DOCSLIB.ORG

Preventing Runway Incursions Airports’ Top Safety Hazard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preventing Runway Incursions Airports’ Top Safety Hazard Preventing Runway Incursions Airports’ Top Safety Hazard ADB Airfield SolutionsI www.adb-air.com Background Runway Incursion Detection The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) defines Runway Incursion as: Any occurrence at an The detection of a runway incur- runway holding position towards sues are detected simultaneously aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle, or person on the protected area sion is a sum of two aspects - the the runway and the detection of it can be concluded that a run- of a surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft. That runway incursions are deadly is detection of a crossing of the an illuminated stopbar. If both is- way incursion has occurred. evidenced by the large number of airport disasters that have occurred as a result of them. In fact one of aviation history’s worst accidents was the result of a runway incursion at Tenerife Airport in 1977. Specifically, a KLM Flight 4805 initiated takeoff before it was supposed to and collided with another Crossing towards the runway detection aircraft, Pan Am Flight 1736 leading to the loss of 583 lives. The incursion detection is plane in direction towards the rection towards the runway can for a go-around to safely land 15 achieved by using two sensor runway. However, the sensors be detected by the sensor sets minutes later. While investiga- sets at the runway holding posi- will not be able to determine but not if this crossing has taken tions into this episode are un- tion. The combined detection of whether the runway holding place over an illuminated stop- derway and there appears to be these sensor sets will allow the position has been crossed with bar or not. The figures below il- some confusion into the active system to determine whether clearance from the ATC or not. lustrate roughly the functioning or inactive use of that particu- the runway holding position has In other words, the crossing of of this detection. lar runway, it has also surfaced been crossed by a vehicle or a a runway holding position in di- that when the Airbus noticed the A B C illuminated stopbars and ques- tioned the ground crew, these were subsequently turned off. Spain’s Aviation Accident and In- cident Investigation Commission Through the ensuing years run- the example of a very recent (CIAAIC) has rated this as a seri- way incursions have emerged as near miss runway incursion that ous incident that brings to light one of the leading safety con- occurred at the Barcelona Airport how human error along with less cerns at airports. As airports this summer between Aerolineas than full proof systems can pose have become busier, airfields Argentinas Airbus A340-300 get- potential runway incursion dis- Figure 1. Runway holding position crossing towards the runway have made various provisions ting ready for take-off and UTAir asters on the airfield. Indeed, including Stopbars, RGL, Mark- Boeing 767-300 looking to land. overran stopbars/indicators has The moment sensor 1 detects a process illustrated in figure 1 If sensor 1 detects a passing ob- ings etc to help detect runway Both aircrafts had received the been identified as one of the Top passing object it concludes that above. ject inside that time, it can be incursions and standardize these go ahead from the ATC when 5 types of incursion for Catego- the runway holding position has concluded that the runway hold- as far as possible. Yet, till date UTAir spotted the Airbus cross- rized Airports. been crossed in direction to- On the other hand, if sensor ing position has been crossed runway incursions continue to ing the runway near the runway wards the runway unless sensor 2 detects a vehicle or aircraft but not in direction towards the remain a safety hazard. Take midpoint. The UTAir pilots opted 2 had detected a passing object passing it shall invalidate any runway. This is the process illus- previously within a predefined detection of sensor 1 during the trated in figure 2 below. An Introduction to a Sensor Controlled Incursion Prevention System (SCIPS) detection time (td). This is the predefined detection time (td). One of the more prominent new preventing an actual calamity. The SCIPS response to the incur- A B C Runway Incursion Prevention Additionally, an alert message is ring aircraft or vehicle consists Technologies being proposed to- simultaneously provided to the of the illumination of a number day is ADB’s Sensor Controlled Air Traffic Control (ATC) to assist of red flashing lights beyond the Incursion Prevention System in the resolution of the conflict. stopbar known as Fast Reaction (SCIPS). SCIPS is an autonomous This is in comparison to some Lights (FRLs). These lights are alerting system designed to de- existing systems (Stopbar, RGL, activated to alert the pilot of tect a runway incursion as soon Markings, etc.) that only indicate the incursion and encourage him as it occurs and directly provide to a pilot that it is not safe to to bring the aircraft to a stand- a targeted answer to the incur- proceed, but that do not provide still as soon as possible. Figure 2. Runway holding position crossing leaving the runway ring aircraft or vehicle thereby a warning of an actual hazard. 