TIS
Wing, Nosewheel, Whatever
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2001
- Posts
- 366
Why have I chosen runway incursions to go on a rant about?
Perhaps it’s because I’ve prevented three of them from happening to me when controllers have erred within the past year. Perhaps its because I’m in charge of addressing the issue at my company. Perhaps it’s the incredulous, “Are you going to tell me something important?” look, indicative of a dreadfully shortsighted “It can’t/won’t happen to me,” attitude that I see sported by SO MANY pilots when I raise the subject. Or perhaps its because of how shockingly exposed we all are to a problem that we truly DO NOT properly respect and understand. I’ve decided that no matter what the reason(s), there is good reason for me to promote and publicize what there is to know about runway incursions, so, here goes.
Here’s the official definition of a runway incursion from the FAA:
“Any occurrence at an airport involving an aircraft, vehicle, person, or object on the ground that creates a collision hazard or results in loss of separation with an aircraft taking off or intending to take off, landing, or intending to land.”
In a nutshell, a runway incursion occurs when two parties try to use the same piece of pavement while at least one of them is also trying to takeoff or land. This is where the definition can begin to split some hairs. If your nose (or any other part of your aircraft) crosses a runway hold line by so much as an inch (let alone a planelength) WITHOUT clearance to do so, and another aircraft is taking off or landing, you’ve caused an incursion.
The FAA has gathered and published in its Runway Safety Reports (2001 – 2003), statistical data that sheds light on the subject in a way that is essential to understand in learning to avoid high incursion risk situations. These reports analyze incursion data gathered from between 480 and 492 towered airports in the United States over the four-year period that preceded each report’s issuance date.
In the reports, incursions are categorized in terms of their severity by the FAA. The classification system has four levels labeled A through D, with D being the least severe. There are several factors that are considered when determining severity including available reaction time, speed, and the effort required to AVOID a collision once the event has begun, to name a few.
According to the reports, 85% of all incursions (at towered airports) are of lesser severity (category C & D). The remaining 15% represent more severe incursions that pose VERY real threats to human life and property.
Incursions are also categorized by origin in the reports. However, before I list the origins, it is important to understand that for the purpose of the reports, the origin of any particular event is merely the final turnkey event that led to the actual incident. The origins of any incursion are never singular in nature and no single explanation ever adequately explains how particular events occur. That said, there are three possible origins as follows: Pilot Deviation (PD) – the actions of a pilot that are contrary to ANY FAR, Operational Error (OE) – the actions of a controller that result in a loss of separation or an aircraft operating to, from, or on a surface closed to aircraft, and Vehicle/Pedestrian Deviation (V/PD) – vehicles or pedestrians enter a movement area without authorization.
According to the 2003 report 58% of all incursions result from Pilot Deviation. That figure is the same as the one found in the 2002 report, and slightly better than the 60% reported in July of 2001. The balance is made up by a nearly 50/50 split between the controllers and vehicles/pedestrians. The 2003 report indicates that controllers cause 22%, while V/PD incidents make up the remaining 20%. These numbers are relatively static in a comparison of all three reports with the obvious point being that nothing has yet occurred to change WHO makes the errors that cause incursions.
Perhaps most instructive are several matters that lie just past the scope of the reports as we read between their lines. First, it is important to recognize that the true nature of the problem may be far darker than what we think we understand. The Runway Safety Reports cover ONLY towered airports, but incursions can happen at ANY airport. Only towered airports have an official mechanism to report an incursion when one occurs. Incursions that go unreported at non-towered airports occur literally EVERY day and are not included in the statistics that the FAA uses to study the problem.
Also significant is the fact that the tower represents a system that should greatly reduce the rate of occurrence of incursions. Thus, what we understand about incursions is limited to what happens at those airports that are best set up to prevent them.
After all the numbers are crunched, it seems that the bottom line reality is that incursions are still too poorly understood to develop an effective prophylactic for use in preventing them. After all, according to the Runway Safety Reports, the rates aren’t changing!
But is it really true that we understand too little to effectively curb these near disasters? There IS one thing we know that is arguably THE most important thing of all to know: Incursions are ALWAYS the result of human error. The 2003 report concludes that this fact alone indicates that a better understanding of incursion risk factors is essential in ameliorating the problem. It follows that reducing or eliminating the errors that people might make through education WILL directly affect the number and severity of incursions that occur each year.
Education stressing incursion risk reduction through a combined approach that examines incursion risk elevating factors, general airport knowledge, and greater pilot vigilance therefore has the greatest potential to produce significant and lasting reductions in runway incursion rates.
