RUNWAY INCURSIONS & ATSA-SURF

1. RUNWAY INCURSIONS&ATSA-SURF by Phil Hogge Chairman ASAS-TN2 Seminar

2. OUTLINE • Runway Incursions in the USA • Runway Incursions in Europe • Background to the TCAS Mandate • ATSA-SURF • Safety - a Political Question?

3. Flight Safety Foundation • 1995-2007 A Total of 1,332 accidents. • Runway Safety Issues can be considered under 3 categories:- CategoryTotalFatal Runway Incursions 10 5 Runway Excursions 379 31 Runway Confusion 4 2 • Even though the number of Incursion and Confusion accidents is low, the rate of incidents is too high.

4. Definitions of Incident Severity (ESARR2)

5. Runway Incursion Incidents in Europe

6. Runway Incursion Incidents in the USA Teneriffe, 27 March 1977, 582 Fatalities 407 Flight International & http://www.faa.gov/runwaysafety/ 339 341 330 326 323 2002 2006 2003 2004 2001 2005 • FAA Definition of a Runway Incursion: • Any Occurrence in the Airport Runway Environment Involving Aircraft, Vehicle, Person, or Object on the Ground that Creates a Collision Hazard or Results in a Loss of Required Separation with an Aircraft Taking Off, Intending to Take Off, Landing, or Intending to Land. • In USA: 49 Million Movements Per Year, Increasing at a Rate of 3% Per Year In US, with Almost 1 Incursion per day, Incursion Prevention is the most desired NTSB Safety Improvement

8. TCAS Mandate Evolution USA • 1956 - Grand Canyon, 128 dead • 1978 - San Diego, 144 dead • 1984 - San Luis Obispo, 17 dead • 1986 - Cerritos, 82 dead • 1987 - Salt Lake City, 10 dead • 1987, US Public Law 100-223 • 1989, SICASP/4 - world-wide evaluation • 1990 - first operational TCAS • 1993 - 100% equipage in the USA

9. TCAS Mandate Evolution Global • 1995 - ICAO standards published • 1996 - Delhi, 349 dead • India mandates TCAS II by 1999 • ICAO consult about world-wide mandate • 1997 - Namibia, 33 dead • USA mandate TCAS for military • Current design finalised on 4 Nov 1997 • 2000 - European mandate • 2002 - Uberlingen, 71 dead • 2003 - ICAO mandate

10. List of RW accidents • 33 serious RW accidents since 1970 • 3 aircraft destroyed • 16 damaged • 1210 people dead • 22 March 1997, Tenerife - B747/B747, 583 dead • 8 March 2001, Linate - MD80/Citation ,118 dead • 30 March 2007, Bucharest - B737/vehicle, 0 dead

11. ASAS Surface Traffic Application(ATSA-SURF) This application provides the flight crews with information on surface traffic that supplements out-the-window observations and see-and-be-seen procedures for aircraft on or near the airport surface.

12. A380 Moving Map

13. ACSS Solution: SafeRoute SAMM • SAMM or Surface Area Movement Management • Safety function to increase airport surface Situational Awareness to Reduce Airport Surface and Terminal Area Incursion Issues • Efficiency - increased airport surface movement efficiency by providing flight crew situational awareness of the airport surface relative to own aircraft. • SAMM relies on • GPS positioning to display OWNSHIP • Database to provide Airport Moving Map • Cockpit Display of Traffic Information using ADS-B/TIS-B JSIT Recommendation 2) • SAMM provides • Displays Own Ship Relative to: • Terminal Area, Airport Surface (JSIT recommendation 1) • On Ground Traffic (JSIT recommendation 2) • Airborne Traffic (JSIT recommendation 2) • In the near future Visual & Aural Alerts and Clearances • Automatic Runway Occupancy Alerting (JSIT recommendation 3) • Positive Runway Selection & Identification (JSIT Recommendation 4) • SAMM can be displayed on • EFB Class II OR III • EFIS • Other Display Solutions

14. Position Awareness (FLYSAFE Consortium) • Moving Map technology is mature (A380, EFB) • Recommended by NTSB after Comair accident (Recommendation A-07-45) • Pure Airport Moving Map may not sufficient to address all hazardous situations • Natural interface on which to build advanced functions

15. Traffic awareness • Traffic awareness by displaying other aircraft and vehicles in relation to the moving map • Supporting services/formats:ADS-B, TIS-B, ACAS (hybrid surveillance)

16. Active Runway • Runway labels used to indicate active runway: • Dimmed label indicatesnon-active runway • Two full labels indicate absence of active runway information • Disadvantage: Pilot might need to change range to access information

17. Closed Runways Complete Runway Closure:RED Closure for Takeoff/Landing: WHITE Closed Taxiways:AMBER Rationale: Use red/amber for no-go areas

18. Traffic alerting during taxiing • Alerts for conflicting traffic on the taxiways • Conditions: spatial proximity, closure rates • Not as critical as runway incursion, therefore limited to Level 2

19. Visualisation of taxi instructions • Clearance awareness by display of assigned taxi route, runway clearances (line-up, takeoff) • Supporting services/formats: CPDLC • Issue: might not be available everywhere initially

20. Runway Incursion alerting • Level 2 (Master Caution) and Level 3 (Master Warning) Alerting is provided if the crew is at risk of or causing a Runway Incursion • Conditions: e.g. entering a completely closed runway • Similar to takeoff configuration warning (unsafe external condition)

21. A matter of Safety • Business Case or Mandate? • The Mandates for TCAS and GPWS both followed rising public and political concern over accidents. • Both systems were relatively immature at the time the mandates were decided. • Let us be ready with ATSA-SURF in two stages (1) - Develop ‘basic’ ATSA-SURF as quickly as possible. (2) - Continue to work on ‘enhanced’ ATSA-SURF.

22. Thank you