Landside Safety Programs

Transcription

1 Landside Safety Programs Ali Ousmane Mahamane AVN Aviation Safety Spring 2013

2 The paper is about the landside safety programs. Landside facilities are facilities related to ground access, vehicle movement and building on the ground. Airports road are the first part of the landside a traveler has access to, the parking lot comes in second place and then the terminal. As many accidents occur the federal government established some regulations regarding the operation and construction of the ground facilities at the Airport. Examples of ground programs are the Ground Accident Prevention and Accident Prevention Program. As a result the overall aviation industry become safer but is insecurity is still an issue.

3 Table of content 1. Introduction Background or History Safety issue description Measure outcomes.5 5. Conclusion.6

4 1 Introduction This report is about the landside safety programs implemented by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aiming to have a safer aviation industry. Safety is achieved through a control of the working environment and control of people s actions. Facilities play an important role in operating an airport properly. Land side facilities are those related to the movement of passengers, baggage and vehicles; which includes any infrastructure from the airport ground access to the terminal. This topic is important to any airport because desirable landside infrastructures provide the airport with a decent flow of passengers, vehicles and baggage; indeed most passenger fatalities occur as a result of vehicle accidents (Wells, A. T. Commercial aviation Safety p. 50). The FAA programs regarding those facilities should have a particular attention as they dictate the management and operational policies for a safer environment. Infrastructure construction requirements, the safety equipment needed inside the terminal, parking lot regulations are few examples of the FAA landside program policies. In other words, landside facilities are ground access facilities such as roads, transit links, parking buildings, the terminal curb and the terminal itself. Background or History Section The first contact with the landside that passengers have is with the airport roads. Indeed they represent the community-to-airport boundary and the access modes are: private vehicles, rental cars, courtesy vehicles, taxicabs, buses and subways. And public transportation represents 20 percent of the access trips. Four types of roads connect the community to the terminal: primary airport access roads, terminal area access roads, terminal frontage roads, and service roads. The primary access airport roads circulate passenger from the city highways to the airport signalized

5 2 intersections with an average speed ranging from 20 to 25 miles per hour, with an average of 700 vehicles per hour at a medium hub airport. The terminal area access roads connect the primary airport access roads to the terminal building and parking facilities, roads are long enough to provide a smooth channeling of traffic and the traffic is separated at an early stage with appropriate signage. Terminal frontage roads distribute vehicles directly to the terminal building. And the service roads are used for the delivery of goods, flight kitchen supplies and air cargo. Also it is used for maintenance, baggage, freight, fuel traffic. After the roads the next component of an airport landside is the terminal curb area required for loading and unloading of passengers and their luggage. Parking facilities are also incorporated into airport landside facilities. As a matter of fact for passenger s convenience parking lots are located less than 1,000 feet from the terminal which represent a walking distance. Or in larger airport a remote parking facilities is provided and served with shuttle buses(national Safety Council. (n.d.). Aviation Ground Operation (5th ed.). N.p). The previous facilities made up and airport landside structure, in a normal situation everything happens as planned. Even though Safety is the industry s number one priority. Today s statistics confirm that travelling by air is one the safest things that a person can do said Giovanni Bisignani, Director General and CEO of International Air Transport Association (IATA)(Corporate Communications. (2009, February 19). More Accidents But Fewer Fatalities in In IATA.). The slight default with the environment in which the personnel operates, human factors effects, wrong allocation of resources, failure adhere to the standards puts landside facilities safety at stake. As airlines suffer high costs from damage that result from ground-related occurrences. The analysis shows a rate of one ground handling incident with resulting aircraft damage per 5000 flights. Investigation into incident causes

6 3 reveals that 61% of the incidents are caused when an interface is established between the aircraft and ground handling equipment. And surprisingly most incidents occur when the aircraft is parked, of which 90% is caused by actors and 10% by the aircraft itself ( National Aerospace Laboratory. (2008). Safety of ground handling. N.p.: A.D. Balk.) In 1987 according to the National Transportation Safety Board 0.9 percent of the accidents are classified as landside accidents. While from 1982 to 1986 aviation ground accident represent an average of 1.5 percent of the accidents.( Wells, A. T. (n.d.). Flight Safety A Primer for General Aviation Pilots (pp. 9). airlines suffer approximately US$ from damage that results from ground-related occurrences. Recently an even higher estimate of US$ has been indicated by the Flight Safety Foundation( National Aerospace Laboratory. (2008). Safety of ground handling. N.p.: A.D. Balk.). As accidents occur, aviation is getting less safe and the federal government decided to regulate the overall aviation industry. Table 1 shows the incident distributions for Schiphol Airport where 26.4% of the total number of incidents is categorized as ground incidents. Of this total, 0.9% result in aircraft damage. Table 1- Incident Distributions Incident Distributions In-flight incidents 73.5% Ground incidents without aircraft damage Ground incidents with aircraft damage 25.5% 0.9% Source: National Aerospace Laboratory-2008

