annual runway safety report 2010

8/2/2019 Annual Runway Safety Report 2010

1/92

Annual RunwaySafety Report 2010


2/92

Message from the Administrator

Dear Colleague:

When serious runway incursions drop by 50 percent over the

previous year, you know youre doing something right.

The good news here is every corner o the aviation community

is sharing the success. From the airlines to the business

aviation community to the pilots, controllers, surace vehicle

operators and the GA enthusiasts who just y or pleasure,

everyone has taken a step up.

The numbers alone tell the story. With almost 53 million

operations in FY 2009, we had 12 serious runway incursions, down rom 25 the previous

year; two serious incursions involved commercial aircrat. Those are encouraging

numbers.

When we issued a Call to Action or runway saety almost two years ago, we as a

community recognized the need to do a better job o keeping things sae on the airport

surace. Even though the number o mistakes is infnitesimally small, given the number

o successul operations per day, we nevertheless need to take every opportunity to

continue to enhance surace saety.

As youll clearly see in the runway saety report, thats what is happening. The

emergence o a just culture between regulator and regulated has played a huge part.

Because we have so ew data points, we need or the people in the system to be able to

say, Heres a problem without ear o penalty. As a result, were learning about the sot

spots, the places, and procedures that need to change.

Although weve been successul, we still need to do more. Given these results, Imconfdent that we will.

J. Randolph Babbitt

FAA Administrator


3/92

Table o Contents

FAA Initiatives to Improve Runway Saety .....................3

The FAA Measures and EvaluatesRunway Saety ...............................................................5

Updates and Progress onRunway Saety Activities ................................................9

NextGen and Runway Saety ...................................... 21Human Factors in Aviation .........................................27

International Leadership inRunway Saety ............................................................ 35

Appendix ..................................................................A-1


4/92


5/92

32010 Runway Safety Report

FAA Initiatives to ImproveRunway Saety

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible or the

oversight and regulation o the worlds most advanced and saest

aviation system. Strong partnerships within the aviation community,continued collaboration with stakeholders, and a clear vision o the

uture have resulted in a strong oundation rom which the FAA

continues to build a uture air transportation system and improve

saety.

The FAA is responsible or the largest and most complex National

Airspace System (NAS) in the world (Figure 1), which includes more

than 500 towered and roughly 18,500 non-towered airports. This

complex airport environment operates saely and eciently primarily

due to the collaboration and diligence o more than 14,500 air trac

controllers, more than 624,000 FAA certicated pilots, ground crews,

and a large number o airport vehicle operators. Their combined dili-

gence has served to reduce the number and severity o runway incur-

sions, and the impact o their role will become more evident as the

FAA continues to engage in Next Generation (NextGen) initiatives.

With NextGen tech-

nologies, procedures, and

operations, the FAA will

be able to accommodate

the projected growth

in air transportation

demand and provide

better reliability while

improving runway saety

in a more complex

environment. NextGen

technologies will promote

greater situational awareness or pilots, ground vehicle operators,

and air trac controllers through real-time system-wide distribution

o inormation. Slated or continous implementation, the FAA is

constructing the NextGen air transportation system through near-,

mid-, and ar-term planning initiatives. The FAA is well under way to

accomplishing many near-term runway saety initiatives and will soon

begin work on mid-term activities.

The creation o the uture air transportation system requiresharmonization and collaboration between the FAA, oreign agencies,

aircrat and component manuacturers, and airlines. To urther inter-

national involvement, the FAA hosted the rst International Runway

Saety Summit to not only bring a global ocus on saety issues but

also advocate or increased awareness o the importance o runway

saety domestically and internationally.

Figure 1

NAS With Air Trafc

52,928,316Surface operations

in FY 2009

58,562,343Surface operations

in FY 2008

951Runway incursions

in FY 2009

1,009Runway incursions

in FY 2008

12Serious runway incursions

in FY 2009

25Serious runway incursions

in FY 2008

By the Numbers


6/92

4 FAA Initiatives to Improve Runway Safety

1 20092013 FAA Flight Plan Objective 3, Reduce the Risk of Runway Incursions.

Table 1

FY 2010 Runway Saety Report

FAA Measures andEvaluates Runway Saety

FY 2009 data and its comparison to FY 2008 data

Updates and Progress onRunway Saety Activities

Meetings Multimedia Training Other initiatives More runway saety improvements Improvements or inrastructure and technology

NextGen and RunwaySaety

What is NextGen? How will NextGen impact runway saety? NextGen and runway saety technologies available today NextGen and runway saety in the near term NextGen and runway saety in the mid-term (20122018) NextGen and runway saety beyond the mid-term (2018+)

The Human Factor inAviation

What is the human actor discipline? Why is the study o human actors so important? How human actors research reduces human errors Designing with the human actor in mind Anatomy o an incursion

International Leadershipin Runway Saety

International leadership in runway saety FAA is a key participant in ICAO Adopting international phraseology FAA collaborates on runway saety with international aviation stakeholders FAA and Eurocontrols collaboration in runway saety International saety data sharing FAA and CAST FAA and Chinese aviation authorities FAAs uture leadership role

The FAAs Oce o Runway Saety publishes this

annual report to inorm aviation stakeholders o

the ongoing eorts to improve runway saety. The

2010 FAA Annual Runway Saety Report presents

the FAAs progress toward the Flight Plan[1] goals

and perormance targets or runway saety. The

report also describes the NextGen initiatives thatpertain to runway saety, the role o human actors

in runway saety, and FAAs international leader-

ship responsibility, all contributing to improving

the uture o runway saety (Table 1).

To learn more about the FAAs current initiatives

and uture plans or runway saety, please visit

www.aa.gov/go/runwaysaety. The ollowing FAA

publications are available at www.aa.gov:

National Runway Saety Plan,

FY 2009 through FY 2011 FAA Flight Plan, 20092013

FAA Port olio o Goals, 2009

FAA Ofce o Saety,

Saety Blueprint, 2009


7/92


The FAA Measures and EvaluatesRunway Saety

The FAA depends on the support o strong partnerships in the airport

environment to collectively improve runway saety (Figure 2). These

partnerships have provided the ramework necessary or buildingthe uture o air travel, one that

increases saety awareness or

all involved and will allow us to

travel rom where we are today

to the projected increased capac-

ity requirements o tomorrow.

Leveraging NextGen technologies,

improved training materials and

rened communication techniques

will aid in decreasing the number

o serious incursions and continue

to improve runway saety.

Runway saety is measured by the

occurrence o runway incursions,

which are dened as ollows:

Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence

o an aircrat, vehicle, or person on the protected area o a surace

designated or the landing and takeo o aircrat. The FAA uses this

denition to identiy runway incursions, and then categorizes each

based on the severity o the incident (Table 2 and Figure 3). Category

A and B events are considered to be serious incursions.

Airpo

rtOp

erations

Tower

Operati

ons

Airc

raftOperations

Drivers

and

Pedestrians

Controllers

Pilots

Figure 2:

Runway Saety Is a Shared

Responsibility.

Table 2:

Runway Incursion Severity Classifcation

Category Description

AA serious incident in which a collision was narrowly

avoided.

B

An incident in which separation decreases and a

signicant potential or collision exists, which may

result in a time-critical corrective/evasive response

to avoid a collision.

C An incident characterized by ample time and/ordistance to avoid a collision.

D

An incident that meets the denition o runway

incursion such as incorrect presence o a single

vehicle/person/aircrat on the protected area o a

surace designated or the landing and take-o o

aircrat but with no immediate saety consequences.

1%The FAAs goal for reduction

of total runway incursions

for FY 2009

6%The actual reduction of runway

incursions in FY 2009

52%The decrease in

serious runway incursions

from FY 2008

By the Numbers


8/92

6 The FAA Measures and Evaluates Runway Safety

Table 3:

Types o Runway Incursions

Operational Errors Pilot Deviations Vehicle/Pedestrian Deviations

Action o an air trac controller

that results in less than required

minimum separation between

two or more aircrat or betweenan aircrat and obstacles (e.g.,

vehicles, equipment, personnel

on runways) or clearing an

aircrat to take o or land on a

closed runway.

Action o a pilot that violates

any Federal Aviation Regulation

(e.g., a pilot crosses a runway

without a clearance while enroute to an airport gate).

Pedestrians or vehicles entering

any portion o the airport move-

ment areas (runways/taxiways)

without authorization rom airtrac control.

