National Academies Press: OpenBook

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

Chapter: Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology

« Previous: References
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Risk Assessment Methodology." 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 87

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.

Procedure to Estimate Risk of Collision. The following presents the procedure to estimate risk of collision: 1. Identify the runway and the taxiway (or taxilane or object) centerline separation to be evaluated. 2. Identify the ADG for analysis based on the aircraft with the largest wingspan that will be using both the runway and the taxiway or taxilane. 3. Select the plot for the specific ADG involved and estimate the risk based only on the runway centerline to taxiway centerline separation (see Figures AA-29 to AA-40). 4. Using the risk level estimated, compare to 1 × 10−7, the lowest probability for risk of severe consequences accord- ing to the risk matrix used by the FAA. 5.1.2—Risk in Ground Phase (Landing) There are two alternatives that may be used to estimate the risk for the ground phase of landing, i.e., during the landing rollout. Alternative 1 is the default analysis and pro- vides a simpler and direct estimate based upon generalized inputs. Alternative 2 provides a more accurate estimate for specific cases but also requires a significant amount of data and computation. Procedure to Estimate Risk of Collision. The following are the steps to estimate risk for the landing rollout phase. For Alternative 1 (Default): 1. Figures AA-41 to AA-47 represent the risk curves that integrate both the frequency and location models for the specific case. 2. Characterize the separation between the runway center- line and the parallel taxiway, parallel taxilane, or object. 3. Characterize the ADG involved in the analysis. 4. Select the correct plot for the ADG involved in the analysis. 5. Enter the centerline separation to obtain the risk of collision in the plot selected. For Alternative 2: 1. Obtain 1 year of historical landing operational data and information on weather conditions for the runway. 2. Calculate the frequency of landing veer-offs for the run- way by applying the frequency model (see “Event Prob- ability” and Table 7 in Chapter 4). 3. Calculate the probability that the aircraft veers off beyond a given distance: a. Obtain the wingtip clearance WD between the aircraft landing and the nearest obstacle, as shown in Figures A-11 and A-12, by placing the center of the aircraft land- ing at the edge of the runway. b. Use WD and apply the location model (see Table 10) to calculate the probability of a lateral deviation beyond WD. 4. Multiply the frequency probability by the location proba- bility and repeat Steps 2 and 3 for each historical landing operation on the runway. 5. Calculate the average value for the probabilities estimated with historical landing data for the runway. where WD is the wingtip distance, CS is the separation between the runway and the taxiway, RW is the runway width, WS1 is the wingspan for the aircraft taking off, and WS2 is the wingspan for the aircraft in the parallel taxiway. If the analysis is for a specific ADG, WD can be picked up from Table A-6. Another possibility is the evaluation of separation between the runway and an object. Figure A-12 shows an example using a runway and a service road. In this case, the wingtip separa- tion is calculated using Equation 6: where WD is the wingtip separation, CS is the separation between the runway and the service road, RW is the runway width, SW is the width of the service road, and WS is the wingspan of the aircraft. WD CS RW SW WS= − − −2 2 2 6( ) WD CS RW WS WS= − − +( )2 1 2 2 5( ) A-10 Figure A-11. Typical runway/taxiway scenario for runway veer-off incidents.

