Expediting Aircraft Recovery at Airports (2012)

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.

18 chapter four AircrAft recovery complicAtions Although some complications encountered during the recov- ery process can be overcome relatively easily, others present significant obstacles. It is beneficial for airport operators to be aware of some of these complications to avoid extended delays and additional costs during an actual aircraft recov- ery event. This chapter highlights some of the most com- mon complications associated with the recovery of disabled aircraft, although it does not provide an exhaustive list of complexities that may be encountered. DelAy costs Aircraft recovery, as a complex process, often involves significant costs and complications. Although a relatively simple recovery operation (such as a blown tire on a Cessna 150 upon landing rollout) may be resolved within minutes, a heavy recovery operation may take days, and a major sal- vage operation may take weeks. For a major airport, even several hours of runway closure during a peak time can be significant, causing flight delays to skyrocket. Olsen (2008) estimates that an airport could lose in excess of $3,000 per minute in landing fees alone as a result of closures associated with a disabled aircraft event, especially if inbound aircraft are diverted to other airports because of capacity constraints. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and FAA modeled delays at JFK International Airport (an airport with four runways) to determine delay costs to the airlines serving JFK. Modeling was based on only one runway being avail- able (resulting in 222,104 minutes of delay per day) and only two runways being available (resulting in 11,344 minutes of delay per day). Using an average delay cost to each air- line of $42.66 per minute, with only two runways available, delay costs to the airline would average $483,935 per day. With only one runway available, delay costs would increase to $9,474,956 per day. Based on these numbers, the Port Authority developed the following conservative liquidated damages for a project requiring the rehabilitation of one of JFK’s runways: • $3,000 for the first 15-minute interval if the contractor fails to complete the runway work and return bay run- way to operations as scheduled. • $4,500 for the second 15-minute interval if the contrac- tor fails to complete the runway work and return bay runway to operations as scheduled. • $6,000 for the third 15-minute interval if the contractor fails to complete the runway work and return bay runway to operations as scheduled. • $300,000 per day (after the first day) if the contractor fails to complete the runway work and return bay run- way to operations as scheduled (K.B. Bleach, personal communication, November 9, 2011). Although delay costs (in terms of lost airport revenues or expense to the airlines) are difficult to predict accurately, it is clear that delays resulting from runway closures do result in additional costs, which may be quite significant. Compli- cations encountered during the recovery process will only exacerbate these costs. competing pressures It is necessary to understand the many competing pres- sures in a disabled aircraft event. It may seem that each of the personnel involved in the aircraft recovery process has conflicting goals. The airport operator, in an effort to minimize delays and return the airport to normal operation, wants to reopen the runway as soon as possible. The air- craft owner/operator and insurance adjustor want to avoid damaging the aircraft during the removal process, even if this delays the reopening. The independent removal con- tractor wants to take charge of the removal, avoid dam- aging the aircraft, and complete the work quickly to get paid. These competing pressures complicate the recovery process. Second, avoiding secondary damage to the aircraft can complicate the removal process. If the aircraft is not lifted and/or moved properly, secondary damage may occur. To avoid this, it is best to allow qualified and experienced per- sonnel appointed by the aircraft owner/operator to lift and move the disabled aircraft. In addition, proper equipment is necessary. It is also important to calculate the weight and center of gravity of the aircraft to anticipate changes in its stability. Changes in stability may surprise personnel, resulting in injuries to personnel and secondary damage to the aircraft. To determine the best way to recover the dis- abled aircraft, it is helpful for the aircraft owner/operator to survey the site, review the appropriate Airplane Recov- ery Manual, and consult with specialists as needed.