Runway incursions can be urther classied by type

as Operational Errors, Pilot Deviations, or Vehicle/

Pedestrian Deviations (Table 3). Pilot deviations

accounted or 63 percent o runway incursions,

with operational errors and vehicle/pedestrian

deviations accounting or 37 percent (Figure 4).

In FY 2009, 270 o more than 500 towered

airports reported runway incursions. A total o

951 incursions occurred at these 270 airports.

Flight operations dropped rom 58.6 million in FY

2008 to 52.9 million in FY 2009 a 10-percent

decrease. As a result, the rate o runway incursions

per million operations increased slightly (Figure 5).

Although the rate o incursions increased, the

number o serious incursions decreased signi-

cantly (25 to 12). More than 98 percent o the 951

runway incursions were recorded as Category C

and D or non serious. The FY 2009 perormancetarget or total incursions was set at a 1-percent

decrease rom FY 2008; however, the actual

decrease was 6 percent.[2]

During FY 2008, the FAA recorded 25 serious

incursion incidents out o 58.6 million operations

(0.43 incursions per million). In FY 2009, the FAA

recorded 12 serious incursion incidents out o 52.9

million operations (0.23 incursions per million).

These numbers represent a reduction o serious

runway incursions by 52% in one year, and surpass

the FAA FY 2009 Portolio o Goals perormancetarget o not more than 0.47 incursions per million

operations (Figure 6).

OE/D

16%

PD

63%

V/PD

21%

Figure 4:

Distribution Across Runway

Incursion Type (FY 2009)

Category A1%

Category B0.32%

Category C36%

Category D63%

Figure 3:

Distribution Across Runway

Incursion Severity (FY 2009)

2 FAA FY 2009 Portfolio of Goals


9/92


Figure 6:

Number and Rate o Serious Runway Incursions, Categories A and B (FY 2006FY 2009)

Figure 5:

Number and Rate o Runway Incursions (FY 2006FY 2009)

0

10

5

15

20

25

30

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Rate of Incursionsper Million Operations

FY 2009PerformanceTarget = 0.47Serious Incursionsper MillionOperations

Number ofRunway Incursions

7Category B

24Category A

FY 2009FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

0.51

7

17

0.39

13

12

0.43

9

3

0.23

FY 2009 ActualPerformanceRate = 0.23Serious Incursionsper MillionOperations

Rate of SeriousRunway Incursions perMillion Operations

0

400

200

600

800

1000

1200

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20Rate of Incursions per Million Operations

Number of Runway Incursions

816Total RunwayIncursions 892 1009 951

Rate of Runway Incursionsper Million Operations 13.36 14.59 17.23 17.97

FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009


10/92


11/92


500,000the number of

runway safety DVDs

distributed in FY 2009

240the number of

runway safety briefings

conducted in FY 2009

77%the percentage of

pilot deviations that involved

general aviation aircraft

By the Numbers

Updates and Progress on RunwaySaety Activities

The FAA Oce o Runway Saety has made progress in continuing

to build a proactive saety culture across the aviation community.

An important part o a robust saety culture is the awareness andidentication o hazards. The FAA has achieved increased community

awareness o the hazards that contribute to runway saety by using

specic targeted outreach and training activities.

The FAA continually inorms the aviation community about runway

saety updates and best practices through various ormats ranging

rom traditional fyers, multimedia DVDs, interactive websites, and

aviation events. This multi-pronged approach enables the FAA to

reach a ar broader aviation audience.

Saety in the runway environment is largely dependent on eective

communications among pilots, controllers, ground crews, and vehicle

operators to ensure airport operations are conducted in the saemanner in which they were intended. Eective communication has

proven to be a critical actor in decreasing operational risk resulting

rom misinterpreted or misunderstood instructions and inormation.

Thereore, human actors infuences are given greater consideration

in discussions about phraseology changes, pilot situational awareness

improvements, and technology implementation.

Human error is known to contribute to almost every runway incur-

sion; the largest proportion o those incursions involved general avia-

tion pilots. In act, general aviation pilots were involved in 77 percent

o all runway incursions that were categorized as pilot deviations in

FY 2009 (Figure 7). In FY 2009, general aviation pilots were involvedin 11 o the 12 serious runway incursions. Consequently the FAA

and the general aviation community have joined together to identiy

and address specic runway saety issues. By developing training and

outreach activities targeting runway saety, hundreds o thousands

o pilots, air trac controllers, and

airport vehicle drivers have the

opportunity to increase operational

awareness and help decrease the

number o runway incursions. In

support o this eort, or example,

the FAA teamed with the Aircrat

Owners and Pilots Association(AOPA) to distribute runway saety

DVDs. This one initiative reached

more than 400,000 or about two-

thirds o all registered pilots. General Aviation77%

CommercialAviation

23%

Figure 7:

FY 2009 Pilot Deviations by

Operating Type


12/92

10 Updates and Progress on Runway Safety Activities

The Oce o Runway Saetys strategic communi-

cation, community outreach, and training activities

encompass our ocus areas: meetings, multimedia,

training, and other initiatives (Table 4). Since the

initiation o these activities, occurrence o serious

The frst-ever FAA International Runway Saety

Summit was held December 13, 2009, in

Washington, DC. Focusing on runway saety

rom an international perspective, the 3-day event

attracted more than 500 airport managers and

planners, air trac controllers, pilots, engineers,

airline ocials, aviation association executives,

human actors specialists, and saety experts rom

17 countries worldwide.

By bringing these individuals together, we

will not only be able to evaluate our progress

to improve runway safety to date, but will

also set a course for the future of runway

safety worldwide.

Wes Timmons

Director of Runway Safety

runway incursions has decreased. The program

has achieved success in promoting the message

o runway saety to the aviation community. The

ollowing subsections explain these activities in

greater detail.

meetings

multimedia

training

otherinitiat

ives

InternationalRunway Safety

Summit Runway Safety

Action Team(RSAT) Meetings

Runway SafetyBriengs

Flight InstructorRefresher Clinics

IndustryConferences

Trade Shows Runway Safety

Council

DVD Pilots Guideto Safe Surface

Operations National

Association ofFlight Instructors(NAFI) DVD

Pilot SafetyAnnouncementFilms on RunwaySafety

Online RunwaySafety Course

Runway SafetyWebsite

Airport Recurrent Crew Resource

Management(CRM)

National Air TrafcProfessionalism

Tower Refresher Prevention of

Operational Errors

Signs and MarkingsQuizzes

Postcards, Posters,and E-mails

Safety SummerFlying Brieng

Taxi ClearancePost-it Notes

Vehicle SafetyStickers

UniversityCompetitions

Table 4:

Ofce o Runway Saety Communications Strategy

Meetings

Special keynote talks by U.S. Deputy Secretary

o Transportation John D. Porcari, FAA

Administrator J. Randolph Babbitt, National

Transportation Saety Board Chairperson Deborah

A. P. Hersman, and FAA Air Trac Organization

Chie Operating Ocer Hank Krakowski empha-

sized the importance that the United States and

its aviation partners worldwide place on runway

saety.

Recognized saety and human actors experts

rom industry groups Air Line Pilots Association

(ALPA), National Air Trac Controllers

Association (NATCA), Civil Air Navigation

Services Organization (CANSO), International

Air Transport Association (IATA), and

EUROCONTROLled presentations, panels, and


13/92


runway safety progress, and future plans also were

included in the agenda.

The Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) is

chartered to address existing and potential runway

safety issues and offer recommendations for improve-

ment of local airports. The nine regional RunwaySafety Program Ofces held 129 meetings combined

at nationwide airports reporting frequent or severe

runway incursions. RSAT meeting attendees included

airport management, air trafc controllers, airport

tenants, airlines and charter companies, xed base

operators, general aviation pilots, airport certication

inspectors, and other stakeholder entities (Table 5).

Runway safety briengs, presentations, and Flight

Instructor Refresher Clinics (FIRC) were presented

to ight instructors to help them stay current with

Table 5:

Runway Safety Activities (FY 2009)

Runway Safety Activities (FY 2009) Total

Runway Safety Program Meetings 116

Local RSATs 81

Follow up RSATs 48

Pilot Meetings 106

FIRCs 71

Designated Pilot Examiner Meetings 3

Flight Schools Part 91/141 24

Mechanic Schools Part 143 6

National Association of State Aviation

Organizations Events

14

Fly-ins AOPA EAA Local 20

Safety Assessments/FCT Site Visits 26

Incident and Other Investigations 150

Speaking Engagements 84

Other Customer Meetings 288

Meetings With Aircraft Manufacturers 2

Total Major Activities 1039

general aviation ight training guidance. The FAA

conducted 71 clinics nationwide, reaching thousands

of ight instructors. FIRCs are an important conduit

for the FAA, starting at the source with student pilots.