The frequency and location models for veer-off are presented in Tables 7 and 10. Subsection 5.2—Takeoff For takeoff, the risk is that an aircraft will veer off the run- way and strike an obstacle in the vicinity of the runway obsta- cle free zone (OFZ). In this case, the obstacle is assumed to be an aircraft or another object (fixed or movable) that is closest to the runway centerline. This is a conservative assumption because an aircraft may not be present in the parallel taxiway, and the obstacle has a small length compared to the total runway length. Analysis for takeoff is only applicable to runways with depar- ture operations only. This is because when the runway is used for both landing and takeoff, the highest risk condition is for landing. Similar to the case for landings, there are two alternatives for estimating the risk of collision. Alternative 1 is the default analysis and is simple and direct, based upon generalized inputs. Alternative 2 provides a more accurate estimate that takes into account specific operation conditions for the air- port; however, it requires a significant amount of data and computation. Procedure to Estimate Risk of Collision. The following are the steps to estimate risk for the takeoff roll phase for Alternative 1 (Default): 1. Figures AA-48 to AA-54 represent the risk curves that integrate both the frequency and location models for the specific case. 2. Characterize the separation between the runway center- line and the parallel taxiway, parallel taxilane, or object. 3. Characterize the ADG involved in the analysis. 4. Select the correct plot for the ADG involved in the analysis. 5. Enter the centerline separation to obtain the risk of collision in the plot selected. For Alternative 2: 1. Obtain 1 year of historical takeoff operational data and information on weather conditions for the runway. 2. Calculate the frequency of takeoff veer-off for the run- way by applying the frequency model (see “Event Prob- ability” and Table 7 in Chapter 4). 3. Calculate the probability that the aircraft veers off beyond a given distance: a. Obtain the wingtip clearance WD between the aircraft taking off and the nearest obstacle, as shown in Figures A-11 and A-12, by placing the center of the aircraft landing at the edge of the runway. b. Use WD and apply the location model (see Table 10) to calculate the probability of a lateral deviation be- yond WD. 4. Multiply the frequency probability by the location proba- bility and repeat Steps 2 and 3 for each historical takeoff operation on the runway. 5. Calculate the average value for the probabilities estimated with historical takeoff data for the runway. Example 3—Runway/Taxiway Separation In this example, an ADG II airport wants to bring regu- lar flights of ERJ-170 aircraft. The runway is 150 ft wide and has a Cat I instrument landing system (ILS). The wing- span of an ERJ-170 is 85.3 ft, and it is classified in ADG III. The existing separation between the runway and the paral- lel taxiway centerlines is 320 ft; however, the standard for A-11 Figure A-12. Typical runway/object scenario for runway veer-off incidents. Table A-6. Wingtip separation based on largest wingspan in ADG. ADG RW (ft) WD (ft) I 100 CS-99 II 100 CS-129 III 100 CS-168 IV 150 CS-246 V 150 CS-289 VI 200 CS-362

ADG III aircraft is 400 ft. The scenario is illustrated in Figure A-13. The analysis involves a two-step process. In the first step, it is necessary to evaluate the risk during the airborne phase, and, in the second step, it is necessary to estimate the risk for aircraft veer-off during the landing roll. The risk of collision for ADG III Cat I during the airborne phase of landing is estimated using Figure AA-33. The runway/ taxiway centerline separation for the case is 320 ft, and the A-12 Figure A-13. Example of Runway/Taxiway Separation. 200 250 300 350 450 500400 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-11 1.0E-08 1.0E-10 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n 8.4E-09 Figure A-14. Estimating airborne risk of runway/taxiway separation (ADG III–CAT I). risk of collision is 8.4E-9 (see Figure A-14), or one chance in 119 million landings. This level is considered acceptable according to the FAA risk matrix. The final step is to estimate risk of collision in case the air- craft veers off the runway. Figure AA-43 is used for ADG III aircraft, and the separation of 320 ft is entered to estimate the risk of collision of 9.0E-08 (or one chance in 11.1 million land- ings). As this risk is lower than 1.E-07, it may be acceptable to the FAA.

Section 1—Taxiway to Taxiway/Taxilane Risk Plots A-13 Exhibit AA-1. Example illustrating use of plots. 62 64 66 68 70 72 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Standard = 69 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-1. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG I. ATTACHMENT—RISK PLOTS This attachment contains several plots that should be used with the methodology described in Appendix A. The input parameter is always the centerline separa- tion or the wingtip clearance in feet. The output of these plots is the risk of collision. The scale for the risk values is logarithmic. When the analysis involves one specific ADG, the centerline separation should be entered. In an example plot (see Exhibit AA-1), a text box con- tains the current FAA standard separation for the specific scenario. Exhibit AA-1 also illustrates the use of these plots. To esti- mate the risk of collision when the centerline separation of two parallel taxiways used by aircraft in ADG I is 65 ft, use the plot shown in Figure AA-1 to enter the centerline separation and move vertically until crossing the curve. Then move hor- izontally to read the risk of collision—in this example, it is approximately 9.0E-07, or 9 events in 10,000,000 operations. The procedure is illustrated in Exhibit AA-1.

A-14 92 94 96 98 100 102 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Standard = 105 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-2. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG II. 130 132 134 136 138 140 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline to Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Standard = 152 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-3. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG III.

A-15 184 186 188 190 192 194 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline to Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Standard = 215 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-4. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG IV. 226 228 230 232 234 236 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline to Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Standard = 267 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-5. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG V.