2 | Preventing Runway Incursions 3 | Preventing Runway Incursions Illuminated stopbar detection 2. If the runway holding position is 90 m or less from the runway edge… This signal basically indicates lights. Various alternatives are ADB advises to monitor the whether the ATC has cleared possible - for example monitoring stopbar control signal direct- …the perpendicular line of three the entrance of the aircraft to the status of the lights via a ly from the ATC. There might FRLs should be located on the the runway from that holding remote device (such as those always be other reasons why the runway edge. position (stopbar lights OFF) or used to control the FRLs) or di- lights are not illuminated with- not (stopbar lights ON). rectly monitoring the stopbar out clearance from ATC, e.g. CCR It is considered important to control signal from the ATC. problem. If the control signal is highlight that this proposed The best way to monitor the monitored and used as trigger standard layout of FRLs is appli- stopbar lighting depends on how for the SCIPS, these incursions cable for all runway holding po- each airport controls the stopbar can also be detected. sitions located not less than 60 m from the runway edge. Figure 4. Layout of Fast Reaction Lights with stopbar 90m or less from the runway edge Alerting of a Runway Incursion Regarding the elevated FRLs, these lights should be spaced 5 lar line of 3 FRLS, however in no the runway edge (see Figure 4 The second main functional- simultaneous alerts are provided meters from the taxiway edge event should the elevated FRLs above). ity of the SCIPS is the alerting in this case: activation of the and in line with the perpendicu- be located less than 15 m from system. This alerting function- Fast Reaction Lights (alert to the ality is activated once a runway pilot) and ATC alarm (alert to the incursion has been detected air traffic controllers). ATC Alarm as explained previously. Two Status information of SCIPS is Typical components in SCIPS provided to the ATC via an au- are: Fast Reaction Lights dible alarm that goes off when a runway incursion occurs. An ◊ Sensor Sets If a runway incursion is detected of inset high intensity red flash- The difficulty arises when trying alert acknowledge button is also the Fast Reaction Lights (FRLs) ing lights enhanced with a pair of to pin down this standard SCIPS provided. Sensors’ signals are directly con- are activated to alert the pilot of elevated flashing red lights on the layout at any type of taxiway nected to the Local Intelligence the incursion and encourage him edges of the taxiway. The pattern used to enter a runway. ADB’s In the event a runway incursion Unit (LIU) located in a nearby to bring the aircraft to a stand- is formed by seven FRLs spaced proposal of this pattern is based alert has occurred, then reset- junction box via pairs of copper still as soon as possible. 7.5 m along the taxiway center- on two fixed points: the runway ting is achieved via an input sig- wires. This method guarantees line and three FRLs perpendicu- holding position (stopbar) and nal from the ATC. This resetting fast and reliable processing of The proposed standard SCIPS lar to the taxiway centerline and the runway edge: shall result in the Fast Reaction the information produced by layout consists of a “T” pattern spaced 3 m between each other. Lights being switched off and the sensors. The signal cable is the ATC alarm being stopped. installed in a dedicated pipe and 1. If the runway holding position is more than 90 meters from the runway edge… In addition to this possibility of uses separate dedicated pits. resetting the system from the ATC, the system is also pro- …the perpendicular line formed grammed to automatically reset by the three FRLs should be when the stopbar lighting is located 90 meters from the stop- deactivated. bar. This distance may be re- duced to a minimum of 82.5 m if necessary to avoid the FRLs coinciding with the taxiway cen- terline lights. This layout is illus- trated in adjacent Figure 3. Figure 3. Layout of Fast Reaction Lights with stopbar more than 90m from the runway edge 4 | Preventing Runway Incursions 5 | Preventing Runway Incursions • Compatible with stop bar op- • Sensor B is used to determine ◊ Control Units Aberdeen Trials eration at Aberdeen Interna- when the aircraft/vehicle is tional Airport vacating the runway.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Runway Incursions:1 Adequacy of Ground Movement Safety Systems and of Air Traffic Control (ATC) Procedures
