leaving the port in the tested wave patterns and current directions and speeds with the design vessels tested was viable. The turning basin is sufficient for the vessels tested even with vessels berthed at either side. The port is well designed and is suitable for the vessels tested. The operational limit for calling at the port is the vessels ability to manoeuver, including number and size of assisting tugs, and not the proposed port design. If the vessels can be lifted off the berth on departure, they can also depart from the port. 3.2.2. Bulk Carrier, quay B and C The simulated Bulk Carrier can arrive safely at the port when assisted by two 60 TBP tugs in wind speeds up to 16 m/s irrespective of the wind direction, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.2 knot and waves up to Hs 3.0 m. 3.2.3. LPG Carrier, quay D The simulated LPG Carrier can arrive safely at the port in wind speeds up to 16 m/s irrespective of the wind direction, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.2 knot and waves up to Hs 3.0 m. The vessel can arrive safely at the port when assisted by one 13 TBP tug in wind speeds up to 18 m/s irrespective of the wind direction. 3.2.1. 220 m Cruise vessel, quay 28/29 The simulated 220 m Cruise vessel with conventional propulsion can arrive safely at the port in wind speeds up to 10 m/s from all directions, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.0 knot and waves up to Hs 2.0 m. Tug assistance will be needed in higher wind speeds. 3.2.2. 113 m Fast-Ferry The new port design with Cruise vessels alongside all Cruise terminals does not impede safe operation of Fast Ferries to and from the Fast-Ferry terminal in the northeastern part of the port in wind speeds up to 22 m/s irrespective of the wind direction, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.2 knot and waves up to Hs 3.0 m. 3.2.3. Cruise vessel, conventional driven, quay A and B The simulated Cruise vessel with conventional propulsion can arrive safely at the port in wind speeds up to 14 m/s from all directions, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.2 knot and waves up to Hs 3.0 m. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
10 3.2.4. Cruise vessel, AziPod driven, quay A and B The simulated Azimuth Cruise vessel can arrive safely at the port in wind speeds up to 20 m/s irrespective of the wind direction, northwest- or southeast-going current up to 1.2 knot and waves up to Hs 3.0 m. 3.3. Recommendations It is recommended to: Place a sector light on the northern breakwater to mark shallow water to the north Place a leading light for the entrance That two tugs of 60 TBP be available for the Bulker under all conditions as Bulk Carriers usually are poorly equipped with only one rudder/propeller and no bow or stern thrusters. The tugs are either needed for checking the speed and assist pushing/pulling the Bulk Carrier to/from the quay. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
11 4. Methodology In order to find the limiting conditions for safe arrival to the new phase 2 of with Cruise vessels, Bulk Carriers, LPG Carrier and a Fast-Ferry, a number of real-time simulations were set up. The scenarios were created to simulate the worst and the prevailing conditions. One layout of phase 2 of was set up. New bathymetries were implemented into the database along with new current and wave information. Three Cruise vessels, one Fast-Ferry, one Bulk Carrier and one LPG Carrier were chosen from FORCE Technology s vessel database to be used. Real-time simulations were conducted by Captains and local Pilots in order to assess (from a navigation point of view) the layout of the new port. The results of the study were then used to define under which conditions safe arrival could be carried out. 4.1. Set-up, simulations and debriefing To set up the simulations, a run matrix (see section 7) was created with combinations of: Layout Wind Current Tide Banks Vessel These scenarios were then set up in the simulator, and Pilots and Captains conducted the runs in one of FORCE Technology s simulator bridges as described in section 6.8. During a run, all relevant parameters were logged for later replay, for example: Speed Under keel clearance Squat Heave Roll Pitch Etc. After each run, the Captains/Pilots and the Instructor filled in an evaluation sheet with an evaluation of the run and comments describing their opinions on safety, performance etc. After each day of simulations, a debriefing meeting was held with the participants. During this meeting, findings from the day were discussed along with conclusions and recommendations. In addition, the program for the next day was discussed. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
12 4.2. Outcome The outcome of the simulations are conclusions and recommendations based on the conducted simulations which are written down in this report. The report will address: Objective Summary Description of environmental conditions and vessels List of simulations carried out Documentation of simulator runs: Track plots and Captain s comments Conclusions and recommendations and documentation of operational limits for the defined cases Report phase 2 final 116-25500
13 5. Area definition 5.1. phase 2 area The phase 2 area is developed based on official Electronic Nautical Charts (ENC), drawings from NIRAS and information from surveys. See Appendix III. The mathematical model of the area that was used for the simulations is described below. 5.2. Area model description Figure 5-1 Overview of the model of the phase 2 area The phase 2 area description contains: Land contours Leading lights and marks Water depths Current Tide Banks 3D graphical definition The 3D description gives the user a visual impression of the view from the bridge or any other chosen position. 5.3. Water depths Water depths in the simulator are given as soundings (derived from depth contours, dredged areas and spot soundings) in the mathematical model, and the simulator program will interpolate between these soundings. The operator can increase the water depth over the whole area directly Report phase 2 final 116-25500