19 closures AnD DelAys Single runway airports face an additional complexity. The removal of a disabled aircraft can be more urgent at a single- runway airport, because if an aircraft becomes disabled on that one runway, the airport is effectively closed until the aircraft can be removed and the runway cleared of any debris. Similarly, at congested airports the closure of a run- way because of a disabled aircraft can significantly reduce the airport’s capacity, likely resulting in delays that may reverberate throughout the National Airspace System. As a result, both single runway airports and congested airports face an additional urgency, at the same time that the aircraft owner/operator is focused on preventing secondary damage to the aircraft, regardless of how long the aircraft occupies the runway. communicAtions The primary responsibility of the airport during an air- craft recovery operation is, first and foremost, communica- tion. Proper communications are essential during the air- craft recovery process. First, this includes communication between the airport operator and the aircraft owner/operator, as well as additional recovery personnel. As the recovery process gets underway, it is important for the airport opera- tor and the aircraft owner/operator to have one person representing their interests and properly communicating needs and issues. Second, proper communications involves disseminating changed airfield conditions to airport users. The digital Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) can make this process more efficient. Airports likely have well-developed NOTAM procedures in place. In both instances, insufficient or improper communications can be a complicating factor to the recovery process. personnel Access Yet another factor complicating the aircraft recovery effort involves providing site access to recovery personnel. Typi- cally, personnel are escorted to and from the site, espe- cially if the site lies within the movement area. If this is not closely controlled, a vehicle–pedestrian deviation may occur. Often, airports dedicate a police officer or other indi- vidual to conduct escorts for personnel authorized to gain access to the site. utilities Underground or above-ground utilities could be severed as the aircraft lands short or overruns the runway. If this occurs, the aircraft may become energized, which would result in a very dangerous situation for recovery person- nel. This may be mitigated with a thorough site survey and aircraft inspection before commencing removal. Addition- ally, underground utilities may become severed during any excavation that is necessary to remove the aircraft. Before excavation of soil to debog landing gear, for instance, it is beneficial to consult utility and navaid composite drawings and mark the location of any underground utilities (includ- ing navaid and communications cables). If utilities are not identified before the start of aircraft recovery efforts, and utilities are interrupted because connections are severed, this may result in extended closures if navaids and other air- field lighting are affected. It is important, therefore, to iden- tify utilities prior to commencing any necessary excavation work. An ACRP Synthesis, Subsurface Utility Engineering information Management for Airports, has been issued to aid airports in this area (Anspach and Murphy 2012). structures Airport structures may be damaged during aircraft excur- sions. There have been instances when an aircraft veered off the runway and came to a stop on the ramp, after striking a loading bridge and/or the main passenger terminal building. Damage to airport structures can complicate the recovery process and delay a return to normal operations. lArge AircrAft The recovery of larger aircraft (such as the B747-8, 777, 787 Dreamliner, or A380) typically presents greater logistical challenges in their removal, which may also result in airport impacts of longer duration. According to ICAO (2009a, p. 1-6), two examples of these constraints include (a) “the blocking of more than one access route to the apron areas and (b) the use of the runway and taxiway where their separation distances are minimal.” Additional factors influencing the removal process of these aircraft include— 1. Increased fuselage length and wingspan 2. Increased weight 3. Substantial increases in volume of fuel and cargo 4. Access height for various components including engines, doors, wings and tail surfaces, which may be compounded by unusual aircraft attitudes 5. Low-allowable skin pressures 6. General accessibility to the aircraft, which may require large areas of soil to be prepared and stabilized to move removal equipment and equipment for offloading cargo and fuel 7. The need to substantially increase the load-bearing capability of any roads being built (Olsen 2008, p. 32; ICAO 2009a, p. 2-5). Aircraft manufacturers have, however, developed special- ized equipment to aid in the recovery of large aircraft. This equipment includes higher capacity pneumatic lifting devices, higher capacity aircraft removal jacks with arc movement control capabilities, higher capacity lifting and towing equip-