    RA N S P T O L R A T U R IBU L S U N P N UM A E O T I I T O National Transportation Safety Board A N N S A D FE R T Y B O A Washington, D.C. 20594 Safety Recommendation Date: July 6, 2000 In reply refer to: A-00-66 through -71 Honorable Jane F. Garvey Administrator Federal Aviation Administration Washington, D.C. 20591 In this letter, the National Transportation Safety Board recommends that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) take action to address the following safety issues related to runway incursions:1 adequacy of ground movement safety systems and of air traffic control (ATC) procedures. The Safety Board has issued numerous safety recommendations to the FAA since 1973 to prevent runway incursions and other airport surface incidents. On May 6, 1986, the Board issued a Special Investigation Report, titled “Runway Incursions at Controlled Airports in the United States.”2 In this report, the Board noted that the number of reported near-collision ground incidents had increased significantly and made several new safety recommendations to reduce the frequency of runway incursions. Several of these safety recommendations remained open when a fatal runway collision involving Eastern Airlines flight 111 (EAL111), a Boeing 727 (727), and N44UE, a Beechcraft King Air A100, occurred at Atlanta, Georgia, on January 18, 1990.3 As a result, the Board placed airport runway incursions on its 1990 Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements List, and the issue has 1 FAA Order 8020.11A, “Aircraft Accident and Incident Notification, Investigation and Reporting,” defines a runway incursion as “any occurrence at an airport involving an aircraft, vehicle, person, or object on the ground, that creates a collision hazard or results in a loss of separation with an aircraft taking off, intending to take off, landing or intending to land.” 2 Special Investigation Report NTSB/SIR-86/01.
    [Show full text]
  • National Transportation Safety Board
    National Transportation Safety Board Airport Runway Accidents, Serious Incidents, Recommendations, and Statistics Deadliest Runway Accidents ● Tenerife, Canary Islands, March 27, 1977 (583 fatalities). The world’s deadliest runway accident occurred on March 27, 1977, when Pan Am (PAA) flight 1736, a Boeing 747, and KLM4805, a Boeing 747, collided on runway 12 at Tenerife, Canary Islands, killing 583 passengers and crew. KLM4805 departed runway 12 without a takeoff clearance colliding with PAA1736 that was taxiing on the same runway during instrument meteorological conditions. The Spanish government determined the cause was: “The KLM aircraft had taken off without take-off clearance, in the absolute conviction that this clearance had been obtained, which was the result of a misunderstanding between the tower and the KLM aircraft. This misunderstanding had arisen from the mutual use of usual terminology which, however, gave rise to misinterpretation. In combination with a number of other coinciding circumstances, the premature take-off of the KLM aircraft resulted in a collision with the Pan Am aircraft, because the latter was still on the runway since it had missed the correct intersection.” ● Lexington, Kentucky, August 27, 2006 (49 fatalities). The deadliest runway accident in the United States occurred on August 27, 2006, at about 0606 eastern daylight time when Comair flight 5191, a Bombardier CL-600-2B19, N431CA, crashed during takeoff from Blue Grass Airport, Lexington, Kentucky. The flight crew was instructed to take off from runway 22 but instead lined up the airplane on runway 26 and began the takeoff roll. The airplane ran off the end of the runway and impacted the airport perimeter fence, trees, and terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual on the Prevention of Runway Incursions
    Doc 9870 AN/463 Manual on the Prevention of Runway Incursions Approved by the Secretary General and published under his authority First Edition — 2007 International Civil Aviation Organization Published in separate English, French, Russian and Spanish editions by the International Civil Aviation Organization. All correspondence, except orders and subscriptions, should be addressed to the Secretary General. Orders should be sent to one of the following addresses, together with the appropriate remittance (by bank draft, cheque or money order) in U.S. dollars or the currency of the country in which the order is placed. Credit card orders (American Express, MasterCard and Visa) are accepted at ICAO Headquarters. International Civil Aviation Organization. Attention: Document Sales Unit, 999 University Street, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7 Telephone: +1 514-954-8022; Facsimile: +1 514-954-6769; Sitatex: YULCAYA; E-mail: [email protected]; World Wide Web: http://www.icao.int Cameroon. KnowHow, 1, Rue de la Chambre de Commerce-Bonanjo, B.P. 4676, Douala / Telephone: +237 343 98 42; Facsimile: +237 343 89 25; E-mail: [email protected] China. Glory Master International Limited, Room 434B, Hongshen Trade Centre, 428 Dong Fang Road, Pudong, Shanghai 200120 Telephone: +86 137 0177 4638; Facsimile: +86 21 5888 1629; E-mail: [email protected] Egypt. ICAO Regional Director, Middle East Office, Egyptian Civil Aviation Complex, Cairo Airport Road, Heliopolis, Cairo 11776 Telephone: +20 2 267 4840; Facsimile: +20 2 267 4843; Sitatex: CAICAYA; E-mail: [email protected] Germany. UNO-Verlag GmbH, August-Bebel-Allee 6, 53175 Bonn / Telephone: +49 0 228-94 90 2-0; Facsimile: +49 0 228-94 90 2-22; E-mail: [email protected]; World Wide Web: http://www.uno-verlag.de India.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Runway Incursions: Driving on the Airport FY 2009