14 or gradually. This feature is mainly used in tidal harbours. The bathymetry for this study is delivered by NIRAS. 5.4. Current Figure 5-2 Depths curves (2 m, 5 m, 10 m, 15 m, 20 m) The current in the simulator is given as a grid of points consisting of speed and direction. During the simulation, the current impact on the ship is calculated at 12 points along the ship by interpolating between these points. The current scenarios for the present study are received from NIRAS and consist of two scenarios which are current going NW or SW. See example below. Figure 5-3 NW-going current Report phase 2 final 116-25500
15 5.5. Wind In the simulations, wind is given directly in the simulator by setting speed and direction. The operator can increase the wind speed over the entire area directly or gradually as well as change the direction if necessary. 5.6. Waves Figure 5-4 Wind rose for In the simulations, waves are given as a wave map consisting of points. Each point contains information of wave height (Hs), direction (deg) and period (Tp). Two scenarios were delivered by NIRAS, one for NW and one for SW. See example below. Figure 5-5 Waves from SW. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
16 6. Design ships 6.1. Ships Ship descriptions and standard manoeuvre plots are given in Appendix II. The ships chosen for the study were: Table 6-1 Ships chosen for the simulations The ships were chosen from the FORCE ship model database by the client and represent the ships expected to call the port when the new port is established. On the following pages, the particulars for each ship are given. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
17 6.2. Ship 3206 particulars Table 6-2 Ship 3206 LPG Carrier Loaded Report phase 2 final 116-25500
18 6.3. Ship 3427 particulars Table 6-3 Ship 3427, Cruise ship Voyager of the Seas Report phase 2 final 116-25500
19 6.4. Ship 3555 particulars Table 6-4 Ship 3555, Cruise ship Costa Classica Report phase 2 final 116-25500
20 6.5. Ship 3674 particulars Table 6-5 Ship 3674, Cruise ship Royal Princess Report phase 2 final 116-25500
21 6.6. Ship 3655 particulars Table 6-6 Ship 3655, Catamaran ferry Incat 64 Report phase 2 final 116-25500
22 6.7. Ship 3558 particulars Table 6-7 Ship 3558, Bulk Carrier, Loaded Report phase 2 final 116-25500
23 6.8. Simulation procedure During the full-mission simulations, the FORCE Technology Bridge A was used for the own ships. The main set-up for the Bridge A is that the simulator is controlled by a navigator, the Captain, standing inside a mock-up of a standard navigation bridge in front of a screen covering 360 degrees outlook through the bridge windows. The simulator bridge is equipped with instruments similar to those found on a real bridge, including radars and electronic chart. Based on the information thus displayed, the navigator can activate his engines, rudders and thrusters by means of the analogue control handles. All simulation runs are logged electronically in order to be able to replay second by second what happened during the runs. This includes time series of a number of parameters, e.g. speed over ground and through water, rudder angle, propeller revolutions etc. This provides an opportunity to investigate all runs in detail at a later stage. The replay system has been used to generate the track plots in Appendix I. Figure 6-1 Bridge A set-up Report phase 2 final 116-25500
24 6.9. Output from simulations The output from the simulations are track plots and the Captain s comments. An example is shown below. In appendix I, all runs are shown. Figure 6-2 Example of output plots Report phase 2 final 116-25500
25 7. Documentation of simulations run list Report phase 2 final 116-25500
26 Table 7-1 List of runs conducted Report phase 2 final 116-25500
27 8. Geographical plots of manoeuvres and comments All the manoeuvres are shown in Appendix I. The plots show the swept area that the ships cover along with the comments from the Captains. Also shown are sweep plots covering all the runs for each ship simulated regardless of the environmental forces. An example is shown below for the Azipod Cruise ship. Figure 8-1 Example of sweep plot for the Azipod Cruise ship Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Appendix I Plots and Captain/Pilot comments Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Appendix II Ship Description Ship 3206, LPG Carrier, Loaded Ship 3427, Cruise ship, Azipod Ship 3555, Cruise ship, 220 m Ship 3674, Cruise ship, Conventional Ship 3655, Fast-Ferry, Incat64 Ship 3558, Bulk Carrier, Loaded Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Appendix III Area Database Description (Ronne_fase2) Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Appendix IV Wind definitions in simulator Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Wind definitions in the simulator Wind definitions in relation to the simulators wind speed indicator versus the vessels wind speed indicator. In the simulator the wind speed is given in meteorological wind speed. This wind speed is not equal to the wind speed read from the wind indicator of the ship. As a tentative comparison the following facts and assumptions can be given: Wind indicator registers the wind speed e.g. at 35 meters height. Coefficient for calculating wind forces in the simulator refers to wind speed at 10 meters height and a mean value of a 10-minute sampling period. Wind information from meteorological sources should refer to wind at 10 meters height. Read-out from a wind indicator will typically refer to the mean value of a 5 second sampling period. The variation of the mean wind in the height z above ground level is found by the formula: u z uz = u 10 æ z ö ç è10ø = Wind speed in a certain height a u 10 = Wind speed at 10 meters height a z = Power constant (0,12 over sea, 0,16 over land, 0,28 over town). = Wind speed indicator height above the surface Using Engineering Sciences Data Unit (ESDU) 72026 we find the following ratio between Max 5 second wind and mean 10 minutes wind equal to 1,25. Example: Wind read out on wind indicator (on vessel, height 35 m ) = 25 m/s 10 min. mean wind at e.g. 35 m height = 25 / 1,25 = 20 m/s 10 min mean wind at 10 m height = æ35ö 20 / ç è10 ø 0,12 = 17,2 ms This means that what the navigator correctly reads as a wind speed of 25 m/s corresponds to a meteorological wind speed of 17,2 m/s. Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Report phase 2 final 116-25500
Appendix V Evaluation Analysis Ronne phase2 Instructor and Pilot Report phase 2 final 116-25500