Airport Technology Reports – Next Generation FOD Detection Technology for Future Airport Runway Op's

SPECIAL REPORT

Next Generation FOD Detection Technology for Future Airport Runway Operations FOD – The Ever Present Threat New Market Realities Create Opportunities in FOD Detection Battling with Foreign Objects The Evolving Nature of FOD Removal The Rise of Automated Foreign Object Detection

Published by Global Business Media

Tarsier Automatic Runway FOD Detection System ÂŽ

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

Rain

Sand

Over the last 60 years Moog has been recognized for providing technically advanced and highly supported solutions to the global aerospace industry.

Moog is now providing the same world class solutions and customer focused support for Automated Runway Debris Monitoring. www.moog.com/tarsier

Nighttime

Fog

SPECIAL REPORT

Next Generation FOD Detection Technology for Future Airport Runway Operations FOD – The Ever Present Threat New Market Realities Create Opportunities in FOD Detection

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Contents

Battling with Foreign Objects The Evolving Nature of FOD Removal The Rise of Automated Foreign Object Detection

Foreword

2

Tom Cropper, Editor

FOD – The Ever Present Threat

3

John Watson, Correspondent

Best of Both Published by Global Business Media

“Recovering This Cable Virtually Paid For Our System” What Was Learned

Published by Global Business Media Global Business Media Limited 62 The Street Ashtead Surrey KT21 1AT United Kingdom Switchboard: +44 (0)1737 850 939 Fax: +44 (0)1737 851 952 Email: info@globalbusinessmedia.org Website: www.globalbusinessmedia.org Publisher Kevin Bell Business Development Director Marie-Anne Brooks

Moog Involvement Major Cost Savings from Tarsier Summary

New Market Realities Create 8 Opportunities in FOD Detection Tom Cropper, Editor

Evolution of the Market The Impact of Disasters

Editor Tom Cropper

New Technology

Senior Project Manager Steve Banks

Battling with Foreign Objects

Advertising Executives Michael McCarthy Abigail Coombes Production Manager Paul Davies For further information visit: www.globalbusinessmedia.org The opinions and views expressed in the editorial content in this publication are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of any organisation with which they may be associated.

Material in advertisements and promotional features may be considered to represent the views of the advertisers and promoters. The views and opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily express the views of the Publishers or the Editor. While every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication, neither the Publishers nor the Editor are responsible for such opinions and views or for any inaccuracies in the articles.

© 2016. The entire contents of this publication are protected by copyright. Full details are available from the Publishers. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

10

Jo Roth, Staff Writer

Calculating the Cost Solving the Problem

The Evolving Nature of FOD Removal

12

James Butler, Staff Writer

The Problem Removal of FOD Into the Future

The Rise of Automated Foreign Object Detection

14

Tom Cropper, Editor

The Case for Automated Detection A Changing Market Evolving Technology

References 16

WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 1

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Foreword T

HE OLD days of aviation were rough and

risk to their businesses. All that might be changing

ready. Pilots landing on grassy runways, dirt or

soon as we discover in our second article. The profit

gravel – the risks of being damaged by debris of all

margins are tightening, so any measures which can

sorts were high. Today’s aviation industry has made

save money will have a critical role in the financial

great leaps forward in terms of the technology it

security of airlines as well as the safety of passengers

can bring to all facets of operations. Even so, risks

and crew. Airlines will have to ask themselves if the

remain and some believe the industry is behind

cost savings are worth the upfront costs.

where it should be.

We’ll then look at the key things to consider in

Our first article comes from John Watson of Moog

choosing a system, including cost, function and the

Navigation and Surveillance Systems. Their Tarsier

particular threats facing any single runway, before

Foreign Object Detection System (FOD) sets new

turning our minds to the future. James Butler will

standards in terms of automated detection of debris

examine the rise of automated FOD systems and

on a runway. He argues that, although new technology

how they are changing the industry before we round

has come to market, many airports still adopt a minimal

off with a look at the market as a whole and where it

approach. This is compromising safety and missing

might be heading.

out on the opportunity to save billions of dollars.

Just how much those savings might be, is unclear.

Estimates vary from $4bn to $20bn, but so far airlines do not seem to have entirely grasped the financial

Tom Cropper Editor

Tom Cropper has produced articles and reports on various aspects of global business over the past 15 years. He has also worked as a copywriter for some of the largest corporations in the world, including ING, KPMG and the World Wildlife Fund.