    Federal Aviation Administration Situational Awareness Tips MONITOR ATC communications. Easy Steps to Avoid Reducing Runway Runway Incursions: Prior to driving on the airfield: BE PREPARED to vacate the runway or Incursions runway safety area on short notice. Always coordinate with airport manage- Driving on the Airport ment maintenance and repair activity in COMPLETE FAA sponsored web-based DON'T DEVIATE from established access accordance with established policy. FY 2009 runway safety education program at: routes and designated roadways. Don't take www.aopa.org/asf/runway_safety. Certificate shortcuts. awarded upon completion. BE FAMILIAR WITH THE AIRPORT LAYOUT. Keep current airport diagram MINIMIZE distractions such as paperwork, readily available. If you find the diagram is DETERMINE if the airport has a local drivers' food or beverages, cell phones or not current, contact airport management. training program for that airport. If one exists, conversation. complete the training before accessing the Use perimeter roads when possible. airport. USE available memory aids as reminders to operate vehicles safely. COORDINATE access to the airport through Always check NOTAMs/ATIS. the airport manager or operations department. Preventing Incursions and Establish and maintain radio FAMILIARIZE yourself with airport layout Incidents While Operating communications with ATCT when you changes due to construction, maintenance, access the airfield. etc. Know the airport frequency, and plan Vehicles on an Airfield your route ahead of time. Listen carefully,
    [Show full text]
  • Controller and Pilot Error in Airport Operations: a Review of Previous Research and Analysis of Safety Data
    Controller and Pilot Error in Airport Operations: A Review of Previous Research and Analysis of Safety Data DOT/FAA/AR-00/51 DOT-VNTSC-FAA-00-21 Office of Aviation Research Washington, DC20591 Kim Cardosi, Ph.D. Alan Yost U.S. Department ofTransportation Research and Special Programs Administration John A. Voipe National Transportation Systems Center Cambridge, MA 02142-1093 Final Report January 2001 This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 O U.S. Department ofTransportation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 PuMcreporting burden torttnscollection ol information 6 estimated to average 1tourperresponse, mduolrigffw timeforreviewing ensawr^sourceSjMlJier^andmamtainttigirte data neeoWa^amptetirnaxlrenewrathecoDedOTolW SendMrmwrtsreoarSr^fts burden estimate oranyotheri olthiscoQecSon ofinformation, inctuanasuggestionsforr (hisburden, toWashington Headquarters Services, Directorate forInformation Operators andRep^ 1204, Arlmgton, VA 22202-4302, and toBte &$M Ol M and Budaet PapeworgReftrtonProject (0704-01B8). WaslfoSon. PC 20503. _ 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3.REPORTTYPE AND DATES COVERED January 2001 Final Report January 1997 -June 1999 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Controllerand Pilot Errorin AirportOperations: A Review ofPreviousResearch and Analysis of SafetyData FA1L1/A1112 6. AUTHOR(S) Kim Cardosi. Ph.D„ Alan Yost 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Runway Incursion IFALPA
    Runway Incursion IFALPA International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations Runway incursion • Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft. • Doc 4444 Procedures for Air Navigation Services Runway Safety • ICAO document 9870, the Runway Incursion Prevention Manual, is based on the Eurocontrol action plan and FAA initiatives, focusing on short and medium term preventive actions. These might be the best achievable at present, but the real solutions lie in designing out the problem which requires a more systemic approach focusing on the future. Runway Safety • IFALPA’s preferred solution is to design airports in such a way that Taxiways crossing runways should be avoided whenever possible, by the construction of “end-around” or “perimeter” taxiways. • When a crossing is unavoidable, it should be done at a low energy point on the runway, at either runway end, entrance Taxiways for a runway shall be restricted to those required for lining up, for take off and shall be perpendicular to that runway. Runway Safety • Many airports were constructed more than 30 years ago, during these years aviation traffic has grown exponentially. Many airports around the world still have the original signs and markings, and they are no longer ICAO compliant. Leaving a pilot to interpret the meaning of these non standard signs and markings is an unnecessary hazard that may lead to a significant safety event. IFALPA considers theuseofnonstandardsignsandmarkingsa threat for its pilots and is requesting their standardization around the globe.