A-16 274 276 278 280 282 284 Taxiway/Taxiway Centerline to Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Standard = 324 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-6. Collision risk associated with taxiway centerline separation for ADG VI. 12 14 16 18 20 22 Wingtip Separation (ft) 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-7. Collision risk associated with wingtip separation distance (Any ADG).

A-17 Section 2—Taxiway to Object Risk Plots 34 36 40 44 4838 42 46 50 52 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG I Standard = 44.5 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-8. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG I. 52 56 60 6454 58 6250 66 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG II Standard = 65.5 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-9. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG II.

A-18 72 76 80 8474 78 8268 70 86 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG III Standard = 93 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-10. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG III. 98 102 106 110100 104 10896 112 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG IV Standard = 129.5 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-11. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG IV.

A-19 118 122 126 130120 124 128116 134132 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG V Standard = 160 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-12. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG V. 142 146 150 156154144 148 152140 158 Taxiway Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG VI Standard = 193 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-13. Collision risk associated with taxiway to object separation for ADG VI.

A-20 Section 3—Taxilane to Taxilane Risk Plots 61 63 6560 62 6459 66 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Standard = 64 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-15. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG I. 12 16 20 2414 18 2210 2826 Wingtip Separation (ft) 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-14. Collision risk associated with taxiway wingtip to object clearance (any ADG).

A-21 89 91 9490 92 9388 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Standard = 97 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-16. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG II. 127 129 131128 130126 132 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Standard = 140 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-17. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG III.

A-22 180 183181 182179 184 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Standard = 198 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-18. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG IV. 224 226223 225222 227 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Standard = 245 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-19. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG V.

A-23 271 274272 273270 275 Taxilane/Taxilane Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Standard = 298 ft 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-20. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG VI. 11 13 1512 14 1610 17 Wingtip Separation (ft) 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-21. Collision risk associated with taxilane wingtip separation distance (any ADG).

A-24 Section 4—Taxilane to Object Risk Plots 32 36 40 4434 38 42 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG I Standard = 39.5 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-22. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG I. 48 52 5650 5446 58 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG II Standard = 57.5 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-23. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG II.

A-25 67 7369 7165 75 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG III Standard = 81 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-24. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG III. 95 97 10193 9991 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n ADG IV Standard = 112.5 ft Figure AA-25. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG IV.

A-26 115 121117 119113 123 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG V Standard = 138 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-26. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG V. 137 139 141 143 145 Taxilane Centerline to Object Separation (ft) ADG VI Standard = 167 ft 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-27. Collision risk associated with taxilane to object separation for ADG VI.

A-27 Section 5.1.1—Runway to Taxiway, Taxilane, or Object Risk in Airborne Phase (Plots Based on FAA/ICAO CRM) 200 300 400250 350 450150 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Approach Cat C Standard = 300 ft 1.0E-13 1.0E-12 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-29. Missed approach collision risk for ADG I Cat I. 9 1511 137 1917 Wingtip Separation (ft) 1.E-10 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-28. Collision risk associated with taxilane wingtip to object clearance—any ADG.

A-28 200 300 400250 350 450150 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-13 1.0E-12 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-30. Missed approach collision risk for ADG I Cat II. 200 300 400250 350 450150 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Approach Cat C Standard = 300 ft 1.E-12 1.E-11 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-31. Missed approach collision risk for ADG II Cat I.

A-29 300 400350200 250 450150 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-13 1.0E-12 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-32. Missed approach collision risk for ADG II Cat II. 300200 400350 450250 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-33. Missed approach collision risk for ADG III Cat I.

A-30 300200 400350 450250 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-34. Missed approach collision risk for ADG III Cat II. 600300 700400 550350 450 650 750250 800500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Approach Cat D Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-35. Missed approach collision risk for ADG IV Cat I.

A-31 600300 700400 550350 450 650 750250 800500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Approach Cat D Standard = 400 ft 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-36. Missed approach collision risk for ADG IV Cat II. 600 300 700 400 550 350 450 650 850750 800 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Approach Cat D Standard = 400-500 ft* 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n *For specific standard, please check Table 2-2 in FAA AC 150/5300-13. Figure AA-37. Missed approach collision risk for ADG V Cat I.