The FAA is bringing the importance of runway safety

directly to each ight instructor so that each of them

can teach proper runway safety awareness and incur-sion avoidance to each general aviation pilot through

improved training, printed materials, and electronic

media (e.g., runway safety DVDs).

The Runway Safety Council (RSC) is a joint effort

between the FAA and the aviation industry. A work-

ing sub-group, called the Root Cause Analysis Team

Table 6:

Runway Safety Conferences

Runway Safety Conferences Date

NBAA Annual Meeting and

Convention (Orlando)

10/2008

AOPA Expo (San Jose) 11/2008

Ohio Regional Business Aviation

Association Safety Day (Columbus)

01/2009

Women in Aviation Conference

(Atlanta)

02/2009

Aviation Human Factors Conference

(Dallas)

03/2009

ICAO Runway Safety Seminar

(Bangkok)

04/2009

NBAA Regional Forum (Dallas) 04/2009

Corporate Aviation Safety Seminar

(Orlando)

04/2009

EAA Sun n Fun (Lakeland, FL) 04/2009

Regional Airline Association Annual

Convention (Salt Lake City)

05/2009

AAAE Annual Meeting (Philadelphia) 06/2009NBAA Regional Forum (St. Paul)

EAA AirVenture (Oshkosh, WI)

07/2009

NBAA Regional Forum (Las Vegas) 09/2009

NASAO Annual Meeting (Tucson) 09/2009

Bombardier Safety Standdown

(Wichita)

09/2009


14/92


The Runway Saety Council (RSC) is a joint

eort between the FAA and the aviation industry.

A working sub-group, called the Root Cause

Analysis Team (RCAT), conducts root cause

analysis o most serious runway incursions, which

are then presented to the RSC along with recom-

mendations to improve runway saety.

Industry conerences, trade shows, and events are

all places at which the FAAs Oce o Runway

Saety showed a strong presence (Table 6). These

platorms enable the FAA to engage and interact

with industry leaders, airport managers, air trac

controllers, pilots, aircrat operators, and industry

groups. This interaction enables the FAA to receive

comments and suggestions regarding runway saety

issues, concerns, and progress. The events listed inTable 6 signiy the FAAs sustained communica-

tions and collaboration eorts.

Multimedia

A runway saety DVD containing our videos,

co-produced by the Oce o Runway Saety, was

included in the April 2009 issue oAOPA maga-

zine, reaching approximately two-thirds o the

nations airmen. The our short lms were entitledFace to Face, Eye to Eye; Heads up, Hold Short,

Fly Right; Listen Up, Read Back, Fly Right; and

Was That for Us? The short lms ocused on good

communication, situational awareness, and proper

planning procedures beore a fight (Table 7). All

lms were accompanied with examples o real-lie

situations and problems that have historically

Table 7:

Runway Saety DVD Films

Title Overview

Face to Face, Eye

to Eye

The lm highlights human actors elements o runway saety, detailing the impor-

tance o situational awareness, phraseology, and communication between pilots and

controllers. The key message throughout this short lm was to educate the viewer

about the importance o continual education o runway saety.

Heads up, Hold

Short, Fly Right

The lm underscores paying attention to detail, keeping a sharp sense o situational

awareness, and i unsure, asking someone who knows. Best practices included keep-

ing a sterile, sae, and observant cockpit. The video message reminded viewers that

reducing distractions in the cockpit, being aware o surroundings, and clariying

any unclear instructions are critical or maintaining a sae runway environment.

Listen Up, ReadBack, Fly Right

The script ocused on pilots who fy to or rom non-towered airports and theprocedures that should be used to maintain saety while emphasizing a sterile

cockpit, planning or readiness o fight, and phraseology in an area that relies on

the communication skills o pilots when no air trac services are provided.

Was That For

Us?

The script emphasized the importance or good prefight planning by fight crews,

ocusing on taxiing procedures, understanding lighting and signage, and good

communication.

occurred. An FAA-published brochure, A Pilots

Guide to Safe Surface Operations, designed to

augment the videos was also included.

The FAAs Ofce o Runway Saety ofcial website

was launched in October 2009 (Figure 8). Thiswebsite contains valuable inormation or everyone

involved and interested in runway saety. The

website also oers resources, best practices, and

statistics ocused on runway saety. For more inor-

mation, visit www.aa.gov/go/runwaysaety.


15/92


The FAA published 63 Hot Spot charts (Figure 9).

A Hot Spot is an area on an airport that has had

a history o problems, either rom congestion

or runway incursions. The FAA has added Hot

Spots to its AERONAV Services airport diagrams.

to airport diagrams, which are available ree

o charge. Visual displays o Hot Spots are an

eective way or a pilot or vehicle driver to be

orewarned o existing areas o concern and to plan

or contingencies. Last year, the FAA identied 23

airports as potential candidates or Hot Spot mark-

ings. To date, the FAA has published 63 airport

diagrams, complete with Hot Spot markings. Some

o these charts also have been made into oldout

pamphlets that illustrate more detail.

Runway Saety DVD and Pilots Guide brochures

were mailed in April 2009 to National Association

o Flight Instructors (NAFI) members (more than

5,000 members, or about 90% o all active fight

instructors) to spread awareness or runway saety.

The NAFI mailing included an introductory

message about runway saety and was co-signed by

NAFIs Executive Director and FAAs Director o

Runway Saety.

Figure 8:

Ofce o Runway Saetys Ofcial WebsiteFigure 9:

Hot Spot Chart


16/92


Training

Crew resource management (CRM) training,

initially designed or fight crew personnel, was

enhanced in 2009 and tailored to meet the air

trac controllers specic needs. Continuing to

promote an operational saety culture, the FAAs

CRM human actors training is geared toward

addressing the operational aspects o the air

trac control team environment and is relevant

to daily operations. The training includes three

major sections: Improving Teamwork, Improving

Individual Perormance, and Threat and Error

Management (TEM). A DVD highlighting the

basic concepts o CRM also was distributed to all

air trac acilities. The FAAs Oce o Saety has

conducted training at many o the nations largest

airports and terminal acilities, and 2,914 control-lers have been trained in CRM. For FY 2010,

CRM workshops are scheduled to be held at

another 21 acilities.

National Air Trafc Proessionalism (NATPRO)

training is ocused on visual sensory perception

to enhance cognitive skills, situational awareness,

memory, and reaction time or controllers in radar

and tower acilities, and was completed by all

terminal acilities in 20082009. NATPRO II is the

complementary part o the training or controllers

in radar and tower acilities, and targets auditory

sensory training. It is also intended to improve

cognitive skills, situational awareness, memory,

and reaction time, with an emphasis on improving

hearback/readback skills. It was completed in radar

acilities in January 2010, and tower acilities will

complete it by December 31, 2010.

Tower Reresher Training is a comprehensive

reresher training class or air trac control-

lers specically ocusing on tower procedures,

best operating practices, and runway incursion

prevention. This training, which was conducted

at all FAA and contract towers nationwide and

completed in September 2009, consisted o

briengs on risk management techniques, actual

surace events, and a review o unique local airport

characteristics and procedures.

A Prevention o Operational Errors When

Conducting On-the-Job Training Program was

developed in response to numerous operational

errors that have occurred during new air trac

controller training sessions. To address this issue,

training presentations were given to all terminal

acilities. These presentations addressed the poten-

tial risks when on-the-job training is occurring.

Terminal acilities are encouraged to utilize this

training on an ongoing basis or all newly ormed

training teams consisting o the controller receiv-

ing training, the on-the-job training instructors

and the ront line manager.

Back to Basics DVDs or Airport Trafc Control

Tower Controllers. From 20062010, two series

o Back to Basics DVDs were deployed and

training completed. Subjects o the DVDs included:

Be Sure the Runway is Open; Aircrat Position is

Veried; Scan the Runway; Issue Clearance UsingCorrect Phraseology; Close the Loop by Getting

an Accurate Readback, Thunderstorm Hazards,

Infight Icing, and Clear Communications.