20 ment, lightweight temporary roadway systems, and larger temporary fuel storage equipment (ICAO 2009a, pp. 1-6, 1-7; Olsen 2009). smAll AircrAft Smaller aircraft can also present challenges to the recovery process. For instance, owing to their smaller size, weight, and minimal wing height above the ground, regional jets need smaller aircraft removal jacks and smaller pneumatic lifting devices (ICAO 2009a). Experience has shown that airports may not know what to have on hand for disabled aircraft events involving regional jets, Dash 8s, and other small air- craft. Although some generic pieces of recovery equipment may be used, specific tow bars and other tools may be neces- sary. Additionally, many newer generation GA aircraft have composite construction. If damaged, the aircraft may break into large pieces of composite laminate debris with jagged edges. If this is the case, there is a risk of puncture wounds at the accident site for response, investigative, and recov- ery personnel. Additionally, many of these newer generation GA aircraft (especially Cirrus Design aircraft and some light sport aircraft) are equipped with parachutes and airbags. It is important for personnel to take the necessary precautions to avoid inadvertently activating one of these devices during the recovery effort. removAl responsibilities Experience has shown that the GA aircraft owner/operator typically expects the airport operator to lead the aircraft recovery effort. Airports often require the FBO to timely respond to and recover GA disabled aircraft as part of their lease/operating agreement. However, any type aircraft can be operated under Part 91 and considered a GA aircraft. Thus, an FBO with recovery equipment designed only for aircraft that typically frequent the FBO will encounter complexities if FBO personnel are called on to recover an aircraft type for which recovery equipment is not on hand. unloADing AircrAft Another complication is associated with unloading the air- craft before beginning any lifting procedures. This process may involve unloading cargo and/or deplaning passengers. On passenger aircraft, air stairs will likely be necessary to deplane passengers if the aircraft has remained intact. Of course, passengers may have already deplaned through evacuation slides and window exits. A complication can also arise if the airport is not prepared to move uninjured passengers from the aircraft to a collection/staging point. In establishing an uninjured care site or staging area as part of irregular operations, it is important to consider the possible number of passengers and the how to provide for their isolation. Agreements with local transportation com- panies to transport passengers may prove useful in these situations. HAzArDous mAteriAls Although hazardous materials are rare on passenger flights, if the cargo involves hazardous materials, it is important to take additional precautions to ensure the safety of recovery personnel and prevent an uncontained release of hazardous materials. Traditionally, the number one hazardous material that confronts Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) crews is fuel. Likewise, many accident sites contain biohazards, requir- ing proper personal protective equipment for recovery person- nel. Therefore, an event involving hazardous materials may require a hazardous materials team that is trained and fully capable of resolving a hazardous materials event, with proper personal protective equipment. site security Site security of the site is also very important and may complicate the recovery process. It is important to consider managing the media and crowds that will surely congre- gate to view the disabled aircraft. This is especially true for larger aircraft that seem to have a greater visual impact on the public. In addition to the media and public, it is impor- tant to maintain site security for the benefit of investiga- tive authorities, recovery personnel, and the aircraft owner/ operator. WeAtHer Weather conditions can be an additional set of complicating factors. Meteorological elements such as snow, rain, sleet, and hail can severely hamper recovery efforts. An already bogged aircraft can be much more difficult to remove in heavy rains; likewise, a 3-ft snow bank will make cranes difficult to maneu- ver. Depending on the severity of the conditions, recovery efforts may need to be delayed until conditions improve. The temperature may also complicate recovery efforts. Severely cold temperatures can drastically delay recovery operations and make other provisions necessary, including a heated trailer, to ensure that recovery personnel do not succumb to extreme cold. recovery costs Depending on the severity, the actual recovery process may take a few hours or a few days. During this time, equipment is being utilized and personnel are spending time on the recovery. Therefore, the recovery process can be expensive. Although the direct costs associated with the recovery are eas- ily determined, indirect costs may be more difficult to gauge. ICAO (2009a) has created an Aircraft Removal Cost Template that may prove helpful in calculating these costs (Table 1).

21 TABLE 1 AIRCRAFT REMOvAL COST TEMPLATE