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 9
9 Snow Symposium meetings. The Balchen/Post award is deter- for monitoring and preventing driver fatigue (15, 16); health mined by a committee made up of industrywide aviation and wellness factors (17); physiological, personality, and professionals who seek to acknowledge those airports that behavior aspects (15, 18); sleep loss factors (19); vigilance demonstrate responsive winter operations. Additional ques- monitoring (20); duty time (21); ergonomics and other design tionnaires were sent out electronically to representatives of considerations (22, 23); and management practices (24). All the following AAAE committees: Small Commercial Service these factors were identified by the airport survey respondents Airports; General Aviation; Operations, Safety, and Planning; as affecting their operations. and the Technical Services. Data were collected and synthe- sized over the period from April to October 2007. For extensive information on fatigue and fatigue manage- ment, both NASA (http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/zteam) Upon receipt of the completed questionnaires, the data and the Australian National Transport Commission (http:// were grouped by questions and topic area. Clarification of www.ntc.gov.au) have conducted significant research into responses was sought as needed through direct communica- fatigue in the transportation and aviation industry, as has the tion with the responder. As part of the questionnaire, airports FAA (http://www.faa.gov) and the FMCSA (http://www. were asked to submit examples of their snow removal plans, fmcsa.dot.gov). The results of the literature search in these separate winter operations procedure or policy manuals, and areas are provided in subsequent chapters of this report, in letters of agreement (LOAs) that existed with air traffic con- particular chapter five. trol towers. These documents were reviewed for information related to the synthesis study. Although many areas of aviation and flight operations have been studied and researched (e.g., extensive human factor The third step in the development of this report was to research has focused on pilots and mechanics; aircraft design research the technology associated with winter operations, human factor research has focused on aircraft cabin layout; runway incursions, snow equipment, and driver training. This research into cognitive learning has resulted in more effective entailed contacting companies engaged in runway incursion training regimens; and weather research has resulted in new prevention, snow equipment manufacturing, and driver train- systems for detection of significant events), little research has ing simulators. been conducted into the area of airport operations, and in particular, those associated with winter operations. Yet winter CONCLUSIONS FROM LITERATURE REVIEW operations and low visibility conditions represent an increased risk component for airport operations and further result in the The literature on runway incursions is fairly extensive, having escalation of risk elsewhere in the aviation system. received emphasis from the NTSB and the FAA. FAA and other aviation stakeholders have taken steps to address run- As previously mentioned, the issue of runway incursion has way and ramp safety, but the lack of coordination and lead- received focused attention from the FAA and other government ership, technology challenges, the lack of data, and human regulators internationally. The FAA has established an Office factors-related issues have impeded progress (10). The lack of Runway Safety (http://www.faa.gov/runwaysafety/) for that of data and human factors issues is pertinent to this report. purpose. Various reports from the website were reviewed for The review of literature found that previously published infor- information related to winter operations. Preventing incur- mation on the topic of preventing incursions of snow removal sions takes a coordinated effort of pilots, air traffic con- vehicles was minimal, receiving only cursory mention in arti- trollers, and airport operators to resolve. Many of the actions cles that focused more on snow removal equipment or on taken for preventing incursions also apply to snow removal snow removal plans. operations. Results from the FAA studies indicate the major- ity of incursions are the result of pilot error, with controller Published research or articles on roadway snow removal error being second, and vehicle/pedestrian error being third. operations were much more extensive and refined. Research Snow removal equipment operator error is grouped into the from the highway sector was reviewed and included in this last category. In addressing the issue of runway incursion and report where it was assessed that the results and information how to reduce the number of deviations, the FAA has devel- could have application to airports. Areas such as accident oped guidance through various brochures, procedures, and prevention, vehicle design and lighting, and human factors manuals (Figure 2). are such areas. Chapter ten provides a synopsis of technology that has been Research on highway human factors has been well studied, considered in the past, is currently in use, or is being consid- and several studies are cited for inclusion in this report. In ered for use at airports to prevent incursions. The technology particular, a search on the effects of fatigue in snow removal and systems identified represent a broad range of advanced operations resulted in numerous articles that were trans- technology and cost that is intended to address runway incur- portation-related but not specific to snow removal operations sions in general. The systems include facility-based controller at airports. Because of the human factors implication of notification through the use of surface-movement obstacle fatigue, the search results covered topics such as technologies detection equipment; ground-based flight crew notification