Hearback/Readback Joint Initiative. A signicant

number o operational errors that occur in terminal

acilities are a result o hearback/readback errors;

thereore Terminal Quality Control developed a

multimedia presentation to mitigate hearback/

readback errors by educating and inorming

the controller workorce on dierent types o

hearback/readback errors, how they occur, andexamples (both radar and audio) o TRACON,

Tower and Enroute operational errors triggered by

hearback/readback mistakes. This presentation was

completed September 30, 2009.

Air Trafc Initiatives. All air trac controllers are

being trained on two changes to air trac proce-

dures that are scheduled or implementation. The

rst was Taxi and Ground Movement Procedures,

encompassing multiple runway crossing procedures

and explicit runway crossing instructions. The

second is Line Up and Wait, a phraseology changethat substitutes line up and wait, or position

and hold is scheduled or implementation end o

September 2010.

Airport Recurrent Training or all certicated

airports in the nation was conducted. This train-

ing included initial and recurrent instruction or

airport employees (e.g., airport police and airport


17/92


maintenance workers). As a result o the 2008

FAAs Call to Action, all certicated airports now

require recurrent training or non-airport employ-

ees (e.g., Fixed Base Operator [FBO] personnel and

airline mechanics). The airport conducted initial

and recurrent training, and the training curriculum

must include at least one o the ollowing:

Airport amiliarization, including airport mark-

ings, lighting, and signs

Procedures or sae and orderly access to, and

operations in, movement areas and saety areas

by pedestrians and ground vehicles, including

provisions identiying the consequences o

noncompliance with the procedures

Airport communications, including radio

communication between the air trac control

tower and personnel, and procedures or report-ing unsae airport conditions

Duties required under the airports certication

manual

Additional subject areas such as aircrat rescue

and reghting, handling and storing o

hazardous substances and materials, airport sel

inspections, wildlie hazard management, or

eld condition reporting, as appropriate

An Airport Certication Inspector must approve

all training, and each airport must provide a sylla-bus in its Airport Certication Manual.

Runway saety was emphasized in airline pilot

training. Many airlines incorporated real-world

runway incursions into their pilot curriculums.

Working with the FAA, the airlines constructed

scenarios rom actual runway incursions to

emphasize the importance o runway saety.

Importance was placed on numerous issues such as

the ollowing:

Display and use o airport ground navigation

charts.

Contemporary human actors associated with

the introduction o new technologies (e.g.,

aircrat equipped with advanced avionics

displays and electronic fight bags [EFB]).

Understanding pilot-controller ground

instructions and the potential or error during

read-back.

Proper timing or the use o checklists and fightdeck briengs during taxi.

Last minute avionics and fight management

system (FMS) input.

Controllers were trained on runway saety rom

the pilots viewpoint; several U.S. air carriers, in

collaboration with the FAA, have oered a one-day

air trac amiliarization course or controllers.

The controllers spent the day in ground school

learning about the responsibilities and pitalls o

working in the cockpit o a transport category

aircrat. They also observed a simulator sessiondemonstrating pilot-controller interaction during

ground operations.


18/92

A summer pilot initiative was developed by the

FAAs Oce o Runway Saety in partnership with

the FAA Saety Team (FAAST). This initiative

reminded pilots who had not fown during the

winter months about the importance o runwaysaety. The summer awareness initiative, composed

o postcards, posters, and e-mails, all emphasized

runway saety and targeted roughly 40,000 airmen

in the Great Lakes and Northwest Mountain

regions.

A runway saety campaign aimed at general avia-

tion pilots using placemats to depict airport signs

and provide an airport markings quiz was tested

at airport restaurants in the Southwestern Region

o the United States. The test campaign distributed

more than 10,000 placemats. Response to theplacemats has been positive and expansion o the

campaign to other regions is expected in FY 2010

(Figure 10).

The Ofce o Runway Saetys signs and mark-

ings vehicle sticker was updated or the 2009

Experimental Aircrat Association (EAA)

AirVenture fy-in. The stickers, intended to be

axed to airport vehicle dashboards, provided a

handy airport signage and marker reerence or

vehicle drivers. Thousands o these stickers were

distributed to each o the FAAs nine regionalrunway saety oces or ongoing disbursement.

FAAs taxi clearance notesin the style o

Post-it Noteswere updated during summer

2009. These notes are used to jot down taxi

inormation (e.g., clearances, requencies, and

Other Initiatives

Figure 10:

FAA Saety Handouts

Figure 11:

FAA/AOPA Online

taxi routes). The taxi clearance post-it became a

hit with all pilots and a sell-out at FAA pilot

briengs, FIRCs, and saety presentations. Eachregional runway saety oce has been issued extra

supplies o the notes or distribution.

An update to the AOPA on-line runway saety

course was completed and produced with the

support o the FAA Oce o Runway Saety and

developed with the latest multimedia technology

(Figure 11). The comprehensive training and

examination are available to AOPA members and

non-members. The course includes the ollowing:

An in-depth guide to airport signs, pavementmarkings, and lighting

Re-creations o several real-lie runway incidents

and accidents

Valuable real-world insights rom air trac

controllers

Best practices or communication at towered and

non-towered airports.

The course presents a multitude o interactive

exercises to help pilots hone their skills. It provides

airmen with a thorough review o every aspect orunway saety. To date, almost 83,000 pilots have

completed the course, and the numbers continue to

increase each month.

The FAA has sponsored its third annual Design

Competition or Universities, which engages

undergraduate and graduate students in airport



19/92


More Runway Saety Improvements

Figure 12:

FAA Design Competitiondesign related issues. Students work individually

or in teams choosing one o our Technical Design

Challenge categories:

Airport operation and maintenance

Runway saety/runway incursions

Airport environmental interactions

Airport management and planning.

The competition provides an opportunity or

students to address pertinent technical challenges

regarding the management, saety, capacity, and

eciency presented to our nations airports and to

recommend innovative solutions. The FAA selects

winning designs, and the ourth annual competi-

tion is under way.

Inrastructure

Runway Saety Areas (RSA) are unobstructed

zones around the perimeter o the runway to

enhance saety in the event o a runway incursion

or excursion. An FAA team determined appropriate

improvements or each runway. The FAA expects

to improve 82 percent o the saety areas identied

by the end o 2010.

Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS)is a sot-ground arrestor system constructed to

quickly and saely stop aircrat rom overrunning a

runway. The FAA developed EMAS in partnership

with industry and airport operators. An EMAS

bed provides a saety enhancement on runway

ends where not enough level, cleared land exists

or a standard runway saety area. EMAS has

been installed at more than 41 runway ends at

28 airports, with plans to install 15 more EMAS

systems at 9 additional airports across the nation.

EMAS has proven its value at least six times

over, most recently at Charleston, WV, where aregional jet carrying 30 passengers and 3 crew

members aborted its takeo. The aircrat overran

the runway and was stopped saely by a recently

installed EMAS. The aircrat came to a stop with

its wheels buried in the EMAS material, allowing

the passengers to exit without injury.

If it hadnt been for the EMAS, Im convinced

a catastrophic accident would have occurred.

West Virginia County Commissioner

January 19, 2010.

Technology

Runway Incursion Prevention Device (RIPD) is

an electronic device developed as a memory aid

or controllers to help prevent runway incursions.Housed in the tower cab at the ground controller

position, RIPD equipment helps enhance runway

movement procedures and is coupled with a visual

and an audio warning message. The FAA has

nalized the operational design and will start

implementation. The implementation plan will be

a reverse waterallthat is, starting with smaller

airports (without ASDE-X) and moving to the

larger acilities. Prototype testing o the RIPD will

begin in late 2010.

Airport Movement Area Saety System (AMASS)visually and aurally prompts tower controllers

to respond to situations that could potentially

compromise saety. AMASS, which is an add-on

enhancement to the already existing ASDE-3

radar, provides automated alerts and warnings o


20/92


potential runway incursions and other hazards

(Figure 13). The system operates with ground andapproach sensor systems to ascertain aircrat loca-

tions in approaching and ground movement situa-

tions. It uses airport radars, state-o-the-art signal

processing, and advanced computer technology to

improve airport saety. The value o AMASS was

demonstrated in the near-collision o two aircrat

at San Francisco in 2007, when the system alerted

the air trac controller 15 seconds beore the

estimated collision. The FAA installed AMASS

at the nations busiest airports, and the system

continues to be an important runway saety tool

or controllers.

