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,
