Understanding Airspace, Objects, and Their Effects on Airports (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 78-96
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 78... ...
Introduction Appendix A introduced various airspace protection criteria documents, and specified the purpose, function, and application of the broad range of criteria included within those documents. This Appendix describes the interrelationships among criteria.
|
From page 79... ...
Interrelationships Among Criteria 79 Figure B.1. Interrelationships among criteria.
|
From page 80... ...
C. Certain individual flight procedure design and airport design criteria influence one another.
|
From page 81... ...
8. Height zoning ordinances should, and often do, reference FAA notification criteria, so that developers will be aware of the Federal requirement to submit an FAA Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, when their proposed structure exceeds any of the FAA notification criteria.
|
From page 82... ...
or "DER", the final point on the runway surface for take-off procedures. The clearance geometrics for arriving or departing aircraft overflying obstacles are informed by performance tolerances and parameters developed in instrument flight procedure criteria.
|
From page 83... ...
These surfaces are found in ALP sets, and are therefore an available source of airspace information for airport operators to provide to municipal land use planners and developers. AC 150/5070-6b, Change 1, Airport Master Plans (AC 150/5070)
|
From page 84... ...
Figure B.2. Profile view -- obstruction standards.
|
From page 85... ...
Table B.1 describes the three main functions of FAR Part 77 and describes some of the limitations of this regulation. The first limitation identified through the case studies is that project sponsors may fail entirely to submit notification to the FAA even when they meet one of the five notification criteria.
|
From page 86... ...
For example, the FAR Part 77 civil airport imaginary surfaces do not have any "Departure Surfaces" because it is assumed that aircraft will depart at a greater climb rate than approach descent rate. However, there are cases when a published instrument departure procedure will have a lower climb rate than a given runways descent rate, the following hypothetical scenario demonstrates how such an inconsistency might work: There is be a published instrument departure procedure off Runway 9 that only requires the aircraft to maintain a 200 ft.
|
From page 87... ...
Because AC 150/5300-13 defines surfaces for a separate purpose, and in some cases with inconsistent geometries, airport operators that expect decisions related to new or modified airport designs to be based in FAR Part 77 may find major discrepancies with their expectations. A specific example comes from the case study of Daytona Beach International Airport: During a FAR Part 139 standard certification maintenance inspection, the FAA inspector noted that due a change from visual to GPS non-precision approaches on Runways 7R and 25L, the 20:1 approach slopes as defined in FAR Part 77.25 had become 34:1 due to the newly established non-precision approach procedures.
|
From page 88... ...
Figure B.3. Plan view -- runway approach area.
|
From page 89... ...
Figure B.4. Profile view -- runway approach area.
|
From page 90... ...
Figure B.5. Plan view -- departure considerations.
|
From page 91... ...
Figure B.6. Plan view -- departure considerations.
|
From page 92... ...
Figure B.7. Plan view of VFR protection and instrument procedure protection.
|
From page 93... ...
developable heights on private land. As a result of these constituencies and concerns, there is less certainty in obstruction evaluations for OEI procedures than in other obstruction criteria (TERPS, FAR Part 77, AC 150/5300-13, etc.)
|
From page 94... ...
also all around the airfield, largely duplicating the process of developing an AOC. The lateral "splays" and lengths of these surfaces cover a much wider area than is typically used in an individual airline OEI procedure development.
|
From page 95... ...
FAA OE/AAA Process and OEI Typically, OEI is not considered in the OE/AAA analysis process because FAA has historically taken a position that they have no legal basis to declare a hazard based on what is ostensibly a solely economic impact to airlines. Airlines submit negative comments when an OE case is circularized, and FAA paraphrases them in the DNH but notes that unless TERPS or other criteria are exceeded, economic impact to an airline, in and of itself, is not grounds for a hazard determination.
|
From page 96... ...
Effect on Airports The effect of OEI obstacles that result in weight penalties is the equivalent to reducing the runway length available. While the overall length of a runway can comply with FAA airport design criteria and aircraft manufacturers recommendations to accommodate a critical aircraft and provide the range capability to serve distant markets, obstacles off the end of the runway can effectively reduce that length.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.