Runway Status Lights (RWSL)

Runway Status Lights provide pilots with

inormation about current or immediately

anticipated runway occupancy by other aircrat

(Figure 14). A RWSL system (Figure 15) derives

Figure 13:

AMASS System Display

Figure 14:

Runway Status Lights

Figure 15:

Runway Status Lights Concept

trac inormation rom surace and approach

surveillance systems and illuminates red in-pave-

ment lights that alert the pilot to potentially unsae

situations. Two RWSL componentsRunwayEntrance Lights (REL) and Takeo Hold Lights

(THL)are undergoing operational evaluation

at Dallas/Ft. Worth International, Los Angeles

International, and San Diego International

Airports (Table 8). RELs are deployed at a taxiway/

runway crossing and illuminate red, signaling to

the pilot or driver it is unsae to enter because

trac is on or approaching the runway. THLs

are deployed in the runway by the departure hold

zone and illuminate red when an aircrat is in

position or departure and the runway is occupied

by another aircrat or vehicle. Another RWSLcomponent, Runway Intersection Lights (RIL)

or intersecting runways, will be tested at Boston

Logan International Airport starting in Summer

2010. RILs are deployed at runway intersections

and illuminate red when the runway intersection is

or will soon be occupied by an aircrat or vehicle

and a confict exists. RWSL is under consideration

by the International Civil Aviation Organization

(ICAO) as an international standard.

Final Approach Runway Occupancy

Signal (FAROS)

Pilots landing on runways at night or in poor

visibility are oten unable to visually determine

whether the runway is ree o obstructions. This

issue can lead to the type o runway incursion

called a land over, in which one aircrat lands

on the runway over the top o another aircrat or a

vehicle occupying the runway. Like RWSL, FAROS


21/92


Table 8:

Runway Status Lights Deployment Status

Runway Status Lights (RWSL) Deployment Sites Status/Schedule

Dallas-Ft. Worth International Airport (Dallas, TX) Test System Installed

San Diego International Airport (San Diego, CA) Test System Installed

Los Angeles International Airport (Los Angeles, CA) Test System Installed

Boston Logan International Airport (Boston, MA) Test System Installed

Orlando International Airport (Orlando, FL) August 2011

Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (Phoenix, AZ) December 2011

George Bush Intercontinental Airport (Houston, TX) January 2012

Baltimore-Washington Intl Thurgood Marshall Airport (Baltimore, MD) March 2012

Las Vegas McCarran International Airport (Las Vegas, NV) March 2012

Charlotte Douglas International Airport (Charlotte, NC) May 2012

Hartseld-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (Atlanta, GA) September 2012Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Seattle, WA) April 2013

Chicago OHare International Airport (Chicago, IL) May2013

Washington Dulles International Airport (Chantilly, VA) May 2013

LaGuardia Airport, (New York, NY) June 2013

John F. Kennedy International Airport (New York, NY) April 2014

Denver International Airport (Denver, CO) May 2014

Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport (Minneapolis, MN) May 2014

Newark International Airport (Newark, NJ) June 2014

Detroit Metro Wayne County Airport (Detroit, MI) August 2014Philadelphia International Airport (Philadelphia, PA) October 2014

Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood Airport (Ft. Lauderdale, FL) March 2015

San Francisco International Airport (San Francisco, CA) December 2015

is designed to provide a visual alert o runway

status to pilots approaching a runway or landing

(Figure 16). Pilots are provided runway occupancy

status by the fashing Precision Approach Path

Indicator (PAPI) lights. As with RWSL, the system

derives trac inormation rom approach and

surace surveillance systems and uses active datato eed the alerting signal (fashing the PAPI) when

appropriate. The FAA completed operational

testing o active FAROS at Dallas/Ft. Worth

Airport and is conducting operational evaluation

o low-cost FAROS at Long Beach/Daugherty Field

Airport in Caliornia (Table 9). Currently, the FAA

is determining key FAROS sites where the new

designs can be installed or operational testing.

Figure 16:

FAROS System PAPI Lights


22/92

20 Measuring Runway Safety and Strategies for Continuous Improvement

awarded our contracts or pilot test sites using

SMRs (Table 10). LCGS will be evaluated at the

pilot site locations beore a ull-scale investment

and deployment decision. Test and evaluation is

expected to last at least one year.

Upon completion o the pilot site evaluations and

additional investment analysis activities, one or

more LCGS vendors may be selected to provide

NAS-wide deployment or 30 airport locations.

Additional airport saety related technologies will

also be implemented as part o the NextGen plan.

These technologies will allow the air trac system

as a whole to move into the next generation o air

trac management with increased saety abilities.

Low Cost Ground Surveillance Systems

(LCGS)

LCGS will close surveillance technology gaps that

exist between large airports that have Airport

Surace Detection Equipment (ASDE) systems

and small-to-medium size airports that do not. By

improving the surace situational awareness o air

trac controllers, LCGS systems will help reduce

the risk o ground trac accidents, incidents, and

runway incursions.

Prototype evaluations o two dierent candidate

systems at Spokane International Airport revealed

that surace movement radar (SMR) provided

the most cost-eective LCGS solution. The FAA

Table 10:

LCGS Installation Status

LCGS Pilot Evaluation Site Planned Installation Date

Manchester Boston Regional Airport (Manchester, NH) 4Q 2010San Jose International Airport (San Jose, CA) 4Q 2010

Long Beach International Airport (Long Beach, CA) 3Q 2011

Reno/Tahoe International Airport (Reno, NV) 4Q 2011

Table 9:

FAROS Deployment Status

FAROS Deployment Sites Status

Dallas-FT. Worth International Airport (Dallas, TX) Operational Evaluation Concluded

Long Beach Daugherty Field Airport (Long Beach, CA) Operational Evaluation Ongoing

FAA photo by Jon Ross


23/92


Table 11:

Transormation o the U.S. Air Transportation System

NextGen and Runway Saety

What Is NextGen?

NextGen is a comprehensive overhaul o our National Airspace

System to provide increased capacity and better operational peror-mance that reduces congestion, meets projected demand, and is

environmentally sound. In a continuous rollout o improvements and

upgrades, the FAA is building the capability to saely guide and track

air trac more precisely and eciently, in turn providing multiple

benets to passengers and operators.

NextGen is a necessary evolution in the air transportation system in

the United States (Table 11). Trac is orecast to increase steadily

over the coming decades, making it imperative that NextGen develop-

ment take place now.

NextGen will make travel more predictable and ecient. For passen-

gers, this will translate to dependable, sae, and secure air travel.For operators, this will translate to more optimized fight operations

with improved predictability, reduced carbon ootprint, ewer delays,

and lower cost. In addition to these gains in operational ecien-

cies, NextGen will help prevent accidents because advanced saety

Todays National Airspace System

Ground-based navigationand surveillance

NextGen

Air trafc controlcommunications by voice

Disconnected information systems

Cognitive-based air trafccontrol

Fragmented weather forecasting

Airport operations limited byvisibility conditions

Forensic safety systems

Focus on major airports

Inefcient routes andfuel consumption

Satellite-based navigationand surveillance

Routine information sent digitally

Information more readily accessible

Decision support tools

Forecasts embedded into decisions

Operations continue into lowvisibility conditions

Prognostic safety systems

Focus on metropolitan areas

Short ight paths, fuel savingprocedures, alternative fuels,reduced noise and emissions


24/92


management eatures will enable the FAA, with

other government agencies and aviation partners,

to better predict and identiy risks and resolve

hazards.

How Will NextGen Impact RunwaySaety?

Sae runway operations are related directly to the

level o situational awareness maintained by pilots,

controllers, and airport operators. Everyone, in

turn, relies on a combination o communication,

navigation, and surveillance inormation to

conduct sae runway operations. The introduc-

tion o NextGen technologies provides increased

accuracy, expanded inormation, and clearer

communication among pilots, controllers, and

airport operators, and will signicantly contributeto increased levels o situational awareness, which

will positively impact runway saety.

Advanced technologies can help mitigate some

o the contributing actors in runway incursions,

such as a breakdown in communications between

controllers and pilots, ailure o a controller to

veriy the correct readback o instructions rom

the pilot, or blocked transmissions. NextGen

data communication systems will mitigate these

contributing actors by reducing the requency

congestion and removing the potential or

miscommunications.

Another actor in runway incursions occurs when

pilots misperceive their location on the airport

surace. With NextGen, moving maps will be avail-able in the cockpit to improve the pilots situational

awareness during taxi operations. These maps will

indicate the aircrats own position as well as the

position o other aircrat and ground vehicles. All

o the relevant surace aircrat and vehicle move-

ments also will be shared between controllers and

airline fight operations, enabling greater eciency

and saer operations.

Many NextGen Operational Improvements are

directly related to runway saety (Figure 17).