2 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

FOD – The Ever Present Threat

Tarsier

®

John Watson, Correspondent

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

TARSIER TOWER WITH BA PLANE

F

OD, FOR Foreign Object Debris, originated in the early days of powered flight to describe any object lying near or along the takeoff area that could possibly damage an aircraft and which should therefore be promptly removed. In those early days, FOD removal was an occasional chore, usually resulting from pilot reports of objects spotted during takeoffs and landings. But with the advent of World War 2, and the massive increase in military flight operations, FOD removal became a pre-flight necessity, starting with organized “FOD walks,” where teams of personnel collected items along the full lengths of the runways. But FOD walks were both time consuming and labor intensive and, following WW2 and the worldwide adoption of hard surfaced runways, they were slowly replaced by mechanical sweeper-like devices towed behind vehicles that performed the same task much faster, with many fewer people.

Today, commercial and military airports operate scheduled daily runway inspections with a mix of driver/observer teams in single patrol vehicles moving along the runways at 30-40 mph, or vehicle/sweeper combinations traveling somewhat slower. Schedules also vary, with civil European practice generally being four inspections per day, and the US typically calling for just early morning and late afternoon inspections.

But, this too is changing due to three primary factors: 1. Increasing demand for continuous, vehicle-free, runway availability at major airports, with London/ Heathrow now operating at over 95% capacity during “rush hours,” 2. Risk of an observer not seeing every significant piece of FOD from a fast moving inspection vehicle, 3. The need, following the Air France Concorde loss in 2000, to inspect runway surfaces for

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com

WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 2/18/16 3 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

While there has been increasing awareness of dangers faced by FOD, there has been little effort by airports or airlines to take effective action

TARSIER SQUARE

hazardous FOD much more frequently – ideally, following each takeoff.

While there has been increasing awareness of dangers faced by FOD, there has been little effort by airports or airlines to take effective action. Partially, that is due to difficulty in making a business case and partially because there have been no catastrophic accidents due directly to FOD. FOD detection equipment is purchased by airports while benefits are realized by airlines.

Finding a way to justify initial and operating costs for airports is a big challenge. Airlines typically do not break out FOD-related maintenance costs, but instead treat engine, tire and fuselage repairs as the normal cost of doing business. Regulatory agencies are slow to mandate safety equipment until a significant event makes implementation an obvious decision.

Over the past few years, a few pioneering airports have taken action to provide a safer runway environment. These airports are leaders who are used to putting safety as a high priority.

There have been a few FOD-related industry meetings, but these are mostly sponsored by system providers, not regulators or safety oversight groups.

Addressing runway FOD today is a wideranging mix of meeting minimum regulatory requirements, two to four quick sweeps by operations personnel in a truck all the way to dedicated continuous runway scanning and 4 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

detection by an automated system. Sadly, the vast majority of commercial airports are comfortable with meeting minimums. Spending money on safety equipment to prevent that unexpected and occasional accident caused by FOD or spending money for a car park that delivers revenue every day is a tricky and difficult decision for airport operators.

Even now, many airports operate at or near capacity. Plans to build that third, or fourth, runway are now being drawn up and budgets are being planned. These projects take years to realize, meanwhile operations must continue and airports still must accommodate current and new airlines. It is increasingly more important that airport operators squeeze maximum utilization and efficiency from their existing runway infrastructure. FOD does pose a threat to safety, but addressing FOD in the classic way impacts operational efficiency.

Best of Both The solution lies in continuous, 24 hour remote scanning of runways, using precision millimeter radar, combined with advanced day/night optical technology, instant FOD alerting to airport operators and simultaneously to recovery vehicles using GPS airport maps showing the FOD’s GPS location. In one word – Tarsier.

The world’s first automatic FOD detection system, Tarsier was developed shortly after the Concorde accident by the UK’s QinetiQ research

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier

®

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

TARSIER TOWER

establishment – and called Tarsier after a small Southeast Asian marsupial with exceptional peripheral vision. Systems were installed at each of Vancouver International Airport’s main parallel runways in 2005. Testing of the system’s effectiveness showed that, while mechanical sweeping of a given area detected 24 FOD items, Tarsier detected 293 over the same area. As one observer remarked, “There’s a lot more out there than we expected.”

Tarsier is a system that utilizes millimeter wave radar for FOD detection. Due to the radar’s range and detection capability, only two or three sensor towers are required for a normal 3500-4000 meter long runway. Additionally, sensor towers are located outside the Runway Safety Area exclusion zone, meaning that during installation or maintenance activities the runway can remain open and air traffic is not disrupted.

