Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 33
33
gates and work areas, electronic message displays at the ramp/ uniformly applied. Furthermore, liability issues would likely
passenger boarding area, telephone, and pager.) govern any decision for industry standardization.
At all airports contacted, it is common practice and a natu-
ral tendency for all airlines to follow the lead of the primary
Conclusions
air carrier, especially if that airline has invested resources to
facilitate its decision making. This accounts, in part, for the It is said that lightning does not strike twice in the same
variability in stop/restart times among multiple airlines oper- place. This can also apply to the use and implementation of
ating at an airport. In addition, airport terminal areas can lightning detection and warning systems at airports: No two
encompass very large land masses, and airlines are generally airports are alike, and a "one size fits all" approach does not
grouped in certain areas. This also contributes to the variance appear to be viable. Airport geographical settings, weather
observed among airline operators. Airline business models phenomena characteristics, airport facilities layout, airline
(i.e., quick-turn or more traditional layover times), availabil- business models and operating procedures, labor union agree-
ity of visual aircraft docking guidance systems, and union ments, legal liability issues, and cost allocation processes are
agreements are other factors that influence stop/restart work just some of the primary factors that do not lend themselves
decisions for ramp activities. to standardization.
What has been learned is that the technology is working, is
relied upon, and serves a useful means to make decisions
Observed Deficiencies and Effectiveness
about ramp operations. The industry has focused on distance
The airports and airlines contacted were satisfied with out and time since last event to establish bases that govern
the equipment installed and the warning notification proce- stopping and restarting ramp activities, respectively, and these
dures they have implemented. Some have upgraded their seem practical and useful.
systems to take advantage of new technologies and have mod- Data on deaths, injuries, loss of property, and downtime
ified their threat and risk levels to reflect a longer time history caused by lightning events at airports does not appear to be
of events to aid in their decision making. maintained in a common database. Contacts with the Occu-
The technology used either by airports or by airlines is pational Health and Safety Administration, Department of
meeting the need to protect life and property on the ramp Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Weather Service,
during lightning events. Whether the airport or the airline, or NOAA, National Transportation Safety Board, and FAA did
both, make the investment in lightning detection and warn- not yield any database of aircraft ramp incidents or accidents
ing equipment, ramp activities are managed individually and related to lightning strikes. Individual industry members may
are generally consistently applied. Although data on lightning log lightning events and losses, including downtime; how-
strike injuries at airport ramps do not appear to be available, ever, industrywide data that can be utilized for standardiza-
those airports and airlines contacted have noted a decline in tion or other purposes are not available.
injury occurrences. In the chapters that follow, the MDA Federal team will ex-
amine these parameters, attempt to identify the essential
technology that should be employed, evaluate if and how data
Standardization
related to lightning events and losses may be collected and
Opinions varied on the value of standardizing lightning reported on an industrywide basis, and establish a basis for
detection and warning system technologies and their imple- determining a benefit/cost relationship for implementation
mentation. A majority of airports and airlines contacted of a lightning detection and warning system. The means by
expressed that a single system serving all users could be vi- which airports and their tenants use the information devel-
able and funded through lease terms and conditions. Yet they oped by these technologies appears, however, to withstand
also noted that the stop/restart activity decisions could not be standardization at this time.