The FAA developed transormational programs,which include Automatic Dependent Surveillance

Broadcast (ADS-B), System-Wide Inormation

Management (SWIM), Data Communications

(Data Comm), NextGen Network Enabled

Weather, NAS Voice Switch, and Collaborative

Air Trac Management Technologies (CATMT).

These transormational programs and other activi-

ties will enable the FAA to achieve the necessary

operational improvements.

Figure 17:NextGen and Runway Saety Related Operational Improvements

Operational Improvement 104207

Enhanced Surface Traffic Operations

Operational Improvements 103208 and 107202

Improved Runway Situational Awareness for Controllers and Pilots

ADS-B, SWIM, Data Comm, Nex tGen Network Enabled Weather, NAS Voice Switch, CATMT

Transformational Programs


Initial Surface TrafficManagement


Improved Management ofArrival/Surface/Departures Flow Ops


25/92


NextGen and Runway Saety

Technologies Available Today

To increase situational awareness during surace

operations, the FAA is currently integrating

several runway saety-related technologies, as

described below. Although ASDE-X and ElectronicFlight Bags with moving maps are not considered

NextGen capabilities they are included in this

section to help describe the operational space that

will evolve into NextGen.

Airport Surace Detection Equipment

Model X (ASDE-X)

ASDE-X is a tool that provides the position o

aircrat and vehicles on the surace, providing

alerting unctions or air trac controllers

and enhancing their situational awareness(Figure 18). The technology integrates data

rom various sources (e.g., radars, transponder

multilateration systems, and ADS-B) to deliver

accurate positioning and identiy inormation

to controllers or an improved view o airport

surace operations. Tower controllers receive

visual and audible alerts o potential conficts

ASDE-X is being deployed at 35 o the busiest

airports in the nation (Table 12).Table 12:

ASDE-X Deployment Status

ASDE-XDeployment Site

ImplementationDate

MKE (Milwaukee, WI) 10/30/03

MCO (Orlando, FL) 09/30/04

PVD (Providence, RI) 05/16/05

HOU (Houston, TX) 08/31/05

SEA (Seattle, WA) 02/24/06

STL (St. Louis, MO) 05/24/06

ATL (Atlanta, GA) 06/07/06

BDL (Hartord, CT) 06/21/06

SDF (Louisville, KY) 07/19/07

ORD (Chicago, IL) 08/29/07

CLT (Charlotte, NC) 08/30/07

IAD (Chantilly, VA) 04/01/08

DTW (Detroit, MI) 08/13/08

FLL (Ft. Lauderdale, FL) 09/09/08

PHX (Phoenix, AZ) 09/18/08

JFK (New York, NY) 10/09/08

LAX (Los Angeles, CA) 01/29/09

EWR Newark, NJ) 07/15/09

ASDE-XDeployment Site

ImplementationDate

BOS (Boston, MA) 07/23/09

MIA (Miami, FL) 08/26/09

DEN (Denver, CO) 10/08/09

IAH (Houston, TX) 10/19/09

MSP (Minneapolis, MN) 12/11/09

PHL (Philadelphia, PA) 12/18/09

SLC (Salt Lake City, UT) 01/20/10

SNA (Orange County, CA) 02/23/10

DFW (Dallas, TX) 02/26/10

DCA (Arlington, VA) 06/01/10

MDW (Chicago, IL) 08/01/10

SAN (San Diego, CA) 08/01/10

BWI (Baltimore, MD) 09/01/10

HNL (Honolulu, HI) 09/01/10

LGA (New York, NY) 10/01/10

LAS (Las Vegas, NV) 04/01/11

MEM (Memphis, TN) 04/01/11


26/92


Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) With Moving

Map Displays

Although not a NextGen technology, but rather a

technology enabled by NextGen, EFBs with visual

maps that update as the aircrat moves provide thepilot with greater situational awareness (Figure 19).

The FAA reached agreements with several U.S.

airlines to provide unding to help EFB installation

programs. Through these agreements, the airlines

will provide critical operational data to help the

FAA evaluate the saety impact o the technology.

This data will be used to make inormed deci-

sions on key saety capabilities necessary or the

transition to NextGen. The FAA will provide up

to $600,000 to each airline to invest in EFBs and

surace moving maps or fights to or rom test bed

airports (Table 13). Each agreement will remain ineect through September 2011.

NextGen and Runway Saety in the

Mid-Term (20122018)

To achieve mid-term NextGen capabilities, the

FAA and its partners continue to conduct research

in several areas relevant to runway saety and

runway operations. Some o these areas include

runway conguration management, arrival and

departure metering, low-visibility surace opera-

tions, and simultaneous runway occupancy.

The ollowing descriptions o NextGen capa-

bilities were extracted rom current FAA NAS

architecture documents and the FAAs NextGen

Implementation Plan, March 2010. These descrip-

tions were selected based on their relevance to

runway saety operations.

Figure 18:

ASDE-X Site

Figure 19:

EFB with Moving Map Display


27/92


Expand Low Visibility Operations to

Achieve Low Visibility Surace Operations

(Approach, Landing, and Takeo[3])

Pilots are oten aced with reduced visibility

conditions in the air and on the ground, making it

dicult to accurately determine location. NextGen

initiatives will improve situational awareness

during these conditions using a combination o

technologies.

Pilots and drivers o ground vehicles will

determine their position on an airport using

Global Positioning System (GPS), Wide Area

Augmentation System (WAAS), and Local Area

Augmentation System (LAAS) via ADS-B and

Ground-Based Transceiver (GBT) systems with

or without surace based surveillance. Location

inormation o aircrat and vehicles on the airport

surace will be displayed on moving maps using

Cockpit Display o Trac Inormation (CDTI) or

aided by Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS),

Enhanced Vision Systems (EVS), Synthetic Visions

Systems (SVS), or other types o advanced vision or

virtual vision technology.

Table 13:

Airports With Available Moving Map Database

Airports

Los Angeles International Airport (Los Angeles, CA)

Boston Logan International Airport (Boston, MA)Chicago OHare International Airport (Chicago, IL)

Newark International Airport (Newark, NJ)

Cleveland Hopkins International Airport (Cleveland, OH)

Fort Lauderdale International Airport (Fort Lauderdale, FL)

George Bush Intercontinental Airport (Houston, TX)

Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (Anchorage, AK)

San Francisco International Airport (San Francisco, CA)

Las Vegas McCarran International Airport (Las Vegas, NV)

Miami International Airport (Miami, FL)

Philadelphia International Airport (Philadelphia, PA)

Albuquerque International Sunport (Albuquerque, NM)

Daytona Beach International Airport (Daytona, FL)

Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (Phoenix, AZ)

Dallas-Ft. Worth International Airport (Dallas, TX)

John F. Kennedy International Airport (New York, NY)

Hartseld-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (Atlanta, GA)

LaGuardia Airport, (New York, NY)

Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Seattle, WA)

[3] Operational Improvement 107202


28/92


Improved Runway Saety Situational

Awareness or Pilots and Controllers[4]

Enhanced surace displays, which will alert

controllers when a runway incursion could result,

and provide pilots greater awareness o their loca-

tion on the airport surace, will be developed toimprove runway saety. Both ground-based (e.g.,

RWSL) and cockpit-based runway incursion alert-

ing capabilities (e.g., EFB) also will be available to

alert pilots when it is unsae to enter the runway.

Initial Surace Trafc Management [5]

FAA automated decision support tools will use

departure-scheduling algorithms to manage the

fow o surace trac at high-density airports.

These tools will integrate surveillance data that

will include weather, departure queues, aircratfight plan inormation, runway conguration,

expected departure times, and gate assignments.

The tools also will provide controllers with surace

sequencing and staging lists or departures,

along with average departure delays (current and

predicted).

Enhanced Surace Trafc Operations [6]

Data communication between aircrat and control-

lers will be used to transmit automated airport

inormation, exchange clearances, and instructions,including hold-short instructions. At specied

airports, the use o data communications will

provide the augmented means o communication

between controllers and equipped aircrat. Data

communication unctions will reduce requency

congestion on the radio, ensuring the successul

transmission o more important communications

that can provide a sae runway environment.

NextGen and Runway Saety,

Beyond the Mid-Term (2018+)

Long-term NextGen capabilities require continued

research into surace situational awareness, taxi

route generation and assignment, conormance

monitoring, confict detection, and confict resolu-

tion. Because o the complexity o the NextGen

program and the required interdependencies o

various technologies, research has already started

on many o the improvements that will not mature

until ater the mid-term time rame.