Next time, we’ll start looking at things that elevate your risk of becoming involved in an incursion.
TIS
Perhaps it’s because I’ve prevented three of them from happening to me when controllers have erred within the past year. Perhaps its because I’m in charge of addressing the issue at my company. Perhaps it’s the incredulous, “Are you going to tell me something important?” look, indicative of a dreadfully shortsighted “It can’t/won’t happen to me,” attitude that I see sported by SO MANY pilots when I raise the subject. Or perhaps its because of how shockingly exposed we all are to a problem that we truly DO NOT properly respect and understand. I’ve decided that no matter what the reason(s), there is good reason for me to promote and publicize what there is to know about runway incursions, so, here goes.
Here’s the official definition of a runway incursion from the FAA:
“Any occurrence at an airport involving an aircraft, vehicle, person, or object on the ground that creates a collision hazard or results in loss of separation with an aircraft taking off or intending to take off, landing, or intending to land.”
In a nutshell, a runway incursion occurs when two parties try to use the same piece of pavement while at least one of them is also trying to takeoff or land. This is where the definition can begin to split some hairs. If your nose (or any other part of your aircraft) crosses a runway hold line by so much as an inch (let alone a planelength) WITHOUT clearance to do so, and another aircraft is taking off or landing, you’ve caused an incursion.
The FAA has gathered and published in its Runway Safety Reports (2001 – 2003), statistical data that sheds light on the subject in a way that is essential to understand in learning to avoid high incursion risk situations. These reports analyze incursion data gathered from between 480 and 492 towered airports in the United States over the four-year period that preceded each report’s issuance date.
In the reports, incursions are categorized in terms of their severity by the FAA. The classification system has four levels labeled A through D, with D being the least severe. There are several factors that are considered when determining severity including available reaction time, speed, and the effort required to AVOID a collision once the event has begun, to name a few.
According to the reports, 85% of all incursions (at towered airports) are of lesser severity (category C & D). The remaining 15% represent more severe incursions that pose VERY real threats to human life and property.
Incursions are also categorized by origin in the reports. However, before I list the origins, it is important to understand that for the purpose of the reports, the origin of any particular event is merely the final turnkey event that led to the actual incident. The origins of any incursion are never singular in nature and no single explanation ever adequately explains how particular events occur. That said, there are three possible origins as follows: Pilot Deviation (PD) – the actions of a pilot that are contrary to ANY FAR, Operational Error (OE) – the actions of a controller that result in a loss of separation or an aircraft operating to, from, or on a surface closed to aircraft, and Vehicle/Pedestrian Deviation (V/PD) – vehicles or pedestrians enter a movement area without authorization.
According to the 2003 report 58% of all incursions result from Pilot Deviation. That figure is the same as the one found in the 2002 report, and slightly better than the 60% reported in July of 2001. The balance is made up by a nearly 50/50 split between the controllers and vehicles/pedestrians. The 2003 report indicates that controllers cause 22%, while V/PD incidents make up the remaining 20%. These numbers are relatively static in a comparison of all three reports with the obvious point being that nothing has yet occurred to change WHO makes the errors that cause incursions.
Perhaps most instructive are several matters that lie just past the scope of the reports as we read between their lines. First, it is important to recognize that the true nature of the problem may be far darker than what we think we understand. The Runway Safety Reports cover ONLY towered airports, but incursions can happen at ANY airport. Only towered airports have an official mechanism to report an incursion when one occurs. Incursions that go unreported at non-towered airports occur literally EVERY day and are not included in the statistics that the FAA uses to study the problem.
Also significant is the fact that the tower represents a system that should greatly reduce the rate of occurrence of incursions. Thus, what we understand about incursions is limited to what happens at those airports that are best set up to prevent them.
After all the numbers are crunched, it seems that the bottom line reality is that incursions are still too poorly understood to develop an effective prophylactic for use in preventing them. After all, according to the Runway Safety Reports, the rates aren’t changing!
But is it really true that we understand too little to effectively curb these near disasters? There IS one thing we know that is arguably THE most important thing of all to know: Incursions are ALWAYS the result of human error. The 2003 report concludes that this fact alone indicates that a better understanding of incursion risk factors is essential in ameliorating the problem. It follows that reducing or eliminating the errors that people might make through education WILL directly affect the number and severity of incursions that occur each year.
Education stressing incursion risk reduction through a combined approach that examines incursion risk elevating factors, general airport knowledge, and greater pilot vigilance therefore has the greatest potential to produce significant and lasting reductions in runway incursion rates.
Next time, we’ll start looking at things that elevate your risk of becoming involved in an incursion.
TIS