A-32 600 300 700 400 550 350 450 650 850750 800 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Approach Cat D Standard = 400-500 ft* 1.0E-11 1.0E-10 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n *For specific standard, please check Table 2-2 in FAA AC 150/5300-13. Figure AA-38. Missed approach collision risk for ADG V Cat II. 600 700400 550450 650 750 800 850 900500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Approach Cat D Standard = 500 ft 1.0E-10 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n Figure AA-39. Missed approach collision risk for ADG VI Cat I.

A-33 Section 5.1.2—Landing Veer-Off Collision Risk Plots (Ground Phase) 600100 700200 300 400 800500 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Approach Cat C Standard = 300-400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay Figure AA-41. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG I. 600 700 400 550 450 650 850 750 900800 500 Runway/Taxiway Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Approach Cat D Standard = 500-550 ft* 1.0E-10 1.0E-05 1.0E-06 1.0E-07 1.0E-08 1.0E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n pe r O pe ra tio n *For specific standard, please check Table 2-2 in FAA AC 150/5300-13. Figure AA-40. Missed approach collision risk for ADG VI Cat II.

A-34 650150 750250 350 450 550 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Approach Cat C Standard = 300-400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay Figure AA-42. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG II. 600200 700300 400 800500 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay Figure AA-43. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG III.

A-35 750250 850350 450 550 950650 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Approach Cat D Standard = 400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay Figure AA-44. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG IV. 600 300 700 400 900 1000800 500 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Approach Cat D Standard = 400-500 ft* 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay *For specific standard, please check Table 2-2 in FAA AC 150/5300-13. Figure AA-45. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG V.

A-36 900 400 1000 500 600 700 1100800 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Approach Cat D Standard = 500-550 ft* 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay *For specific standard, please check Table 2-2 in FAA AC 150/5300-13. Figure AA-46. Landing veer-off collision risk for ADG VI. Note: The wingtip separation is measured with the landing aircraft centered at the edge of the runway 6000 800200 400 1000 Wingtip Separation to Taxiway Centerline or Object (ft) 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ro ss in g th e Ta xi w ay Figure AA-47. Landing veer-off collision risk based on wingtip clearance—any ADG.

A-37 600100 700200 300 400 800500 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG I Approach Cat C Standard = 300-400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-48. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG I. 650150 750250 350 450 550 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG II Approach Cat C Standard = 300-400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-49. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG II. Section 5.2—Takeoff Veer-Off Collision Risk Plots

A-38 600 700200 300 400 800500 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG III Approach Cat C Standard = 400 ft 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-50. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG III. 750250 850350 450 550 950650 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG IV Approach Cat D Standard = 400 ft 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-51. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG IV.

A-39 800300 900400 500 600 1000700 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG V Approach Cat D Standard = 400-500 ft* 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-52. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG V. 900400 1000500 600 700 1100800 Centerline Separation (ft) ADG VI Approach Cat D Standard = 500-550 ft* 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-53. Takeoff veer-off collision risk for ADG VI.

A-40 Note: The wingtip separation is measured with the landing aircraft centered at the edge of the runway 600100 700200 300 400 800500 Wingtip Separation (ft) 1.E-07 1.E-08 1.E-10 1.E-09 R is k of C ol lis io n (A cc /O p) Figure AA-54. Takeoff veer-off collision risk based on wingtip clearance—any ADG.

B-1 Appendix B of the contractor’s final report is not published herein, but is available on the TRB website at http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165180.aspx. A P P E N D I X B Collision Risk Model

C-1 Appendix C of the contractor’s final report is not published herein, but is available on the TRB website at http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165180.aspx. A P P E N D I X C Key Studies on Aircraft Deviation

D-1 Appendix D of the contractor’s final report is not published herein, but is available on the TRB website at http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165180.aspx. A P P E N D I X D List of Veer-Off Accidents and Incidents

E-1 Appendix E of the contractor’s final report is not published herein, but is available on the TRB website at http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165180.aspx. A P P E N D I X E Sample of Normal Operations Data

