National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

ACRP Report 45: Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids (2011)
Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP)

Citation Manager

D'Avirro, John, Chaput, Michael, Transportation Research Board. "Suggested Research." ACRP Report 45: Optimizing the Use of Aircraft Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2011.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
73
bottomleft bottomright
Page
73
Front Matter (R1-R11)
Holdover Time Variance Across an Airfield (1-1)
Increased Use of Aircraft De/Anti-Icing Fluid Dilutions (2-2)
Organization (3-3)
Literature Review and Data Examination (4-4)
Survey (5-5)
Preliminary List of De/Anti-Icing Optimization Technologies and Procedures (6-6)
Development of Final List of Technologies and Procedures (7-8)
Focus Group Survey Inputs on Final List of Technologies and Procedures (9-16)
Overall Ranking of Optimization Technologies and Procedures (17-21)
Recommendations for Further Study (22-22)
Recommendations for Phase II (23-23)
Bibliography (24-27)
Additional Testing (Winter 200809) (28-28)
Equipment and Methodology for Precipitation Measurement (29-29)
Sequence of Events (30-31)
Tests Conducted (32-37)
Scatter Diagram of Logged Data (38-40)
Data Analysis (41-43)
Between-Site Differences in HOT (44-46)
Examination of Site Separation Distance (47-48)
Examination of Lake-Effect Snowfall on HOT Differences (49-50)
Comparison of HOTDS Results to Current Operational Practices (51-51)
HOTDS Implementation Strategy and Timeline (52-52)
Conclusions (53-53)
Recommendations (54-54)
References (55-55)
Objective (56-56)
Laboratory Tests (57-60)
Focus Group Survey (61-62)
Step 1: Examination of Potential Cost-Benefit Model Parameters (63-63)
Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing (64-64)
Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards (65-65)
Laboratory Tests (66-67)
Focus Group Survey (68-68)
Cost-Benefit Model (69-69)
Conclusions (70-71)
Recommendations (72-72)
Suggested Research (73-73)
Objective (74-74)
Focus Group Survey (75-76)
Step 2: Cost-Benefit Model Development and Testing (77-79)
Examination of Current Government and Industry Regulations, Guidance Material, and Standards Related to the Use of Fluid Dilutions (80-80)
Findings of the Focus Group Survey (81-82)
Application of Findings to Current Practice (83-85)
Application of Findings to Create Cost-Benefit Model (86-86)
Conclusions (87-90)
Recommendations (91-91)
Appendixes (92-92)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (93-93)

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 73
73 BREAKEVEN SCHEDULE Winter Capital Setup Operational Total Lifetime Breakeven Season Costs Costs Savings Savings Savings Year 1 $700,000 $17,000 $568,000 -$149,000 -$149,000 no 2 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $419,000 yes 3 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $987,000 reached prior 4 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $1,555,000 reached prior 5 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $2,123,000 reached prior 6 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $2,691,000 reached prior 7 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $3,259,000 reached prior 8 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $3,827,000 reached prior 9 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $4,395,000 reached prior 10 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $4,963,000 reached prior 11 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $5,531,000 reached prior 12 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $6,099,000 reached prior 13 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $6,667,000 reached prior 14 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $7,235,000 reached prior 15 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $7,803,000 reached prior 16 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $8,371,000 reached prior 17 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $8,939,000 reached prior 18 n/a n/a $568,000 $568,000 $9,507,000 reached prior Figure 29. Sample breakeven schedule page. TC) incorporate appropriate spot deicing for frost removal lines and deicing service providers to better understand clarification/guidance information in the annual FAA- the benefits of employing spot deicing for frost in their Approved Deicing Program Updates (Notice 8900.xx) and operations. The cost-benefit model will also assist users by the Transport Canada Guidelines for Aircraft Ground Icing forecasting the financial benefits of employing spot deic- Operations (TP 14052). ing and a promotional campaign be implemented to mar- · It is also recommended that the AEA harmonize language ket these tools. contained in paragraph 3.9.1.3.2 of the AEA De/Anti-icing Recommendations Document to agree with the new word- Suggested Research ing of paragraph 6.5 of ARP 4737. (These changes are deemed to be minor editorial changes.) The application of current Type I fluid HOT guidelines to · It is recommended that spot deicing be applied only to non- de/anti-icing frost from surfaces subjected to cold soaking active frost resulting from natural frost generation. should be examined to ensure suitability as the large cold-sink · As part of this project, a cost-benefit model and presenta- presented by the mass of cold wing structure and cold fuel may tion aids were developed (see Appendix G) to assist air- decrease the fluid endurance time.