7 4 Also studies show that the majority (84%) of ground incidents is caused when the aircraft is standing, i.e. when the aircraft is stationary. The distribution is shown in Chart 1. For Schiphol Airport this percentage is slightly higher (92%). Chart 1- Distribution of phase Standing Pushback Taxi To Runway Towing Taxi-in Docking Source: National Aerospace Laboratory-2008 Attached in the appendix is the result of the comparison between the general ground incident/accident data and the data at the Schiphol Airport. Results in the attached document are from the National Aerospace Laboratory-2008 Safety of ground handling. A.D. Balk Safety Issue description As hangars are part of the landside the construction and operation are critical. Location is important as any aircraft should be able to move rapidly in an emergency; the hangar should also provide adequate aisle space, access to fire extinguisher, hoses, sprinkler-control valves and fire alarm. Valuable aircraft parts are to be stored in a separate building or if stored in the hangar a physical barrier made of materials with the lowest fire rating of one hour should isolate the parts from other departments. And hangar work docks should be constructed of fire-resistance materials. Finally hangar electrical service should conform to the National Electrical Code and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70.

8 5 As far as the automotive maintenance buildings are concern issues reside with the equipment as a matter of fact safety bars, welding areas and torch cutting should be establish and the construction should be conform to the NFPA 10 and 13. The landside is also made of freight terminal which should have it airfreight deal handled manually and in old buildings for safety reasons, also stored material should be at a height where they can be accessed by any fire-extinguishing system. And construction can be made similar to a commercial ware house and should comply with the building codes and NFPA standards. Aircraft service facilities in the ramp pits should be located as near to the aircraft service connection as possible, also electrical power pits in ramps should have a stationary motorgenerator located alongside the terminal concourse while mobile ground power units should not be permitted. Warning signs are regulated by the national Electrical Code 1999, section (c) and the electrical wiring should be conform to the National Electrical Code, NFPA 70. Another issue is the location of the fuel pits, indeed the pits should be at a minimum distance of 50 feet away from the terminal building. Measures Outcomes In response to the unsafe condition of the ground operation the IATA launched the Ground Accident Prevention (GAP) program. The GAP program developed information and products in a practical format designed to eliminate accidents and incidents on airport ramps (aprons) and adjacent taxiways, and during the movement of aircraft into and out of hangars (Ground Accident Prevention (GAP) (n.d.). In Flight Safety Foundation). The Accident Prevention Program(APP) is Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) program presented in 1968 to reduce the accident rate and is available for pilots at local Flight Standards

9 6 District Offices (FSDO). The program consists of reducing the accidents through airmen education first. The program was developed by the FAA in 1968 regarding the increasing rate of the aviation accidents. The National Accident Prevention Program is made of a national Accident Prevention Program manager and staffs in the FAA headquarters in Washington, DC; and nine other regional Accident Prevention Program managers coordinate the activities; resolving safety problems, analyzing video surveillance and reporting on safety improvements is their duties. The reduction in the overall accidents proved the validity of the concept: preventing accidents through education. Also they manage the FSDO by reviewing the accident/ incident reports to identify airmen deficiencies. Today the program continues to decrease the number of accidents in a steady way. Wells, A. T. (n.d.). Flight Safety A Primer for General Aviation Pilots (pp. 14) Also the safety management system (SMS) with its minimum safety standards helps airports to meet intent of International Civil Aviation Organization standards in a way that complements existing Part 139.The SMS defines the safety policies as well as the dissemination of the safety information of the airport. Conclusion or Summary The accident prevention program is the key to the aviation safety. With the decreased in the number of accident, the landside safety program implemented is success. And those regulations made the industry more organized and safer. But as far as the security is concern passengers threat is still an issue in current time also regarding this more efficient security measure should be taken to prevent those threats without hindering the comfort of passenger such as taking their shoes off; I think this is too harsh policies need to reasonable and allow the passengers some sort

10 7 of freedom. I am aware that there will never be a perfectly safe industry but I believe that if everyone follows the rules by the book the aviation industry will be very close to that perfection. Finally I would like to tell aviators that ground handling safety is a shared responsibility between operators, airports and staffs.

11 8 Reference -Wells, A. T. (1991). Commercial aviation Safety (p. 50). N.p.: TAB Books. -National Safety Council. (n.d.). Aviation Ground Operation (5th ed.). N.p -Corporate Communications. (2009, February 19). More Accidents But Fewer Fatalities in In IATA. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from -Ground Accident Prevention (GAP) (n.d.). In Flight Safety Foundation. Retrieved March 20, 2013, from -Wells, A. T. (n.d.). Flight Safety A Primer for General Aviation Pilots (pp. 3-9). -National Aerospace Laboratory. (2008). Safety of ground handling. N.p.: A.D. Balk. Retrieved April 16, 2013, from easa.europa.eu/essi/ecast/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/nlr-cr pdf