The ollowing descriptions o NextGen capabili-

ties were extracted rom the current FAA NAS

architecture and have been selected based on their

relevance to runway saety.

Full Surace Trafc Management With

Conormance Monitoring[7]

By using improved surveillance, communication,

and automation, saety and eciency o surace

trac management will be increased. Properly

equipped aircrat and ground vehicles will be

provided with surace trac inormation in real

time. Airports and air trac control centers will

be able to view trac fows and project demand;

predict, plan, and manage surace movements; andbalance runway assignments. Automated systems

will monitor surace operations and update esti-

mated departure clearance times. Surace optimiza-

tion automation includes activities such as runway

conguration and runway snow removal.

Full Surace Situation Inormation (SSI)[8]

Automated broadcasting o aircrat and vehicle

position to ground and aircrat sensors/receivers

will provide a digital display o the airport envi-

ronment and trac to pilots, controllers, vehicleoperators, and fight operations centers. SSI will

complement visual observations o the airport

surace by alerting pilots, controllers, and vehicle

operators o a possible runway incursion beore it

happens.

NextGen represents the uture state o our national

air transportation system. Through a sustained

eort, diligent implementation plan, and continued

industry partnerships, these enhanced technologies

will signicantly improve runway saety or the

next generation o air traveler.







29/92


Human Factors in Aviation

What Is the Human Factors Discipline?

The FAA and its air trac control system, along with pilots, ground

crews, and vehicle operators, unction together every day to ensurethat sae aircrat movement occurs on the runways and airport

surace. This eort requires that everyone be able to transmit and

receive accurate and complete inormation to maintain procedures,

have appropriate judgment to make the right decision, and then take

action upon that decisionliterally hundreds o times every day. Sae

runway operations are the objective or every aircrat every time there

is a decision process. There is a constant reminder that the vulner-

abilities o human error are injected into each decision made.

In the aviation environment, reliable and accurate human peror-

mance is equated with achieving high levels o operational saety.

With technology evolving at a rapid pace, and saety being our high-

est priority, the FAA can no longer rely solely on a persons experi-

ence, insight, and training to accurately predict human perormance.

Human Factors, as an engineering and psychology discipline, has

been proven to scientically identiy and assess human perormance

characteristics required to increase perormance within the control

tower, cockpit, and runway environments.

Pilots, controllers, and airport operations personnel wake up and

start every day ully aware o their responsibility o ensuring sae

fight. So, what happens between the time they wake up and the time

they realize that a runway incursion has just occurred? The answer

might be as simple as, they are human.

The goal o the Human Factors discipline is to improve operational

perormance and saety via the study o human strengths and limita-

tions in relation to how people interact with equipment, the environ-

ment, and other people.

Why Is the Study o Human Factors So

Important?

It is the gap between humans and systems, when studied, analyzed,

and tested that allows human actors specialists to help design

systems and procedures that promote maximum human perormance

by capitalizing on human ability while counterbalancing human

limitation. This is the basis or NextGen, a saer uture. Increasingly

crowded skies mean not only more departures and arrivals but also

more decisions by pilots, ground crews, and controllers. This magni-

es the opportunity or human error and potentially results in runway

incursions.

Aviation saety experts have documented that human perormance

is a major causal actor in a majority o runway incursions. Nearly


30/92

28 Human Factors in Aviation

all air trac control operational errors are either

caused by human actors or have some contribu-

tory human actors element. In todays complex

aviation environment, any mistake can lead to a

serious accident. Accurate human processing skills

not only are necessary but also need to be continu-ally maintained and sharpened. I the number o

runway incursions are to continue to decrease,

human actors must be better understood and

knowledge more broadly applied.

A recent General Accountability Oce (GAO)

report conrmed that, according to experts

surveyed and some airport ocials, the primary

causes o runway incursions are human actors

issues. These issues may include miscommunication

between air trac controllers and pilots, pilots

lack o situational awareness on the aireld, andair trac controller/pilot judgment error.

One way to attack these human actors issues is to

understand specic human contributions to errors

and identiy ways to eliminate or minimize their

eect on runway incursions. An enormous number

o people are involved in daily airport operations

ranging rom piloting the aircrat, controlling

airspace, and ground crew maintenance to vehicle

operations, snow removal, and surace repair. To

successully continue to decrease all runway incur-

sions, we need to understand and evaluate each

and every role in the guidance, maintenance, and

control or takeo, landing, and taxiing to identiy

gaps in process, procedure, equipment, or limita-tions in the human condition.

How Human Factors Research

Reduces Human Error

Human Factors experts, working alongside system

designers and developers, examine the people,

equipment, and processes involved in airport

operations to gain an in-depth understanding o

how each piece o the system works, the inter-

relationship among various systems, and the inter-relationship o each piece with the environment.

When designing and building new technology

and processes, upgrading existing systems, or

developing training materials, a comprehensive

understanding o the aviation environment and all

available resources is essential or targeting the best

solution.

The human has a relationship with everything

around him or hersotware, hardware, other

humans, and the environment. This constitutes

the basis or human system error as a result o the

inherent inconsistencies and limitations o our

human condition. Evaluating human strengths and

weaknesses plays an important role in the design o

systems and procedures to determine which unc-

tions are best perormed by a human and which are

best suited or a machine.

The ultimate goal o Human Factors in aviation

design is to maximize the strengths o both

the human and machine or optimum system

perormance and to avoid the limitations o each

(Figure 20). Although this eort sounds easy,

designing products or a general population should

take into account the varying characteristics o

the user population. Unlike a machine that can

be almost identically produced, modied, and

redesigned to achieve a specic perormance

metric, humans are born with innate variants (e.g.,

physical size and shape, strength, reaction time,

logical thought and reasoning, color and sound

machines

humans

Continuousalertness (repetitive,routine work)

Quick responsetime andapplication ofprecise force

Ability to multi-task Ability to store

information anderase it completely

Complexcomputationalcapability

Sensory functions Perceptual abilities

(abstract concepts)

Flexibility (theability to improvise)

Judgment Selective recall Inductive reasoning

Figure 20:

Strengths o Machines and Humans


31/92


perception, and even a sense o smell). It is precisely

these human dierences that Human Factors engi-

neers measure and analyze to optimize the human

contribution to system perormance.

Human-Hardware Interaction

Throughout the aviation system, humans interact

extensively with hardware, including tools

(interpreting gauges and inormation) (Figure 21),

aircrat controls and displays (fight management

systems in the cockpit), computers and even vehi-

cles and buildings. The potential or human error

is easy to see when asking simple questions: Is the

outside equipment used or a particular operation

as usable in the winter with a gloved hand? Are all

the control switches accessible or all heights and

sizes o pilots? Does being tall skew what a pilot

sees on a display?

Designing visual displays requires in-depth under-

standing o how humans see and, subsequently,

how we process that inormation. The human eye

receives and processes electromagnetic energy in

the orm o light waves, which are transormed into

electrical impulses and sent to the brains vision

center or processing. Capabilities such as detecting

speed, direction, color, contrast, and even patterns

are processed in the brain. With the aid o our past

learning experiences, the brain osters our recogni-

tion and recall. The complex digital instrumentpanel (Figure 22) demonstrates that the placement

o control panels is as important as the colors

chosen and the movements within the display (e.g.,

blinking, graduating color, moving color blocks).

The HumanInormation Interace

Human Factors experts are heavily involved with

ensuring that all the inormation pertaining to

how the aviation system operates and how it is

organized, including all the regulations, saety

procedures, operating manuals, and procedural

checklists, is presented in an understandable

manner in the appropriate ormat. Although not a

device (Figure 23), the inormation that the pilots

are obtaining rom a navigational chart is impor-

tant. Is the inormation complete, understandable,and accurate? The device itsel would be considered

hardware.

Figure 21:

Using Hardware on an Aircrat Wheel Base

Figure 22:

Using Hardware in the Cockpit

Figure 23:

The HumanInormation Interace


32/92


The HumanEnvironment Interace

Humans are also taxed with interacting with their

environment, including being sheltered inside

buildings or airrames or perorming duties outside

exposed to the elements. The indoor environment

can be impacted by such actors as temperature,noise, level o light, urniture, etc. The controller

in Figure 24 is working in a low light internal

environment at a comortable temperature with

little distraction. The outside environment can be

impacted by such elements as weather, airspace,

and airport inrastructure and suraces. The

airrame environment can be aected by additional

actors such as equipment usage and communica-

tion requirements (Figure 25). Usually humans

interact with these interaces in harmony to

produce a working system.