F-1 A P P E N D I X F Aircraft Database Summary

Table F-1. Summary of aircraft characteristics by model. Aircraft Name Manufacturer ICAO Code Wingspan (ft) Length (ft) Height (ft) Engine Type Engines (#) MTOW (lb) Takeoff Distance (ft) Landing Distance (ft) V2 (kts) Approach Speed (kts) Mohawk 298 Aerospatiale N262 71.9 63.3 20.3 Turboprop 2 23,369 2,296.6 1,312.3 100 110 Aerostar 600 Aerostar AEST 36.7 34.8 12.8 Piston 2 6,305 1,804.5 1,148.3 95 94 A-300 Airbus A30B 147.1 177.5 54.3 Jet 2 378,534 7,349.1 5,026.2 160 135 A-300-600 Airbus A306 147.1 177.5 54.3 Jet 2 378,534 7,349.1 5,026.2 160 135 A-310-200/300 Airbus A310 144.0 153.1 51.8 Jet 2 330,693 7,513.1 4,888.5 160 135 A-318 Airbus A318 111.9 103.2 41.2 Jet 2 130,073 4,593.2 4,265.1 135 138 A-319 Airbus A319 111.9 111.2 38.6 Jet 2 141,096 5,741.5 4,429.1 135 138 A-320 Airbus A320 111.9 123.3 38.6 Jet 2 162,040 7,185.0 4,724.4 145 138 A-321 Airbus A321 111.9 146.0 38.6 Jet 2 182,984 7,250.7 5,249.3 145 138 A-330-200 Airbus A332 197.8 192.9 57.1 Jet 2 507,063 7,545.9 5,905.5 145 140 A-330-300 Airbus A333 197.8 208.7 55.3 Jet 2 507,063 7,545.9 5,905.5 145 130 A-340-200 Airbus A342 197.8 194.8 54.8 Jet 4 606,271 9,071.5 5,790.7 145 150 A-340-300 Airbus A343 197.8 208.7 55.3 Jet 4 606,271 9,071.5 6,003.9 145 150 A-340-500 Airbus A345 208.2 222.8 56.1 Jet 4 811,301 10,498.7 6,299.2 145 150 A-340-600 Airbus A346 208.2 247.0 56.8 Jet 4 811,301 10,301.8 6,561.7 145 150 A-380-800 Airbus A388 261.8 239.5 79.1 Jet 4 1,234,589 9,744.1 6,594.5 150 145 Alenia ATR-42-200/300 ATR AT43 80.7 74.5 24.9 Turboprop 2 36,817 3,608.9 3,280.8 110 104 Alenia ATR-72-200/210 ATR AT72 88.9 89.2 25.3 Turboprop 2 47,399 4,921.3 3,608.9 110 105 Avro 748 Avro A748 98.2 66.9 24.9 Turboprop 2 46,495 3,280.8 2,034.1 110 100 Jetsream 31 Bae Systems JS31 52.0 47.1 17.5 Turboprop 2 15,562 5,905.5 4,265.1 110 125 Jetsream 32 Bae Systems JS32 52.0 47.1 17.7 Turboprop 2 16,226 5,150.9 4,002.6 110 125 Jetsream 41 Bae Systems JS41 60.4 63.4 18.4 Turboprop 2 24,000 4,921.3 4,265.1 110 120 100 King Air Beech BE10 45.9 40.0 15.4 Turboprop 2 11,795 1,476.4 2,132.5 105 111 33 Debonair Beech BE33 33.5 25.6 8.2 Piston 1 3,064 1,148.3 984.3 75 70 Beech 55 Baron Beech BE55 37.7 27.9 9.5 Piston 2 5,071 1,476.4 1,476.4 95 90 Beech 60 Duke Beech BE60 39.4 33.8 12.5 Piston 2 6,768 1,968.5 1,312.3 95 98 Beech 76 Duchess Beech BE76 38.1 29.2 9.5 Piston 2 3,902 2,132.5 1,968.5 85 76 Beech 99 Airliner Beech BE99 45.9 44.6 14.4 Turboprop 2 16,755 3,280.8 2,952.8 115 107 Bonanza V35B Beech BE35 33.4 26.3 7.6 Piston 1 3,400 1,150.0 1,480 * 70 King Air F90 Beech BE9T 45.9 39.8 * Turboprop 2 10,950 * * * 108