A high-resolution military-grade camera system is mounted on each sensor tower and provides wide-field context video as well as extreme close-up zoom video in both day and night conditions. Video from these cameras is displayed at the operator position and is used to validate FOD objects.

Now in their tenth year of successful operation, the Vancouver installations were followed by Tarsier systems on both runways at Heathrow in 2007, with further sales at overseas and UK MOD locations.

“Recovering This Cable Virtually Paid For Our System” Commenting on an earlier, but unusual, Tarsier save, Vancouver Director of Airside Operations Brett Patterson said, “that wire could have been snatched up by an aircraft propeller or sucked into an airliner’s low–slung jet engine. This could have spelled disaster.” He added, “Recovering this cable virtually paid for our system.”

Such steel cables are used to provide a ground from an aircraft to a refueling truck.

What Was Learned With Tarsier being in operation at major international airports for 9-10 years, airport operators learned first-hand several key items.

First was how to properly integrate an FOD detection system into daily airport operations. It is one thing to install new technology and another thing entirely to achieve maximum benefit from it.

Questions like, “when do you close the runway?”,

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com

WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 2/18/16 5 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier is a system that utilizes millimeter wave radar for FOD detection.

Due to the radar’s range and detection capability, only two or three sensor towers are required for a normal 3500-4000 meter long runway

CHROME CAMERA

“when do you send an aircraft around?”, “who makes these decisions?”, “how are they determined?” and so on. Knowing that there is FOD on the runway is only the first step.

Another important item was false alarms. A safety system that generates false alarms quickly becomes ignored by the operators. Even if the number of false alarms is minimal (e.g.; less than 20 a day), the nuisance factor is unacceptable.

Tarsier’s implementation of an extremely precise radar with finely tuned detection, combined with a high-zoom (400x) optical system, essentially eliminates false alarms. When Tarsier identifies an object on the runway, it has been validated.

Dependability and low-maintenance mean no loss of coverage and negligible system maintenance. With a mean time between failure at over 47,000 hours, maintenance personnel are not spending their time replacing constantly failing sensors or sensors that have been knocked over by normal activities such as mowing, snow removal, A380 takeoffs, etc.

Tarsier has operated well in excess of 100,000 hours in demanding high-paced environments 6 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

and has proven itself time and again in these critical areas. Leading technology backed by real-world results.

Moog Involvement In 2015, Moog, Inc. of East Aurora, NY, a major US aerospace corporation, acquired exclusive rights to manufacture and market Tarsier.

In discussing the acquisition, John Willey, Executive GM for Moog Navigation and Surveillance Systems (NaSS), stated, “Our agreement with QinetiQ provides Moog with key airport safety technology. Tarsier is the leading FOD detection technology available to airports today. Adding Tarsier to our groundbased navigation aids manufacturing line is a natural fit.” He went on to say, “Moog has a worldwide aviation support network that provides our customers with quick response in any situation. There are nearly 30 overseas Moog support and manufacturing locations situated at major aviation hubs. We are very committed to ensuring that our customers’ operations are not impacted.”

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

operational automatic

Major Cost Savings from Tarsier

FOD detection system

Another key aspect of FOD detection and removal is cost savings to operators, since commercial worldwide direct and indirect losses attributed to FOD damage are now estimated to be close to US$20 million annually, with military costs possibly even higher. As Robin Deyoe, Marketing Director at Moog NaSS, explains, “Having an FOD-caused tire burst on a large aircraft, for example, doesn’t just cost an airline a few thousand dollars for a new one, but a whole cost train of events then kick in. From the tire’s removal and replacement through flight delays, aircraft substitution, passenger arrangements and so forth, to say nothing of additional costs if the aircraft is at an away station airport with limited facilities. That’s how an operator’s indirect costs typically add up to ten times the value of actual physical aircraft damage created by the FOD strike itself.”

When we asked John Willey about Moog’s future plans for Tarsier, he replied “Yes, we looked at that very carefully early on.” He added, “I can’t discuss details, of course, but we could already see interesting synergism with some of our present aviation products and those we have under development. As well, we can see several opportunities for Tarsier itself that we intend to explore.”

Tarsier

Tarsier was the first

Moog has a long history working with civil aviation authorities around the world as well as a strong safety record in the aviation industry.

®

and has set the standard for all other FOD detection technologies

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

Summary Tarsier was the first operational automatic FOD detection system and has set the standard for all other FOD detection technologies. As a radar-based system, Tarsier provides superior performance in any lighting and meteorological environment – conditions that challenge other systems.