Designing With the Human Factor

in Mind

As technological advances continue to provide

ever-increasing amounts o complex inormation,

identiying ways to incorporate this inormation

into existing procedures and systems and designingnew ones while improving human perormance

presents a challenge. Improving saety in the

runway environment, involving a large number

o people, aircrat, and equipment, will require

employing Human Factors concepts into the design

process to provide or all these moving parts to

individually unction and interace saely with each

other, ensuring the ollowing:

Runway signage is easily readable

Taxiways and runways are clearly discernible

Mechanisms exist or controllers and pilots

to clearly communicate and check that each

communication was heard correctly

Ground crews coordinate with controllers and

pilots

Displays relate the inormation needed in a

ormat easily and quickly understandable by the

user

Equipment controls are clearly labeled with

appropriate understandable instructions.

Building systems via a human-centered design

principle that takes actual human perormance

into consideration by maximizing user strengths,

minimizing recognized humanmachine interace

weaknesses, and increasing saety is a unction

o system usability. Human actors specialists

determine the usability criteria throughout the

design, development, and prototyping phases to

assess the upgraded or new system beore bringing

it into the eld. Usability is a measure o how

well a system supports the users needs, in addi-tion to meeting system goals. Taking this a step

urther, designing the system around the user is a

methodology proven with great success because

the design ocuses on the unction and response o

maximizing user capabilities. It eliminates the need

to t the user and the users limitations around

the system and signicantly reduces the amount o

Figure 24:

Controller Working in a Low Light Environment

Figure 25:

Lights, Controls, Displays, and Communication

Helps Pilots Overcome Adverse Environments


33/92


modication at the end o product development,

not to mention the addition o cost and time.

A highly usable human-centered design should

reduce the amount o training required, ease the

complexity o maintenance, and provide increased

saety.

Particularly helpul in raising awareness o the

importance o human actors in aviation, especially

runway incursions, has been a change in saety

culture, where people are increasingly willing to

report incidents that might not otherwise have

been known. This culture change helps establish

how circumstances may have transpired to create

a chain o errors that led to an incident so that an

eective response can be developed. The willing-

ness o organizations to openly share inormation

about saety incidents and targeted solutions alsohas begun to help improve the aviation commu-

nitys understanding o just how important a role

human actors plays.

The ollowing anatomy o a runway incursion

highlights the signicance o the human eect:

humans are the greatest single contributing actor

in runway incursions.

Anatomy o a Runway Incursion

This analysis reviews the sequence o events

and contributing actors that ultimately led to a

Category A runway incursion.

Scene:

Time: 21:00 Local

Weather: Clear

Air trac complexity: Low

Controller time on position: 18 minutes

Controller time on duty: 7 hours out o an

8-hour shit

Airport Construction: Taxiway B6 closed or

maintenance, Runway 29L also closed.

Event Description:

9:00 p.m. The pilot o a six-seat Piper Malibu

contacts the control tower and is cleared to land

on runway 29R. Behind the Malibu is a 50-seat

Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ).

9:019:04 p.m. The CRJ pilot checks in with the

controller and is cleared to land on runway 29R.

The controller advises the pilot that he is ollowing

a Malibu ahead on a 2-mile nal or the runway.

The CRJ pilot acknowledges the landing clearance

and inorms the controller that he has the Malibu

in sight.

9:049:07 p.m. The controller instructs the Malibu

to exit the runway at taxiway B3. The Malibu pilot

misses B3 and is instructed to exit at taxiway B5.

At this time, the CRJ is on a mile nal. The Malibu

pilot inorms the controller that B5 taxiway is


34/92


dicult to locate. However, the controller believes

he sees the Malibu turning let at taxiway B5.

9:07 p.m. CRJ lands on runway 29R and, on

rollout, swerves to avoid the Malibu, which is still

on the runway (Figure 26). The CRJ pilot inorms

the controller that they, had just passed anotheraircrat still on the runway. The two aircrat came

within 15 eet o each other.

Event Analysis:

What Went Wrong?

To ully understand what happened, each partici-

pants role was analyzed. FAA-detailed records

were used to construct a timeline. Focusing on the

most critical 3 minutes, rom 9:04 p.m. to 9:07

p.m., provides additional insight and inormation.The controllers intention was to provide the

best air trac service to both inbound aircrat.

However, poor communication, inrastructure, and

other issues all exacerbated the situation.

Analysis o Time Period 9:049:05 p.m.

Human Error: Malibu pilot missing taxiway B3

The Malibu pilot was unable to make the

turn onto taxiway B3. He might have been

unamiliar with the airport and might not haveplanned ahead and reduced speed in time or

the exit. General aviation pilots oten fy alone;

consequently, it is extremely important or the

single pilot to not only thoroughly review airport

charts and diagrams but also establish runway

exit and taxi plans.

Human Error: Poor communications between the

controller and Malibu pilot

The Malibu pilot did not advise the controller

that he missed taxiway B3. The controller took

the initiative and instructed the Malibu to exitat taxiway B5, which did not connect directly to

the runway.

29R

29L

B5

B6 B3

B4Closed Taxiwayor Runway

Figure 26:

Airport Layout Showing the Two Aircrat and Runway Lights

Figure 27:

Aerial View o Runway as It Was at the Time o the Runway Incursion

Taxiway B5

Taxiway B4

Taxiway B3


35/92


Analysis o Time Period 9:059:06 p.m.

Human Error: Malibu pilot unable to locate

taxiway B5

The Malibu pilot could not locate B5 because

he might have been unamiliar with the airport,

might not have had an airport diagram, and the

taxiway was not lighted.

Human Error: Loss o situational awareness Although not an error, specically assigning B3

and B5 as runway exits caused the unamiliar

Malibu pilot to spend more time and energy

trying to comply with Air Trac Control (ATC)

instructions than maintaining situational aware-

ness. Just as a driver o a car slows to look or

a street sign in an unamiliar area, the Malibu

pilot spent more time on the runway looking or

the correct exit. The controller planned or the

Malibu to spend as little time on the runway as

possible because o the CRJ being on short nal.I the controller had issued an instruction to exit

at the rst available taxiway, this event might

never have happened.

The controller assumes the issue is resolved

when he thinks he sees the Malibu turning onto

taxiway B5. Neither the pilot nor the controller

communicates or conrms that the Malibu was

clear o the runway.

Inrastructure: Taxiway B5 not intersecting with

runway 29R, nonstandard markings, and B6 closed

or construction.

Taxiway B5 did not intersect with the runway

(Figure 27). Also, taxiway B6 was closed or

construction at the time, this let only taxiways

B4 or B5 available or exiting the runway.

Furthermore, B5 did not have any taxiway

lights; instead, it had refectors that were a

dierent color than the anticipated taxiway

lights. Unless a plane is directly acing refectors

with its lights on, refectors are not visible.

Taxiway B5 is narrower than a normal taxiway

and could be conused with a service road.

Analysis o Time Period 9:06-9:07 p.m.

Human Error: Loss o situational awareness

The Malibu pilot and controller were unaware

that the aircrat was still on the runway. The

controller did not conrm that the runway wasclear beore the CRJ landed. I the controller had

known the Malibu was still on the runway, he

would have issued go-around instructions to the

CRJ. Only on landing did the CRJ pilot conrm

that the Malibu was still on the runway.


36/92


Taxiway B3

Taxiway B4

RemovedTaxiway B5

Runway 29R

New Taxiway Signage

Figure 28:

Aerial View o Runway Showing Improvements to the Runway Layout

What Has the Airport Done Since

the Serious Incursion?

As a result o this runway incursion, the FAA

tasked RSAT teams, certied inspectors, pilot

representatives, and FAAST team members to

provide a list o improvements that could help

prevent a similar incident rom recurring. This list

includes the ollowing:

Demolition o taxiway B5 (Figure 28)

New runway signs and markings

Pilot presentations, which include the ollowing:

l The importance o being amiliar with the

airport layout. Having a current airport

diagram in the cockpit, being aware and

understanding the Airport Trac Inormation

System (ATIS)/Notice to Airmen (NOTAM)

inormation relating to the current condition

o the airport, and having a plan or yourrunway/taxiway routing on the airport

l Emphasis on the importance o taxiing clear

o any movement areas and requesting air

trac assistance when conused on an airport

surace

l The i

annual runway safety report 2010

Documents