AIP Design Lessons Trick or Treat Halloween Sharing October 25, 2017 By: FAA DMA ADO staff Dave P. Anderson Brian P. Schuck Mark J. Holzer 1 Trick or Treat Process M FAA staff of Dave, Brian and Mark shall provide an AIP design tips for about 3 5 minutes each topic so either (3 Musketeers or 3 Stooges) Audience is asked to provide positive feedback on how each topic was successful at their airport Or if not successful, what are possible solutions to improve the design or process Open feedback is welcomed as we can all learn from your experience in designing a successful project. Thank you for feedback today! 2 1
Design Topic Discussion M Programming and Justification Tricks Dave Runway Turnaround Design Options Dave ILS Image Forming Grading Mark Runway Object Free Area Mark Taxiway Design Treats Mark Taxiway Linear Equations Tricks Brian PAPI Obstacle Clearance Mark Apron Layout Treats Dave FDC Notams in OE system Tricks Mark GPS Red or Green IAP Candy Mark Filing 7840 Forms in OE Process Mark Summary and Comments 3 Project Justification Tricks D National Priority Rating (NPR) codes updated Obstruction Clearance is Higher Rehabilitate versus Reconstruct Separated so No Mixing of Projects (Lights Planning Rwy Twy Apron) Lighting Projects need to be separated as MIRL+VAULT+RDO CTL PAPI WINDSOCK SIGNS APRON LIGHTING Separate cost estimates with design and construction costs as we program each project in our system 4 2
National Priority Rating (NPR) codes updated Obstruction Code Hazards Must have received a hazard determination or a significant adverse operational impact Non hazards Based on current or future aircraft category for that runway on approved ALP and may include Part 77 and departure surfaces Non hazards not located in the approach/departure (work with your program manager) 5 National Priority Rating (NPR) codes updated New Reconstruction Code Traditionally we have internally used a rehabilitate code for all airfield pavements. Complete reconstruction of an existing airfield pavement. Realignment or shifting of an airfield pavement. Rehabilitation code will be used for projects such as overlay and pavement maintenance 6 3
Project Justification Tricks D National Priority Rating (NPR) codes updated Obstruction Clearance is Higher Rehabilitate versus Reconstruct Separated so No Mixing of Projects (Lights Planning Rwy Twy Apron) Lighting Projects need to be separated as MIRL+VAULT+RDO CTL PAPI WINDSOCK SIGNS APRON LIGHTING Separate cost estimates with design and construction costs as we program each project in our system 7 LIGHTING PROJECTS Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL) MIRL+VAULT+Radio Controller Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPI s) Windsock Rotating Beacon Signs Apron Lighting Need separate cost estimates with design and construction costs as we program each project in our system 8 4
RUNWAYTURNAROUND DESIGN OPTIONS D 9 The Good 10 5
The Good Provides clear direction to pilots Standard taxiway widths / radius Design considerations Adequate size and turning radius for aircraft Drainage 11 The Bad 12 6
The New 13 Image Forming Area Treat M For Airports with an ILS system, Air Traffic and Flight Procedures has criteria to follow the Glide Slope grading at the Runway end 14 7
FAA Air Traffic Guidance Grading Criteria for Image Glide Slope 15 Implementation of ILS Grading Slope 16 8
Digitized Terrain Modeling 17 Runway Object Free Area on ALP M 18 9
Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) M 19 ROFA in FAA Design Page 83 20 10
Chicken Scratching Example 21 ROFA and AIRBUS 320 22 11
Taxiway Design M Determine Critical aircraft for TDG per ALP Traffic Flow Management System is option to determine most demanding current aircraft for design Determine Radius of Fillets by AC TDG or Path Planner (other comparable systems) Twy Edge Safety Margin (TESM) consideration Direct Access for Apron ( Rehab or Reconst) 23 Taxiway Design Groups (TDG) Taxiway Design Group TDG 1 through 7 TDG Focused on Undercarriage Aircraft Dimensions OR USE Customized for critical design aircraft using computer software Path Planner Analysis 24 12
Critical Aircraft Most demanding aircraft type, or grouping of aircraft with similar characteristics, Regular use of the airport (500 annual operations) Including both itinerant and local operations but excluding touch and go operations. An operation is either a takeoff or landing 25 Airline Fleet Comparison 26 13