OCR for page 10
10 conditions, in what manner the conditions should be addressed, when the activity is to occur, or how decisions will be made. Some airports have bridged this gap by generating separate written snow policies, methods, or procedures outside of the regulatory framework of Part 139. This is accomplished due to liability concerns for a violation of the regulation under the ACM if a particular procedure is not followed. Of the SICPs examined, fewer than 10 were determined to have separate procedures established. Most airports relied on and utilized the experience and knowledge of existing personnel for bridging the gap. None of the SICPs reviewed for this report discussed run- way incursion prevention issues associated with driver fatigue and distraction. Fatigue was mentioned in an ancillary policy FIGURE 2 Various FAA sources of safety material. and procedure manual developed by one airport. (Source: FAA.) Some of the questionnaire responses provide insight into technology through ground tracking of aircraft and vehicles; competing goals as a possible root cause of winter incursions and in-cabin aircraft and vehicle positioning equipment that and unsafe situations during winter operations. For instance, provides pilots and vehicle operators with real-time position air traffic system performance is measured, in part, by the information on the airfield. The primary drawback to the availability of the air transportation system to accept the implementation of advanced technology in the prevention of aviation demand, which includes the availability of a runway incursions is related to cost. to accept an aircraft operation. An example of the pressures to keep the runway open is contained in one non-hub airport's A review was conducted of approximately 95 airport snow approved snow plan: plans submitted by Part 139 airports as part of their ACM. It is the intent of this program that airport personnel shall work Although an airport's ground vehicle operating procedures closely with the ATCT when performing snow removal activi- (required under Part 139) may address winter operating con- ties to keep runway closings to a minimum. ditions, the snow plans reviewed were not detailed enough to provide actual guidance for many of the decisions that must Closing a runway for snow removal, which advances the be made during a snow event; nor did they detail the method goals of airport operational safety, competes with the goal of for vehicle operation. In essence, the plans only address the availability. Competing goals create pressures on airport snow standards expected to be obtained and not the "how to." The removal crews. A more in-depth analysis of competing goals lack of standardization or procedures in this area of the ACM and the pressures that snow removal operators experience is is an area for further evaluation. presented in chapter seven. One non-hub airport with a part-time ATCT identified the The literature search determined that much research about following in its approved snow plan: snow and ice removal has been accomplished on the road and highway systems, but not on the airport system. Much of the A. During non-tower operations, runways will be closed during research points toward design and human factors issues as snow removal activities. Operations personnel will advise primary factors affecting driver operation. This is echoed in the air carriers of such closures and issue the appropriate the survey responses. Even though highway operations and NOTAMs. airport operations differ, this study sought to identify equip- B. During tower operations, it may be necessary to close the main air carrier runway depending upon precipitation type, depth, ment, practices, and techniques that produce benefits to the weather conditions, and other factors. In such situations: airport system. An investigation into technology that addresses i. Airport management will determine the length of time the runway incursion issue seeks to create a defense barrier required for runway closure: ii. Other runways/taxiways may be closed for reasons of against potential error. However, the cost of implementation accumulated snow depth, excessive windrow height, snow and because new technology can create new error possibilities removal operations, etc. has made airport operations more complicated. The example is typical of the SICPs submitted and reviewed One source of unique information on winter operational for this report. Lacking is additional guidance or procedures experiences was found in the ACINA's annual survey on for personnel responsible for implementing the plan. State- airport winter operations and services across North American ment A (non-tower operations) is straightforward in closing airports (25). For 2006, it included a wide range of airfield the runway. Statement B (tower in operation) provides flexi- operational issues including operational experiences, runway bility. However, neither gives guidance about how to assess the incursion prevention plans to eliminate perceived hazards,