Table F-1. (Continued). Aircraft Name Manufacturer ICAOCode Wingspan (ft) Length (ft) Height (ft) Engine Type Engines (#) MTOW (lb) Takeoff Distance (ft) Landing Distance (ft) V2 (kts) Approach Speed (kts) Super King Air 300 Beech BE30 54.5 44.0 14.8 Turboprop 2 13,889 1,870.1 1,771.7 115 103 Premier 1A Beechcraft PRM1 44.5 46.0 15.3 Jet 2 12,500 3,792.0 3,170.0 * 121 B707-100 Boeing B701 130.9 144.7 42.3 Jet 4 190,003 8,694.2 6,496.1 * 139 B717-200 Boeing B712 93.2 124.0 29.5 Jet 2 120,999 6,889.8 5,249.3 130 139 B727 Stage 3 Noise Acft Boeing B727Q 107.9 153.2 34.1 Jet 3 210,101 9,842.5 4,921.3 145 150 B727-100 Boeing B721 108.0 133.2 34.3 Jet 3 169,095 8,202.1 4,921.3 * 125 B727-200 Boeing B722 107.9 153.2 34.1 Jet 3 210,101 9,842.5 4,921.3 145 150 B737 Stage 3 Noise Acft Boeing B737Q 93.0 94.0 37.2 Jet 2 110,121 5,905.5 4,593.2 145 137 B737-100 Boeing B731 93.0 94.0 37.2 Jet 2 110,121 5,905.5 4,593.2 145 137 B737-200 Boeing B732 93.0 100.2 37.2 Jet 2 115,500 6,003.9 4,593.2 145 137 B737-300 Boeing B733 94.8 109.6 36.6 Jet 2 124,495 5,249.3 4,593.2 140 135 B737-400 Boeing B734 94.8 119.4 36.6 Jet 2 138,494 6,561.7 4,921.3 150 139 B737-500 Boeing B735 94.8 101.7 36.6 Jet 2 115,500 4,921.3 4,593.2 139 140 B737-600 Boeing B736 112.6 102.5 40.8 Jet 2 123,988 6,233.6 4,265.1 135 125 B737-700 Boeing B737 112.6 110.3 40.8 Jet 2 146,211 5,905.5 4,593.2 140 130 B737-800 Boeing B738 112.6 129.5 40.6 Jet 2 155,492 7,545.9 5,249.3 145 141 B737-900 Boeing B739 112.6 138.2 40.6 Jet 2 174,198 7,545.9 5,577.4 149 144 B747-100 Boeing B741 195.3 229.0 64.2 Jet 4 735,021 10,465.9 6,233.6 170 152 B747-200 Boeing B742 195.7 229.0 64.2 Jet 4 826,403 10,498.7 6,233.6 173 152 B747-300 Boeing B743 195.7 229.0 64.2 Jet 4 826,403 10,826.8 7,217.8 178 160 B747-400 Boeing B744 195.6 229.2 64.2 Jet 4 874,993 10,826.8 6,988.2 185 154 B747-400ER Boeing B744ER 213.0 231.9 64.3 Jet 4 910,002 10,498.7 7,841.2 * 157 B747-8 Boeing B748 224.4 246.9 64.3 Jet 4 975,001 10,000.0 8,595.8 * 159 B757-200 Boeing B752 124.8 155.2 45.1 Jet 2 255,031 6,233.6 4,593.2 145 135 B757-300 Boeing B753 124.8 177.4 44.8 Jet 2 272,491 8,530.2 5,905.5 145 142 B767-200 Boeing B762 156.1 159.2 52.9 Jet 2 395,002 8,858.3 4,921.3 160 130 B767-300 Boeing B763 156.1 180.2 52.6 Jet 2 412,000 9,514.4 5,905.5 160 130 B767-400 Boeing B764 170.3 201.3 55.8 Jet 2 449,999 9,514.4 5,905.5 160 150 B767-400ER Boeing B764ER 170.3 201.3 55.8 Jet 2 449,999 9,514.4 5,905.5 160 150 B777-200 Boeing B772 199.9 209.1 61.5 Jet 2 545,005 9,514.4 5,577.4 170 145 B777-200LR Boeing B772LR 212.6 209.1 61.5 Jet 2 766,001 9,514.4 5,577.4 170 139 B777-300 Boeing B773 199.9 242.3 61.5 Jet 2 659,998 9,842.5 5,905.5 168 145 (continued on next page)

