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 20
20 CHAPTER FOUR CONCLUSIONS Airport operators, on a whole, have taken the subject of run- both the non-movement and the movement areas of the air- way incursion prevention and safety very seriously. Airfield port. These training sessions for recurrent training, usually driver training programs are indicative of the willingness of not as long as initial training, last about 1 to 1.5 hours. More the airport community to keep the aviation system safe and use of computer-based learning most likely will help reduce efficient. Based on the survey results, there is no lack of the overall cost of maintaining a recurrent training program driver training for those authorized to drive on an airport's and will make it easier for employees working at the airport movement area. For those driving on the non-movement area to receive the training. only, most airport operators have also initiated driver train- ing programs, although such programs may be limited in Contractors working on an airport are a challenge to the air- scope. Virtually all commercial service airports have an air- port operator. In many cases there are subcontractors who work field driver training program for at least the employees that alongside of the contractors. Large equipment is used exten- access the movement area of the airfield. Even many of the sively and the work may take the contractors/subcontractors general aviation airports, especially those with the greater close to active runways and taxiways. It is relatively easy to number of operations, have initiated some type of driver get disoriented and to move outside of the approved work training program. Many commercial service airports also area. It is also difficult to keep track of the many workers and have driver training programs for people restricted to the ensure that they have the appropriate knowledge to work on non-movement area of the airport. It is estimated that at the an airfield. Although many airport operators use escort ser- larger air carrier airports there may be as many as 20,000 vices for contractors, this does not guarantee that an errant individuals licensed to drive on the non-movement areas. contractor may not cause a runway incusion. Training this number of people can be a daunting task. Some airports have allowed the air carriers and the fixed-base oper- From the results of the survey, one can conclude that the ators to train their own employees. Good practice would be airport operators have done a good job in developing driver for the airport authority to retain oversight of the program training courses. The same subjects and methods appear to be and audit it periodically. The survey showed that this is done used across airport categories. Regardless of whether the air- at many but not all airports. port is a large hub primary airport or a non-hub commercial service airport, the training follows the same general trends. The curriculum taught in airfield driver training pro- grams is relatively standard. For non-movement area driver Further research could include follow-up studies to be training, it normally consists of topics that one would expect, done comparing costs of training personnel using computer- given the circumstances of operating on ramps and aprons. based programs with classroom-type training. Training pro- These topics include speed limits, the meaning of the non- grams of this magnitude do not come without a cost to the movement area boundary lines and their locations, yielding airport operators and to the tenants. This research could also or giving right-of-way to aircraft, and the dangers of aircraft focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the different types jet blast. For movement area driving programs, the topics of training and determine if one is more beneficial than normally include runway and taxiway signing and marking, another. as well as airfield lighting, critical areas for instrument navi- gation equipment, and proper radio communications. At air- Also, with the recent emphasis on ramp and apron safety, ports that also have low visibility operations, the curricu- further research may be needed to study the viability of insti- lum includes the principles of surface movement guidance tuting a voluntary reporting system for accidents and inci- and controls systems and the lighting and marking that are dents that occur on ramps and aprons. In this way, it would required for such low visibility operation. If an airport also be possible to get a better understanding of the magnitude of has land and hold short operations, the markings and light- the dangers of operating on these areas of an airport as well ing for this type of operation are included in the training as a better understanding of the causes of such problems. The program. Flight Safety Foundation estimates that 27,000 ramp acci- dents and incidents occur worldwide every year at a cost of Many of the airports that responded to the survey already $10 billion annually. Driver training is only one way to help have implemented recurrent driver training programs for reduce that number and cost.