    [Show full text]
  • National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Incident Final Report
    National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Incident Final Report Location: Denver, CO Incident Number: OPS11IA273 Date & Time: 12/31/2010, 2034 UTC Registration: Aircraft: EMBRAER ERJ190 Aircraft Damage: None Defining Event: Runway incursion veh/AC/person Injuries: N/A Flight Conducted Under: Analysis A runway incursion occurred when an aviation operations vehicle, operated as the lead vehicle for a snow removal team, entered an active runway without clearance as the airplane was about to begin its takeoff roll. The airplane's crew noticed the headlights of the vehicle approaching on the runway and did not initiate their takeoff roll. The tower controller was not aware of the vehicle on the runway until advised by the airplane's crew. The airport was equipped with ASDE-X, which did not alert of the runway incursion due to the slow closure rate of the vehicle to the stationary aircraft. Postincident investigation revealed that the driver of the operations vehicle misidentified the runway for an adjacent taxiway. Probable Cause and Findings The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be: The driver of the operation vehicle's misidentification of the runway for an adjacent taxiway, resulting in a runway incursion with an aircraft in position for takeoff. Findings Personnel issues Decision making/judgment - Airport personnel (Cause) Page 1 of 4 Factual Information Air Canada Flight (ACA) number 1072, an Embraer RJ-190 on a scheduled 14 CFR Part 121 flight between DEN and Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD), Chicago, Illinois, had been cleared for takeoff from the approach end of runway 34R at DEN.
    [Show full text]
  • The Increasing Risk of Runway Incursions - the Most Dangerous Part of Air Travel May Be the Time Spent on the Ground, 67 J
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 67 | Issue 2 Article 8 2002 The ncrI easing Risk of Runway Incursions - The Most Dangerous Part of Air Travel May Be the Time Spent on the Ground Kenneth M. Thomas Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Kenneth M. Thomas, The Increasing Risk of Runway Incursions - The Most Dangerous Part of Air Travel May Be the Time Spent on the Ground, 67 J. Air L. & Com. 545 (2002) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol67/iss2/8 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. THE INCREASING RISK OF RUNWAY INCURSIONS-THE MOST DANGEROUS PART OF AIR TRAVEL MAY BE THE TIME SPENT ON THE GROUND Kenneth M. Thomas* "Taxiing on the airportsurface is the most hazardous phase offlight." - Jane Garvey, Administrator of the Federal Aviation Adminis- tration, in her opening remarks at the Runway Safety Na- tional Summit, June 2000.' "When I board an aircraft, I believe that the greatest threat to my life is a collision on the runway." - Jim Burnett, Former Chairman, National Transportation 2 Safety Board. TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................ 547 I. INTRODUCTION .................................. 548 II. A BASIC STUDY OF RUNWAY INCURSIONS ..... 549 A. WHAT IS A RUNWAY INCURSION? ................ 549 B. CAUSES OF RUNWAY INCURSIONS ................ 550 1. Pilot Deviations (PD) ........................ 550 2. OperationalErrors/Deviations (OED) ........