Aircraft Name Manufacturer ICAOCode Wingspan (ft) Length (ft) Height (ft) Engine Type Engines (#) MTOW (lb) Takeoff Distance (ft) Landing Distance (ft) V2 (kts) Approach Speed (kts) B777-300ER Boeing B773ER 212.6 242.3 61.8 Jet 2 775,002 9,514.4 5,905.5 160 145 B787-8 Dreamliner Boeing B788 197.2 186.1 55.5 Jet 2 484,001 * * * 140 BMD-90 Boeing MD90 107.8 152.6 31.2 Jet 2 164,244 7,217.8 3,937.0 140 140 BD-700 Global Express Bombardier GLEX 93.8 99.4 24.9 Jet 2 98,106 6,135.2 1,358.3 120 126 BAC 1-11 British Aerospace BA11 93.5 107.0 25.4 Jet 2 99,651 7,470.5 4,757.2 140 129 BAE-146-200 British Aerospace B462 86.4 93.7 28.2 Jet 4 93,035 3,379.3 4,051.8 125 125 CL-600 Challenger Canadair CL60 61.8 68.4 * Jet 2 47,600 * * * 125 RJ-100 Regional Jet Canadair CRJ1 69.6 87.9 20.7 Jet 2 47,399 5,249.3 4,593.2 135 135 RJ-200 Regional Jet Canadair CRJ2 69.6 87.9 20.7 Jet 2 47,399 5,249.3 4,593.2 135 135 RJ-700 Regional Jet Canadair CRJ7 76.2 106.7 24.8 Jet 2 72,753 5,249.3 4,849.1 135 135 RJ-900 Regional Jet Canadair CRJ9 76.4 118.8 24.6 Jet 2 80,491 6,168.0 5,118.1 170 150 Aviocar Casa C212 66.6 53.1 21.7 Turboprop 2 16,976 2,952.8 1,640.4 100 81 500 Citation Cessna C500 47.2 43.6 14.4 Jet 2 10,847 3,274.3 1,870.1 120 125 Cessna 120 Cessna C120 32.8 21.0 * Piston 1 1,450 650.0 460.0 * * Cessna 150 Commuter Cessna C150 33.5 21.7 6.9 Piston 1 1,499 820.2 656.2 55 55 Cessna 172 Skyhawk Cessna C172 35.8 26.9 8.9 Piston 1 2,315 984.3 524.9 60 65 Cessna 182 Skylane Cessna C182 36.1 28.2 9.2 Piston 1 2,800 656.2 1,348.4 65 92 Cessna 185 Skywagon Cessna C185 36.2 25.8 7.8 Piston 1 3,351 650.0 610.0 * * Cessna 206 Caravan 1 Cessna C208 52.2 37.7 14.1 Turboprop 1 8,001 1,640.4 1,476.4 85 104 Cessna 210 Centurion Cessna C210 36.7 28.2 9.8 Piston 1 4,012 1,312.3 1,476.4 70 75 Cessna 340 Rocket Cessna C340 38.1 34.4 12.5 Piston 2 5,975 2,132.5 1,640.4 95 110 Cessna 402 Utililiner Cessna C402 44.2 36.4 11.8 Piston 2 6,305 2,221.1 1,765.1 95 95 Cessna 404 Titan Cessna C404 49.5 39.0 13.1 Piston 2 8,444 2,296.6 1,968.5 100 100 Cessna 414 Chancellor Cessna C414 41.0 33.8 11.8 Piston 2 6,746 1,706.0 2,296.6 100 94 Cessna 421 Golden Eagle Cessna C421 40.0 33.8 11.8 Piston 2 6,834 1,968.5 2,460.6 100 96 Cessna 425 Corsair Cessna C425 44.3 35.8 12.8 Turboprop 2 8,598 2,460.6 2,132.5 105 110 Cessna 441 Conquest Cessna C441 49.3 39.0 13.1 Turboprop 2 9,855 1,804.5 1,148.3 105 100 Cessna 500 Citation 1 Cessna C500 47.2 43.6 14.4 Jet 2 10,847 3,274.3 1,870.1 120 108 Cessna 501 Citation 1SP Cessna C501 47.2 43.6 14.4 Jet 2 10,847 3,274.3 1,870.1 120 125 Cessna 525 Citation CJ1 Cessna C525 46.9 42.7 13.8 Jet 2 10,399 3,080.7 2,749.3 115 107 Cessna 550 Citation 2 Cessna C550 52.2 47.2 15.1 Jet 2 15,102 3,280.8 3,002.0 115 108 Table F-1. (Continued).

