Preview

Civil Aviation High Technologies

Advanced search

Aircraft overrun warning systems capabilities and disadvantages

https://doi.org/10.26467/2079-0619-2023-26-3-25-37

Abstract

Currently, attention of the aviation community and authorities is being increasingly focused on flight safety in the landing phase. It is accounted for the increased frequency of incidents in the final phase of flight and significant threats associated with the consequences of these events. The statistics of aviation accidents reveals that from 1959 to 2019, 55% of aircraft crashes in the world occurred in the phases of landing and takeoff. The given crashes resulted in 51% of all fatalities on board aircraft. In most cases, causes of these aviation accidents are involved with some kind of human error. Off-design conditions at an aerodrome also have a significant adverse effect on the aviation accident potential and severity. The increasing intensity of flights, airspace congestion, strict ATC-imposed restrictions, the necessity to perform a variety of procedures and general flight crew stress in conjunction with dynamically changing external conditions can disorient a flight crew and lead to a landing with a flight envelope overrange. The search for a solution in terms of preventing aircraft overruns is actively being conducted both by aviation authorities and aircraft manufacturers and operators. Within the framework of this review, the major external and operational factors, affecting the dynamics and the nature of the aircraft roll via the runway, are analyzed, including the context of several accidents that have occurred in recent years. In addition, the article emphasizes the methods to prevent and anticipate aircraft overruns based on the principles of active protection. In particular, the article examines the main operation aspects of onboard avionics systems installed on Boeing and Airbus aircraft and highlights the focus areas of their upgrading. Special attention is paid to the influence of the pilot and the possibility of taking his actions into account to predict an outcome of landing.

About the Authors

S. F. Borodkin
Moscow State Technical University of Civil Aviation
Russian Federation

Sergey F. Borodkin, Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Aerodynamics, Design and Aircraft Strength Chair

Moscow



A. I. Volynchuk
Moscow State Technical University of Civil Aviation
Russian Federation

Alexey I. Volynchuk, Postgraduate Student of the Aerodynamics, Design and Aircraft Strength Chair

Moscow



M. A. Kiselev
Moscow State Technical University of Civil Aviation
Russian Federation

Mikhail A. Kiselev, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, The Head of the Aerodynamics, Design and Aircraft Strength Chair

Moscow



Yu. V. Petrov
Moscow State Technical University of Civil Aviation
Russian Federation

Yuriy V. Petrov, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, The Head of the Technical Mechanics and Engineering Graphics Chair

Moscow



References

1. Shao, Q., Yang, M., Xu, C., Wang, H., Liu, H. (2020). Fire risk analysis of runway excursion accidents in high-plateau airport. IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 204400–204416. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3035894 (accessed: 10.06.2022).

2. Ayra, E.S., Insua, D.R., Cano, J. (2019). Bayesian network for managing runway overruns in aviation safety. Journal of aerospace information systems, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 546–558. DOI: 10.2514/1.I010726 (accessed: 10.06.2022).

3. Valdes, R.M.A., Comendador, F.G., Gordun, L.M., Nieto, F.J.S. (2011). The development of probabilistic models to estimate accident risk (due to runway overrun and landing undershoot) applicable to the design and construction of runway safety areas. Safety Science, vol. 49, issue 5, pp. 633–650. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.09.020

4. Heymsfield, E. (2013). Predicting aircraft stopping distances within an EMAS. Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol. 139, issue 12, pp. 1184–1193. DOI:10.1061/(ASCE) TE.1943-5436.0000600

5. Heymsfield, E., Hale, W.M., Halsey, T.L. (2012). Aircraft response in an airfield arrestor system during an overrun. Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol. 138, issue 3, pp. 284–292. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000331

6. Gandhewar, P., Hemantkumar, S. (2014). Runway excursion: A problem. Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, vol. 11, pp. 75–78. DOI: 10.9790/1684-11327578

7. Belogrudova, D.Y., Saifutdinov, R.A. (2021). Automated systems for preventing the danger of running air-craft over the border of a running. Bulletin of Ulyanovsk State Technical University, no. 2 (94), pp. 55–60. (in Russian)

8. Hindson, W.S. (1990). A pilot rating scale for evaluating failure transients in electronic flight control systems. In: 17th Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, 20–22 August 1990, Portland, OR, U.S.A. DOI: 10.2514/6.1990-2827 (accessed: 10.06.2022).

9. Gawron, V.J. (2008). Human performance, workload, and situational awareness measures handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press, Florida, 296 p. DOI: 10.1201/9781420064506

10. Mozolyako, A.V., Akimov, A.N., Vorobyev, V.V. (2014). Status and development of runway overrun prevention systems. Nauchnyy Vestnik MGTU GA, no. 204, p. 74–77. (in Russian)

11. Kovalenko, G.V., Zhdanovich, A.M. (2017). The method avoidance runway overrun of heavy transport aeroplan. Vestnik Sankt- Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta grazhdanskoy aviatsii, no. 3 (16), pp. 16–32. (in Russian)

12. Evdokimova, T.A., Buzaeva, S.V., Shagarova, A.A. (2022). Impact assessment of adverse meteorological conditions on the work of the ATC. Symbol of Science: International Scientific Journal, no. 9-1, pp. 64–69. (in Russian)

13. Ong, G.P., Fwa, T.F. (2007). Wetpavement hydroplaning risk and skid resistance: Modeling. Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol. 133, issue 10, pp. 113–125. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2007)133:10(590)

14. Baby, C.K., George, B. (2012). A capacitive ice layer detection system suitable for autonomous inspection of runways using an ROV. In: 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Robotic and Sensors Environments Proceedings. Magdeburg, Germany, pp. 127–132. DOI: 10.1109/ROSE.2012.6402627

15. Sayfutdinov, R.A., Belogrudova, D.Y. (2021). Method for forecasting aviation accidents in the system of safety management of aviation activities. Bulletin of Ulyanovsk State Technical University, no. 1 (93), pp. 49–54. (in Russian)

16. Borodkin, S.F., Volynchuk, A.I., Ganiev, Sh.F., Kiselev, M.A., Nosatenko, I.A. (2022). Modern methods of preventing aircraft overrunning the runway. Civil Aviation High Technologies, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 8–19. DOI: 10.26467/2079-0619-2022-25-2-8-19

17. Goodwill, S. (2014). Runway situation awareness tools (RSAT). Flight Technical and Safety the Boeing Company. Available at: https://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2014-UNSTAPPCH/BOEING%20Runway%20situation%20awareness%20tools%20(RSAT).pdf (accessed: 10.06.2022).

18. Tuncal, A., Uslu, S., Erdal, D. (2021). A milestone to enhance runway safety: the new global reporting format. Revista de Investigaciones Universidad del Quindío, vol. 33, pp. 168–178. DOI: 10.33975/riuq.vol33n1.551

19. Barabash, A.D., Borodkin, S.F., Kiselev, M.A., Petrov, Yu.V. (2021). Flight safety level improvement methodology based on the pilot model. Civil Aviation High Technologies, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 8–20. DOI: 10.26467/2079-0619-2021-24-3-8-20


Review

For citations:


Borodkin S.F., Volynchuk A.I., Kiselev M.A., Petrov Yu.V. Aircraft overrun warning systems capabilities and disadvantages. Civil Aviation High Technologies. 2023;26(3):25-37. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26467/2079-0619-2023-26-3-25-37

Views: 407


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2079-0619 (Print)
ISSN 2542-0119 (Online)