    [Show full text]
  • Runway Safety
    Office of the Administrator 800 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, DC 20591 November 4, 2020 The Honorable Roger Wicker Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter is in response to the requirement of Section 334 of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2018 to submit a report on improving runway safety. The report must: • review the relative benefits and risks of requiring the use of runway awareness and advisory systems in turbine-powered airplanes with a maximum takeoff weight greater than 19,000 pounds; • review systems capable of detecting wrong-surface alignment to determine whether the capability exists to detect imminent wrong-surface landings at each airport where such a system is in use; • describe information gathered from the use of the Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (ASSC) system at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) since July 2017; • assess available technologies to determine whether it is feasible, cost-effective, and appropriate to install and deploy, at any airport, systems to provide a direct warning capability to flight crews or air traffic controllers, or both, of potential runway incursions; and, • describe FAA efforts to develop metrics that would allow the FAA to determine whether runway incursions are increasing and to assess the effectiveness of implemented runway safety initiatives. Consultation with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is required. The Federal Aviation Administration’s Runway Safety Program is continuously working to reduce the risk of runway safety events. The Runway Safety Program’s strategic direction is highlighted in the National Runway Safety Plan 2018-2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Causal Paths and Prediction of Runway Incursion Risk Using Bayesian Belief Networks
    Dissertations and Theses 10-2013 Identification of Causal Paths and Prediction of Runway Incursion Risk using Bayesian Belief Networks Benjamin Jeffry Goodheart Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Worldwide Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/edt Part of the Aviation Safety and Security Commons Scholarly Commons Citation Goodheart, Benjamin Jeffry, "Identification of Causal Paths and Prediction of Runway Incursion Risk using Bayesian Belief Networks" (2013). Dissertations and Theses. 53. https://commons.erau.edu/edt/53 This Dissertation - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IDENTIFICATION OF CAUSAL PATHS AND PREDICTION OF RUNWAY INCURSION RISK USING BAYESIAN BELIEF NETWORKS by Benjamin Jeffry Goodheart A Dissertation Submitted to the College of Aviation in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Aviation Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, Florida October, 2013 i UMI Number: 3609284 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3609284 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC.
    [Show full text]
  • Runway Incursion White Paper.Pmd
    RUNWAY INCURSIONS 1 • Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions RUNWAY INCURSIONS: A Call for Action Runway Incursions Executive Summary his paper provides an analysis of the risk and severity of the runway incursion problem facing Tthe U.S. air transportation system. FAA defines a runway incursion as “any occurrence in the airport runway environment involving an aircraft, vehicle, person or object on the ground that creates a collision hazard or results in a loss of required separation with an aircraft taking off, intending to take off, landing, or intending to land.” Approximately one runway incursion occurs each day in the United States, and the potential for a catastrophic accident is “unacceptable,” according to the FAA’s risk/severity matrix. The likelihood for runway incursions grows exponentially as a function of air traffic growth, which is on the increase in the United States. Numerous studies have been performed on the runway incursion problem, both in and outside of the United States. The studies share a great deal of commonality with respect to causal factors and solutions. The most exhaustive and data-centric study performed to date is one completed in 2002 by the U.S. Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST), a group made up of dozens of government and industry aviation safety experts. The study found that the runway incursion problem can be reduced by as much as 95 percent with a combination of technologies that greatly enhance pilot situational awareness and provide conflict alerting to air traffic controllers and pilots. Numerous other enhancements can provide further margins of safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Aeroboss™ Runway Incursion Warning System (RIWS)
    AIRPORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AeroBOSS™ Runway Incursion Warning System (RIWS) Outside the US: +1 (913) 495.2600 Selex ES Inc. is an international subsidiary of Leonardo S.p.A. Toll Free: +1 (800) 765.0861 Made In The USA AeroBOSS™ Runway Incursion Warning System (RIWS) AeroBOSS™ RIWS is part of Leonardo’s AeroBOSS software suite that provides airports real-time situational awareness, monitoring and alerting to improve safety, resource coordination and performance. AeroBOSS Runway Incursion Warning System (RIWS) is in-vehicle technology that prevents runway incursions. AeroBOSS RIWS alerts drivers of potential incursions before they enter the Runway Safety Area (RSA) or any other identified hazard areas at an airport. AeroBOSS RIWS is compliant with the FAA Advisory Circular (150/52-10-25) Revision 2. AeroBOSS RIWS integrates real-time flight surveillance data from the FAA SWIM program and ADS-B surveillance sources. It uses GPS receivers that exceed FAA AC requirements and the fully compliant RIWS software that can be used on Windows, Android or Apple iPads, or on iPhones. The AeroBOSS RIWS provides ground collision alerting and runway collision alerting for surface vehicles and is the first RIWS solution to be used by FAA Tech Ops teams. With proven stability and reliability, AeroBOSS RIWS solution has been in operation at airports of all sizes, including large hub facilities, in the United States. Key Elements of AeroBOSS™ RIWS › Alerts are based on distance, heading and speed of vehicle › Can be configured as standalone in the vehicle
    [Show full text]