With only two or three sensors per runway, installation costs are minimized and system failures are greatly minimized. Airports who have Tarsier greatly appreciate that all equipment is outside the Runway Safety Area exclusion zone. That fact means that runway closures for installation and maintenance are unnecessary.

When purchasing a system that has a 10-15 year lifecycle, airport customers know they will have the backing of an aviation powerhouse when they buy from Moog. Creating advanced technology, promoting aviation safety and superior customer support are everyday activities for Moog.

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 2/18/16 7 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

New Market Realities Create Opportunities in FOD Detection Tom Cropper, Editor

In the aviation industry – as well as many others – major steps forward in technological development tend only to be driven by two things: either business changes, creating an opportunity to increase profits, or a major accident occurs

T

HE CHANGING nature of aviation means FOD is now a commercial as well as financial consideration.

In the aviation industry – as well as many others – major steps forward in technological development tend only to be driven by two things: either business changes, creating an opportunity to increase profits, or a major accident occurs delivering a compelling mandate for change.

When it comes to the issue of Foreign Object Damage (FOD) both these factors are true, which is why we’re seeing the emergence of technology which could revolutionise the way in which airports keep their runways clear.

Evolution of the Market Since the early days of aviation, keeping runways clear has been a major issue for airport operators.

In those days of grass and gravel runways, this could be a major undertaking. Early Boeing 737s, for example, had special shields built in to keep gravel from making its way into the air inlets. Today, commercial and military aircraft both deploy versions of FOD protection technology in the form of specially designed air inlets or rubberised guards to protect vulnerable areas. Aircraft engines have to undergo testing in which dead chickens are fired into the inlet. Although they do not need to continue functioning, they must be able to show that they will not sustain any damage.

On the ground, though, precautions still focus, for the most part, on physical inspection. Early operators would have to take a walk of the runway checking for debris. Today, multiple sweeps made by specially designed vehicles travelling at various speeds clear debris from runways. Even so, this is still limited by the capacity for human error. It’s easy for people to miss items when travelling at any speed, while automated sweeping devices, such as brushes and pads, may not gather up everything. It only takes a tiny fragment of debris to cause serious damage.

8 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

The impact is normally felt by the airline in terms of aborted and cancelled flights and damage to engine parts and body. The trouble is, quantifying the exact financial impact of FOD damage on their bottom line can be challenging. What’s more, in some extreme cases, it can present a serious threat to crew and passengers as Air France learned to their cost in 2000.

The Impact of Disasters In July 2000 an Air France Concorde taking off from Charles de Gaulle Airport near Paris caught fire. It plunged into a hotel, killing all 109 passengers and crew as well as four people on the ground. The news footage of the Concorde with its fuselage alight flew around the world and it wasn’t long before inquests began.

The culprit was soon found to be a piece of debris which had fallen off a Continental Airways flight minutes before.

Three years earlier, a Bombadier Learjet at Newport News/Williamsberg Airport in West Virginia ran into problems because of debris.

Crew report hearing a pop and as they attempted to abort the take-off, the plane began fishtailing.

The tires blew and the aircraft ran off the runway as its emergency chute failed to open. In the aftermath of the accident crew reported finding pieces of rock strewn around the runway.

These are just two of the many emergencies attributed to FOD. Most result in no injuries, but, even so, the Air France disaster was a turning point. Since then the industry has given much more focus to the issue of FOD. Regulations have been updated and new technologies researched but, despite this, the industry has still failed to give FOD the attention it deserves.

New Technology Although manufacturers are bringing new technologies to the market, awareness remains limited. This is partly due to a failure among most airlines to quantify accurately the exact extent of

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier

®

AERIAL IMAGE OF RUNWAY

the problem. Most still count FOD damage as part of their routine maintenance costs and those who have tried to come up with a figure struggle to agree.

Now, though, things are improving, thanks to the changing nature of the aviation market. After years in the doldrums following the financial crash of 2008, aviation is on the up once more. A report from PwC estimates that, in terms of revenue, the industry has doubled in size over the past ten years growing from $369billion in 2004 to a projected $746 billion in 2014. Most of that growth came from low cost airlines which control 25% of the market1.

Moving forward, growth looks set to continue.

IATA’s 20-year forecast leading up to 2034 was downgraded in the wake of China’s economic troubles. Even so, it expects to see an annual growth globally of approximately 4%. By 2034 it says total passenger numbers could reach 7 billion, double the current number2.

These figures come with the usual caveats in that forward predictions can be wide of the mark.