TDG Has Strange New Radius? 27 Taxiway Edge Safety Margin Fillets http://www.faa.gov/airports /engineering/airport_design/ 28 14
Taxiway Design Using Path Planner Modeling 29 Reduced Paving Possible 30 15
Pavement comparison to TDG 4 31 Verify Taxiways TDG on ALP 32 16
Direct Access Taxiway Rehabilitate or Reconstruct 33 Comparison of Direct Access 34 17
Taxilane Object Free Areas TOFA separation 79 ft for group 1 (less than 49 feet wingspan) or 139 feet for group 2 (less than 79 ) between hangars An acceptable level of safety needs to be maintained for TOFAs that do not meet standards. A modification to standards (MOS) needs to be reviewed and approved for all non standard TOFAs. 35 Taxilane Object Free Areas Engineering Brief 78 Linear Equations for Evaluating the Separation of Airplane Design Groups on Parallel Taxiways and Taxiways to Fixed/Movable Objects 36 18
Taxilane Object Free Areas 37 Taxilane Object Free Areas An approved MOS will be listed on the ALP. Taxiways with an MOS will be noted on an ALP. 38 19
Taxiway Centerline to Centerline Distances Engineering Brief 78 also has formulas to calculate acceptable non standard parallel taxiway centerline distances. 39 PAPI Obstacle Clearance M Kenmare Example 40 20
APRON DESIGN D 41 Apron Eligibility Reconstruction, alteration, or expansion of a public use apron reasonable, justified, and economical Size needs to be based on airport design standards and demand Location shown on an approved Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Apron areas for exclusive or near exclusive use are not AIP eligible 21
Eligibility and Design Considerations Who uses the apron and what is the aeronautical activity? Does the airport tenant provide mechanics, flight instruction, rental or charter, avionics, etc Does your airport need tie downs for larger aircraft? Was (or is) the hangar FAA funded for a revenue producing project? Consider funding options for the local airport sponsor of noneligible taxiway or apron areas What happens to apron eligibility if a hangar that was public use is sold to private exclusive use tenant FAA AIP Handbook Order 5100.38D Table C 2 Examples of Prohibited Projects/Costs for Construction 22
APT HGR AUTO PKG Terminal AG AG AG AG FUEL AG AG TEE-HGR Apron redesign of current ALP Exclusive use nonpublic areas shown in yellow nearly 10% of total apron cost Added series of taxiways for hangars/tofa Build in phases due to budget constraints Sample Apron Design for Private/ Corporate Hangars Private or Corporate Hangar 117.5 to TWY CL From HGR 40 Group II Apron 60 x 60 TOFA 57.5 to Taxilane CL 17.5 35 TAXILANE NOT TO SCALE 23
Apron Summary: Apron rehabilitations / reconstructions are expensive Need to justify the apron size based on need What is a public aeronautical service Exclusive use aprons are not AIP eligible FDC Notams M Filing FDC Notam occurs when a project or obstacle impact instrument approaches 48 24
49 50 25
51 52 26
GPS Red or Green LPV Candy M ND Airport Listed Green ND Airports Listed Red SD Airports Listed Green SD Airports Listed Red https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav /procedures/ifp_initiation/ifp_requirements/#gene ral FAA DMA ADO has document called 21 Steps for Establishing or Updating an Instrument Approach 53 SD GPS Approaches in RED ( obstacles or ALP) Custer 8/26 Edgemont 12/30 Gregory 13 Martin 14/32 Milbank 31 Parkston 15 Pine Ridge 30 Webster 12/30 DeSmet 15/33 54 27
SD GPS Approaches in Green (good) Aberdeen 13 / 17 Brookings 17/35 Eagle Butte 13 Faith 13/31 Hoven 13/31 Sioux Falls 9/27 Lemmon 11 Madison 15 Milbank 13 Onida 13/31 Pine Ridge 12 Wessington Springs 12/30 55 ND GPS Approaches in Red (Obstacles/ALP) Ashley 14/32 Garrison 13/31 Grand Forks 17L 27L 35R 9R Wahpeton 15 Fargo 13/31 Mott 9/27 Williston 11 New Rockford 13/31 Washburn 8/26 Wishek 14/32 Park River 12/30 56 28
ND GPS Approaches in Green (Good) Edgeley 14/32 Ellendale 13/31 Kindred 29 Contact FPO Roy Currie ND or Catherine Childress SD for the obstacles that may impact IAP development (Ask your Program Manager) 57 58 29
59 Completing 7480 Form in OE Trick M Revised OE system allows better filing of 7480 forms Required for Runway or Taxiway changes For establishing or closing any airport or heliport 60 30
61 Summary of Tricks of Treats We hope this session was helpful for you We appreciate your comments and looking forward to a successful year of meeting your AIP design goals! Any Questions from the 3 Musketeers?? 62 31