National Academies Press: OpenBook

Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards (2011)

Chapter: ACRP Report 51 Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards

« Previous: Front Matter
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"ACRP Report 51 Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14501.
×
Page 1

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

S U M M A R Y The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) sets standards for the planning and design of airports to provide safe aircraft operations. These design standards include separation distances between various airfield components such as runways and taxiways, taxiways and taxiways, and taxiways and objects. Many U.S. airports were built according to older FAA design standards and were planned to accommodate smaller aircraft. With the rapid growth of aviation demand since World War II, many airports are facing the need to increase capacity and to accommodate larger and faster aircraft. However, some airports are finding it a challenge to modify existing air- field separations to meet current standards for larger aircraft because they are constrained by physical barriers, environmentally sensitive areas, and encroaching development. When it is not feasible to meet existing separations, airports may submit to the FAA a request for modification of standards (MOS) to demonstrate that there are unique local con- ditions that restrict extending the airfield and to show that the modification will “provide an acceptable level of safety, economy, durability, and workmanship” (FAA, 1989). In requests for an MOS to a separation standard, the main concern is usually the safety of operations. As the FAA and the aviation industry transition to a safety management approach to improve safety, it is important that risks associated with changes be assessed. Authorization for MOS may be granted if the MOS fulfills the criteria described in FAA’s Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13, Airport Design, which specifically addresses taxiway and taxilane separations (FAA, 1989). The criteria do not provide an assessment of risk that may be used for specific airfield scenarios, including the separation between runways and other airfield components (taxiways, taxilanes, and objects). Adherence to the FAA requirements can affect airport efficiency and capacity and, potentially, prevent certain aircraft from using an airfield. The objective of this research effort was to develop a simple and practical methodology for assessing the risk of aircraft collisions associated with non-standard airfield separations. The tool developed is intended to support MOS requests for non-standard separations. A practical, risk-based methodology to evaluate airfield separations was developed. The methodology is based on the probability of lateral and vertical deviations from the intended path during landing, takeoff, and taxiing operations. A series of risk plots based on center- line or wingtip separations is provided for each Aircraft Design Group (ADG), and step-by- step procedures are described for each type of separation involved in the analysis, such as runway and taxiway, and taxiway and taxiway. The methodology was validated using actual MOS cases approved by the FAA that cov- ered a spectrum of scenarios, airports, and FAA regions. Relevant information was gathered for each case to characterize the non-standard situation and was analyzed using the method- ology developed in this study. Risk criteria were suggested based on the risk matrix used by the FAA in safety management systems, on the evidence of accident and incident rates, and the consequences gathered in this research effort. Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards 1

Next: Transportation Research Board 2011 Executive Committee »
Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Report 51: Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards is intended to be used to support requests for modification of standards in those circumstances where the design criteria for separations between taxiways/taxilanes and other taxiways/taxilanes and fixed or movable objects as well as separations between taxiways and runways cannot be met.

The following appendices, included in the pdf and print version of the report, will be helpful in understanding the methodology.

  • Appendix A: Risk Assessment Methodology presents a methodology for five different types of circumstances: taxiway/taxilane to taxiway, taxiway to object, taxilane to taxilane, taxilane to an object, and runway to taxiway/taxilane or object;
  • Appendix F: Aircraft Database Summary presents a summary of aircraft characteristics by model; and
  • Appendix H: Analysis of MOS Cases summarizes information collected in the modification of standards survey and presents results of application of the methodology described in Appendix A to each modification of standards case.

Other report appendices, which are available online only, provide detail and information on the development of the methodology.

In addition, the project developed a

PowerPoint presentation

that may be useful for introducing and explaining the methodology to stakeholders.

In July 2021, an errata was posted for this publication: In Table 7 on page 25, the LDVO coefficient was changed from -3.088 to -13.088. The online version of the report has been corrected.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!