The industry remains vulnerable to another major incident such as 9/11 or another financial crash – both of which had a major impact on the direction of air travel. Even so, the demand on airlines

and airports is considerable. Expansion plans are being laid around the world, but these take time, are expensive and controversial. Heathrow’s Terminal 5 was decades in the planning, and the current proposals to add another runway is beset by further political wrangling.

Somehow the industry has to increase capacity and that means improving the productivity of each runway available. Traditional sweeping techniques are slow and put the runway out of action. Advanced automated technology, based on radar and other detection, promises quicker testing and more reliable identification of debris.

So, if safety concerns are not enough to prompt airlines to do more than the bare minimum perhaps their concerns over profitability will.

PwC’s report into the state of the aviation industry also highlights that profit margins are becoming slimmer. Maintaining commercial viability and coping with additional demand, all with a limited expansion of infrastructure, will be a major challenge for the industry. FOD detection products, which reduce checking times, are not the answer in themselves, but they do offer part of the solution. If manufacturers can make the case successfully, this could prove to be an area of rapid growth.

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 2/18/16 9 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Battling with Foreign Objects Jo Roth, Staff Writer

How airport operators can improve their identification and removal of foreign objects on their runways.

FOD detection is changing. The spread of sophisticated technologies such as radar, thermal imaging and sweeper systems means airport operators have more tools at their disposal than ever before

F

OD DETECTION is changing. The spread of sophisticated technologies such as radar, thermal imaging and sweeper systems means airport operators have more tools at their disposal than ever before. Unfortunately, practices vary considerably. While large cutting edge airports such as Heathrow have been among the first to incorporate a comprehensive FOD detection system, others are lagging behind. Some smaller and badly run airports even fail to conform to basic inspection requirements. The challenge for the industry is to improve its performance in this area and to incorporate the most effective systems for their requirements.

Calculating the Cost One of the biggest barriers is cost. Browsing the various providers, the cost of installing a system is considerable – in the realm of £4-£5 million. In an industry which is already counting the pennies, that can seem to be an extravagant expense. The majority of foreign object damage events might damage the aircraft, but they do not cause a loss of life. When assessing FOD, meanwhile, operators will be more likely to focus entirely on the bottom line and conform to the minimum safety requirements.

This is partly because there has been little effort to quantify the financial impact of FOD damage.

According to Iain McCleary who produced a landmark report in 2010 into FOD damage, operators still view this as being part of the ‘cost of doing business’. Costs sit within routine maintenance and repair costs, so there is no true visibility of the damage being done to balance sheets. McCleary’s 2010 report attempted to quantify the cost as follows: FOD and bird strikes have a combined total of 6.1 strikes per 10,000 aircraft movements at a cost of $79,032. In the US, total direct costs will

10 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

be close to $474 million per annum. Taking an international figure of 160 million movements per annum, the direct costs would be approximately $1.2bn. When indirect costs are added which he estimates to be (10 times direct costs), the international total comes to $13bn.

FOD also threatens an airport’s supply of business. Reports that asphalt at Vanuatu’s international airport at Port Vila could be sucked up into engines prompted both Qantas and Air New Zealand to label the airport as ‘unsafe’.

Both suspended flights from the airport, but Air Vanuatu declared that it intended to keep flying.

In a statement it said: “The safety measures imposed by Air Vanuatu require daily ‘sweeping’ of the runway, plus regular inspections prior to and after take-off, new obstacle and runway surveys and 200m of runway to be marked at the end of Runway 11 for urgent repair.”

These steps, the airline hopes, will be enough to solve the problem in the short term, but in the long term asphalt will need to be brought in from New Zealand to repair the runway.

Vanuatu’s problems show the variation of conditions which still exist around the world between large international hubs and smaller regional airports.

Solving the Problem According to McCleary, the industry needs to take a more holistic approach to threat management.

Traditional approaches, he argues, have focused only on runway incursions, whereas there is a whole range of multiple threats which could damage aircraft from wildlife, to loose cargo and so-called ‘invisible FOD’, which can still cause critical damage to aircraft systems. The key issue for airport operators looking to improve their performance is to take a much more wide-ranging approach to threat detection.

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier

ÂŽ

Automatic FOD Detection System

There is no universal solution to FOD as different airports will face different risks. One report, for example, outlines how deer could cause a plane crash in Alaska. An article in KTOO outlines how Sitka was struggling to cope with dead deer during the hunting season3. Dead deer were washing up on the runway, which in turn were attracting birds, and this, of course, then presented an air strike hazard to aircraft on arrival and approach. The problem is rare but real. In 2010 at the airport, an eagle flew into the engine of an approaching 737. The aircraft survived, but bird strikes have caused problems elsewhere.