Aircraft Name Manufacturer ICAO Code Wingspan (ft) Length (ft) Height (ft) Engine Type Engines (#) MTOW (lb) Takeoff Distance (ft) Landing Distance (ft) V2 (kts) Approach Speed (kts) Cessna 560 Citation 5 Ultra Cessna C560 45.3 48.9 13.8 Jet 2 15,895 3,159.4 2,919.9 105 108 Cessna 650 Citation 3 Cessna C650 53.5 55.4 16.8 Jet 2 30,997 5,249.3 2,952.8 125 114 Cessna 750 Citation 10 Cessna C750 64.0 72.2 19.0 Jet 2 35,699 5,708.7 3,818.9 125 130 Cessna Stationair 6 Cessna C206 35.8 28.2 9.8 Piston 1 3,638 820.2 1,476.4 75 92 Cessna T303 Crusader Cessna C303 39.0 30.5 13.5 Piston 2 5,159 1,748.7 1,460.0 85 110 Cessna T310 Cessna C310 37.1 31.8 10.8 Piston 2 5,498 1,663.4 1,791.3 95 110 Citation CJ2 Cessna C25A 49.5 46.9 13.8 Jet 2 12,375 3,418.6 2,985.6 115 118 Citation CJ3 Cessna C25B 49.5 46.9 13.8 Jet 2 12,375 3,418.6 2,985.6 115 118 Citation Excel Cessna C56X 55.8 51.8 17.1 Jet 2 19,200 3,461.3 2,919.9 115 125 Falcon 10 Dassault FA10 42.9 45.5 * Jet 2 18,739 * * * 104 Falcon 200 Dassault FA20 53.5 56.4 17.4 Jet 2 29,013 5,249.3 3,608.9 120 107 Falcon 2000 Dassault F2TH 63.3 66.3 23.3 Jet 2 35,803 5,249.3 5,249.3 120 114 Falcon 50 Dassault FA50 61.9 60.8 29.4 Jet 3 38,801 4,593.2 3,608.9 120 113 Falcon 900 Dassault F900 63.3 66.3 24.9 Jet 3 46,738 4,921.3 2,296.6 125 100 DHC-5 Buffalo De Havilland Canada DHC5 65.0 49.5 19.4 Turboprop 2 12,500 1,640.4 984.3 80 77 DHC-7 Dash 7 De Havilland Canada DHC7 93.2 80.7 26.2 Turboprop 4 47,003 2,952.8 3,280.8 90 83 DHC-8-100 Dash 8 De Havilland Canada DH8A 85.0 73.2 24.6 Turboprop 2 34,502 2,952.8 2,952.8 100 100 DHC-8-300 Dash 8 De Havilland Canada DH8C DC8Q 89.9 84.3 24.6 Turboprop 2 41,099 3,608.9 3,280.8 110 90 DHC-8-400 Dash 8 De Havilland Canada DH8D 93.2 107.6 27.2 Turboprop 2 63,930 4,265.1 3,608.9 115 115 DC-8 Stage 3 No ise Aircraft Douglas 142.4 150.6 42.3 Jet 4 324,961 9,842.5 6,561.7 130 137 DC-8-50 Douglas DC85 142.4 150.6 42.3 Jet 4 324,961 9,842.5 6,561.7 130 137 DC-8-60 Douglas DC86 142.4 187.3 42.3 Jet 4 349,874 9,842.5 6,561.7 130 137 DC-8-70 Douglas DC87 148.3 187.3 43.0 Jet 4 357,204 10,006.6 6,561.7 160 150 DC-9-10 Douglas DC91 89.6 119.4 27.5 Jet 2 110,099 6,889.8 4,921.3 140 127 DC-9-30 Douglas DC93 89.6 119.4 27.6 Jet 2 110,099 6,889.8 4,921.3 140 127 DC-9-40 Douglas DC94 93.5 133.5 28.0 Jet 2 121,109 6,889.8 4,921.3 140 130 DC-9-50 Douglas DC95 93.5 133.5 27.9 Jet 2 121,109 6,889.8 4,921.3 140 132 DC-9-50 Douglas DC95 93.5 133.5 27.9 Jet 2 121,109 6,889.8 4,921.3 140 132 Table F-1. (Continued). (continued on next page)

Next: Appendix B - Collision Risk Model »
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!