Reports from the Federal Aviation Administration suggest there have been 60,000 bird-strike incidents 2000.

To ensure an effective and robust strategy, airports need to consider the entire parameters of the airport from ramps to runways, taxiways and aprons. There are several prevention and detection methods available from sweepers to automated detection and physical detection, but each of these have their own strengths and weaknesses. Manual detection, for example, can easily miss small objects and can’t take account for incursions such as wildlife. Friction mat sweepers can be highly effective at collecting small surface FOD, but may miss small subsurface FOD. They can also be unstable in certain windy conditions and can miss larger objects such as cans. Automatic

detection can raise instant alarms about sudden incursions, but they will not be able to physically remove objects from a runway.

It will, then, require a network of different inspection methods, threat detection and resolution systems, to ensure an airport runway remains safe and free from threats. This will inevitably cost more and involve pushing compliance over and above that required by regulators. The payback comes in reduced maintenance and damage costs for airlines as well as improved business for airports.

For operators, the key is to research the market, to understand both their direct and indirect FOD to see what financial savings could potentially be made. This will often include working closely with the supplier. The more they can use their expertise to assess threats and incorporate systems effectively, the more valuable they will be. Most of all, as more sophisticated technology becomes readily available, the range of products on the market is growing.

Many of these will be untested and from new smaller development companies. Those products which can demonstrate their effectiveness through clear rigorous testing will be at a significant advantage. Likewise, those which already show clear performance in the real world, such as those used in early adopter airports like Heathrow, will be able to demonstrate a track record of success.

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 11 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 2/18/16 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

The Evolving Nature of FOD Removal James Butler, Correspondent How airport operators around the world are improving their debris detection and removal solutions.

To keep the runway clear, airports use a variety of sweeping technologies – not dissimilar to the kind you’d expect to see on the street – as well as manual collection

A

S AIRPORTS become busier, the problem of foreign object debris is on the rise.

Even so, counter measures remain variable across the industry. Worse still, as technology arrives on the scene to provide more accurate detection methods, it’s becoming clear that FOD is an even bigger problem than any one realised.

The Problem Today airports predominantly use tried and tested systems to prevent FOD. Runways are inspected daily. Construction areas are monitored to ensure debris isn’t blown onto the runway and special inspections are completed after an aircraft incident. To keep the runway clear, airports use a variety of sweeping technologies – not dissimilar to the kind you’d expect to see on the street - as well as manual collection. Some of the systems have been in place since the 1940s, but therein lies the problem. At that time, the busiest airport in world handled a fraction of the volume of today’s smaller regional airports. Times have changed, but practices have not.

The scope of the problem is revealed by the difference between what has previously been reported under old systems and what new technologies can detect. As mentioned elsewhere in this Report, a study in 2010 revealed that perhaps only three to four percent of runway debris had been identified4. Data from automated detection systems being installed at a growing number of airports around the world indicate a ten-fold increase in the amount of debris being collected. Disagreement also exists about the financial cost of foreign object damage. That same report places the figure at $13bn, others have suggested $20bn while Boeing believes the figure is in the realm of $4bn. Even finding a way to quantify the problem is a challenge

12 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

for the aviation industry, but what’s clear is the industry needs a rethink about the way in which it manages foreign object debris.

The first stage is in the assessment of the risks each airport faces. Inevitably the risks will be different for individual airports. For example, one located close to a construction site or a gravel pit could face a particularly high risk of objects being blown onto the runways. Those with heavy densities of wildlife – especially birdlife – could also be at risk of airport incursions, which is something regular inspection alone may not be able to counter.

To address the issue, items such as the toolbox kit from Qinetiq allows users to store and analyse a huge amount of data. This enables operators to look at the frequency of FOD and the nature of objects appearing on the runway. This in turn allows them to better assess their risks and formulate more effective ongoing strategies.

Information can include the time it took for detection and retrieval to the location and nature of the object. Users can quickly build up a map of danger hotspots and what objects they are most likely to be encountered.

Removal of FOD The next stage is removal. Here, operators are presented with an array of possible options from individual ground crew removing items by hand to highly advanced sweeper technology which can quickly sweep up and remove even small amounts of accumulated debris.

These include: • Tow Behind Sweepers: These come in many different forms and configurations. In general, they fall into industrial and military grades and may consist of a spinning brush or a friction mat.

Both systems work well, but spinning brushes in general have a longer service life. Airports are

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier

®

increasingly using magnet collection as part of the system. These can quickly attract even tiny pieces of metallic debris which might previously have been missed. The great advantage of these systems is their low operating cost and ease of use.

• Vacuum Truck: These are high cost but can handle large spaces and are often used in places where continuous removal is required. As the name implies these use high power vacuum technology to suck up and remove debris.

However, these can trucks struggle in tight spaces and may overlook smaller items.

• Walk behind Sweepers: A low cost option and an upgrade on simple manual sweeping. They consist of sweepers designed with side broom capability powers with brushes, vacuums and magnets to collect debris. They are useful in small constrained spaces.

Each of these systems has its own advantages and disadvantages. Different airports may choose any combination of these depending on the risk profile of their airport.

Into the Future The evolving nature of the aviation industry, in which thousands more aircraft must be accommodated within roughly the same space, means processes and technologies on the ground have to undergo a revolution.

Much of these developments focus on automated detection systems which use a mix of radar and cameras to identify and pin-point risks. In 2008, Heathrow unveiled its new system

which is now included on both its Southern and Northern runways. The motivation was efficiency as much as safety. Heathrow runways operate at 98% capacity, which means even small problems can have serious knock-on effects in terms of delays.

Further advances come from the military industry. X-Ray machines are used to closely examine aircraft for signs of so called invisible FOD. These are tiny items too small to be detected through conventional techniques which, nevertheless, can present a serious hazard to aircraft. These methods extend to the protection of aircraft against FOD. Aircraft are being installed with special protection devices to deflect foreign objects, while engine inlets with a specially curved design make it difficult for bird-strikes to enter the engine. Currently, the requirement is for aviators to produce engines which will not damage the rest of the aircraft in the event of bird-strike, but the search is on for components which will be more durable and increasingly capable of functioning immediately after an impact. This promises to further reduce delays and maintenance costs.

As with many areas of the aviation industry, development is occurring across the spectrum in many interesting ways. Threat assessment, detection and removal are key areas for evolution as are crew training and updated working practices. How effective the industry proves to be in implementing such measures will go a long way towards determining the future shape and nature of the market.

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 13 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 2/18/16 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

The Rise of Automated Foreign Object Detection Tom Cropper, Editor How a tragic air accident helped spark a change from physical inspection to automated foreign object detection.

One of the most sophisticated systems is the Tarsier automatic FOD system. Developed partly as a response to the Concorde disaster, its makers describe it as the world’s first automated FOD detection system offering round the clock accurate surveillance of airport runways

I

T’S JULY, 2000, and an Air France Concorde is preparing to take off from Charles de Gaulle Airport near Paris. All seems well, but in a few minutes all 100 passengers, nine crew and four people on the ground will be dead. It’s a crash which shocked the world and sparked a major change in the realm of Foreign Object Detection – the effects of which are still being felt today.

What the pilots could not have known is that a piece of debris had broken off the Continental flight launched minutes beforehand. An inspection of the runway had not taken place, as was procedure with all Concorde flights. As a result, the object would cause a catastrophic fire in the fuselage and the jet would crash into a nearby hotel.

The accident prompted an industry-wide reevaluation of procedures and in particular whether automated detection systems would have prevented the accident. These use technologies such as cameras or radar to spot an object on the runway. In 2007 the FAA began assessments on a number of automated systems designed to detect objects on a runway. All of them proved effective at spotting debris.

The Case for Automated Detection In 2010 another report highlighted the case for automated scanning. The report, Runway Safety: FOD, Birds, and the Case for Automated Scanning, estimated the annual worldwide cost of FOD at $13bn. Moreover, it also said that traditional manual inspection techniques could potentially miss 96% and more of FOD on airport runways5. Introducing the paper, Iain McCreary said: “With Runway Safety, the facts about FOD and birds have been stated previously. However, although there has been the equivalent of a 14 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

verbal acknowledgement, with a few exceptions no corrective action has been taken. This paper is my Challenge.”

He states a number of problems with conventional methods which rely on manual inspections in the form of a man in a van and regular sweeps. As recommended by the USFAA, the requirements are for one per day and this could spot no more than 3-4% of all objects. Airports tended to treat a runway in its totality rather than accounting for time of day and so-called FOD hotspots – namely areas of a runway which are more at risk than others.

New automated technology, he argued, could offer huge potential savings – given his estimated cost of $13bn – but given that C level executives treat this cost as part of doing business, it had not been fully realised. “For regulators, airlines and airports alike to ignore these numbers is to ignore a tremendous opportunity.”

A Changing Market So, in the five years since this report, has there been any change? Automated detection systems are becoming available and they compete with one another to be seen as the height of cutting edge technology. These can rely on a range of technologies including 3D imaging, thermal cameras and radar to spot threats and alert pilots in real time. Furthermore, the technical capacity within this advanced sector of products is also improving constantly, which means the accuracy of these systems has the capacity to evolve.

One of the most sophisticated systems is the Tarsier automatic FOD system. Developed partly as a response to the Concorde disaster, its makers describe it as the world’s first automated FOD detection system offering round the clock accurate surveillance of airport runways. It was developed by Qinetiq Research

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

Tarsier

®

Automatic FOD Detection System

Continuous detection and precise location of FOD in any environmental condition and was first deployed in Vancouver where early tests showed the full range of objects which had been missed. The system detected more than ten times the number of objects picked up by manual inspection.

It uses an advanced combination of day and night cameras to identify objects, and millimetre wave radar to give an uninterrupted coverage of the runway. This radar system offers a high level of accuracy up to a kilometre meaning a typical runway can be covered by just two or three units. Its continuous wave design means output is low, at 0.1 Watts – a tenth of the power of a mobile phone. This comes hand in hand with continuous video monitoring of the runways to allow operators to identify objects. This consists of four instruments – a wide field of view camera to give context, a high zoom colour camera for daytime use, a high-zoom low light camera for night, and an infrared illuminator for use in very low or zero light, which can provide enough light for the cameras to operate without distracting or confusing pilots. The final result is a system designed to offer highly accurate round the clock monitoring of the airport runway in any light conditions.

The function of the system is simple: radar identifies the existence of a threat before cameras confirm the identity of the object to the operator.

GPS co-ordinates can then be sent to ground crew allowing them to quickly remove the

object from the runway. After the successful experience at Vancouver Airport, the system has been rolled out at airports around the world including Heathrow in 2007 and other locations around Canada and the US.

Evolving Technology The combination of radar and camera technology is a step forward in automated systems which only use one of these technologies. It provides the unit with flexibility and the power to work in all conditions – even snow.

Systems such as these represent an important evolution. They can spot and locate a far greater amount of debris than conventional inspection and require much less intervention to operations.

The challenge, going forward, is to integrate new technology within existing systems and convince operators that the upfront cost is justified by the savings they bring. Since one piece of undetected debris can inflict thousands and even millions of dollars’ worth of damage – not to mention the risk to life and limb, these begin to pay for themselves rapidly. The good news is that this technology is in a continuous state of evolution. As it proves itself in the real world, adoption is accelerating, metrics on performance are growing, and developers are rushing to update the technology.

The technology is certainly here, but will attitudes and practices evolve to keep up?

FAA Tested and Operationally Proven with more than 100,000 Hours of Use at Heathrow, Vancouver and Doha Airports

www.moog.com

WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM | 15 Tarsier Ad - 57_5mm x 256mm.indd 1 2/18/16 9:58 AM

NEXT GENERATION FOD DETECTION TECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE AIRPORT RUNWAY OPERATIONS

References: 1

2015 Aviation Trends: http://www.strategyand.pwc.com/perspectives/2015-aviation-trends

2

IATA Air Passenger Forecasts: https://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2015-11-26-01.aspx

3

How a deer can cause a plane crash: http://www.ktoo.org/2016/02/01/124024/

4

Runway Safety: http://www.tarsier.qinetiq.com/benefits/Documents/Runway-Safety.pdf

5

Runway Safety: http://www.tarsier.qinetiq.com/benefits/Documents/Runway-Safety.pdf

16 | WWW.AIRPORTTECHNOLOGYREPORTS.COM

Airport Technology Reports The leading specialist online research and networking resource for Senior Professionals in the Airport Industry

• Up to the minute news and other content available to all site users on a free-of-charge, open access basis.

• Qualified signed up members are able to access premium content Special Reports and interact with their peers using a variety of advanced online networking tools.

• Designed to help users identify new solutions, understand the implications of different choices and select the best options available.

• Thought Leadership – Advice and guidance from internationally recognised key opinion leaders in the airport industry.

• Peer Input – Contributions from senior airport industry professionals.

• Independent Editorial Content – Expert and authoritative analysis from award winning journalists and leading industry commentators.

• Unbiased Supplier Provided Content.

• Designed to facilitate debate.

• Written to the highest professional standards.

Visit: www.primarycarereports.co.uk