Civil Aviation Research Development · civil aviation, including systems and the specific areas of flight vehicles, aircraft operations, air traffic control, airport and support facilities,

Civil Aviation Research and Development An Assessment of Federal Government Involvement

AIRPORT AND SUPPORT FACILITIES

A report by the ASEB Ad Hm Committee on Airport and Support Facilities

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19700015796 2020-08-04T14:09:53+00:00Z

CIVIL AVIATION

RESEARCH

A N D

DEVELOPMENT

A n Assessment of

Federal Government Involvement

AIRPORT AND SUPPORT FACILITIES

AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD NATIONAL ACADEMY O F ENGINEERING

Washington, D.C. D e c e m b e r 1968

The study and r e p o r t by the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board of the National Academy of Engineering were supported by the National Aeronautic s and Space Administrat ion under Task Orde r Cont rac t NSR 09-012-912.

Available f rom

Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board National Academy of Engineering 2 10 1 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418

The National Academy of Engineering was establ ished in December 1964. The Academy i s independent and auto- nomous in i t s organizat ion and elect ion of members , and s h a r e s in the responsibi l i ty given the National Academy of Sciences under i t s congress ional ac t of incorporat ion to advise the f ede ra l government, upon request , in a l l a r e a s of science and engineering.

The National Academy of Engineering, aware of i t s r e - sponsibi l i t ies to the government, the engineering community, and the nation a s a whole, i s pledged:

1. To provide means of a s ses s ing the constantly chang- ing needs of the nation and the technical r e s o u r c e s that can and should be applied to them; to sponsor p r o g r a m s a imed a t meeting these needs; and to encourage such engineering r e s e a r c h a s may be advisable i n the national in teres t .

2 . To explore means fo r promoting cooperation in engineering in the United States and abroad, with a view to securing concentration on problems significant to society and encouraging r e s e a r c h and development a imed a t meeting them.

3. To advise the Congress and the executive branch of the government, whenever cal led upon by any depar tment o r agency thereof, on m a t t e r s of national impor t pert inent to engineering.

4. To cooperate with the National Academy of Sciences on m a t t e r s involving both sc ience and engineering.

5 . To se rve the nation in o the r r e s p e c t s in connection with significant problems in engineering and technology.

6. To recognize in a n appropr ia te manner outstanding contributions to the nation by leading engineers .

Foreword

The National Academy of Engineering established the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) in May 1967 to advise the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis- tration (NASA) and other government agencies. In consulta- tion with officials of NASA, the Department of Transportation, the Federa l Aviation Administration, the Pres ident ' s Science Adviser, certain interested committees of Congress, and the National Aeronautics and Space Council, a s well a s other government and private groups, the Board selected a s i t s f i r s t topic of study, "Civil Aviation Research and Develop- ment: An Assessment of Federa l Government Involvement." The Board's repor t under that title was published on August 13, 1968. It summarizes repor ts of s ix ad hoc committees, including this repor t by the Committee on Airport and Sup- por t Facil i t ies.

As background information for the reader of the committee reports , the most important conclusions and recommendations of the Board a r e stated below (summary report, pages v-vi).

The Board has concluded that in a favorable economic cl imate civil aviation can continue to flourish; in fact i t can accelera te i t s beneficial growth if a carefully conceived program of planning and resea rch and development aimed spe- cifically a t the civil a i r t ranspor t system i s ca r r i ed out.

After conside ring the multiplicity of fac tors affecting the growth of civil aviation, the Board concluded that the three most cr i t ica l fac tors a r e (1) a i rpor t and support facilities, (2 ) noise, and (3) a i r traffic control.

The most important recommendation of the Board pertains to knitting together more tightly the civil aviation r e s e a r c h and development activities of the Department of Transportation,

i t s major operating unit, the Federa l Aviation Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and especially to di- viding their responsibilities according to capability, The DOT should provide the leadership in conducting sys tems studies to identify, ana- lyze, and rank civil aviation goals a s well a s the r e s e a r c h and development needed to attain these goals; NASA should be responsible for r e sea rch and development in al l the a r e a s of importance to civil aeronautics; the FAA should, in addition to operating the airways network, be responsible for the sys tems testing of the resulting operational concepts and hardware.

The Board 's repor t also contained many detailed technical recommendations concerning resea rch and development needed to ensure the continued growth of civil aviation. These pertain to most of the important a r e a s of civil aviation, including sys tems and the specific a r e a s of flight vehicles, a i r c r a f t operations, a i r traffic control, a i rpor t and support facilities, economics, and noise.

The Board assigned detailed work to s ix ad hoc committees covering the above specific a reas . Each committee was composed of knowledgeable men from different pa r t s of the aviation community; their valuable contributions a r e sincerely appreciated by the Board.

Board membership i s l is ted in Appendix I. The Board wishes to express i t s appreciation and indebtedness to a large number of individuals beyond i t s membership with whom i t conferred. These a r e a lso l is ted in Appendix I. The Board i s indebted to the American Institute of Aero- nautics and Astronautics, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the Institute of Elect r ica l and Electronic Engineers, and the Society of Automotive Engineers fo r conducting special studies, making available special reports , and identifying members for participation in an advisory capacity. The cooperation of these societ ies served to broaden the advisory base.

The Board i s part icularly grateful for the valuable ass is tance provided by the members of the Ad Hoc Com- mittee on Airport and Support Facil i t ies, who a r e listed on the following page.

AD HOC COMMITTEE ON

AIRPORT AND SUPPORT FACILITIES O F

THE AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD

Chairman: John M. Kyle, Jr. (ASEB) Chief Engineer The P o r t of New York Authority

C a r l M. Kneisel Vice P res iden t of P r o p e r t i e s and Faci l i t ies P a n Amer ican World Airways, Inc.

Horace C. Lamberton, Jr. P a r t n e r Howard, Needles, Tammen and Bergendoff

William C. Stevens Engineer of Design for Aviation Engineering The P o r t of New York Authority

Arnold W. Thompson Consulting Engineer Arnold W. Thompson Associa tes

contents

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

DISCUSSION O F PROBLEMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Genera l Considerat ions 4

Technical Considerat ions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

APPENDIXES

I . CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

I1 . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3

Introduction

Organization for Conduct of the Airport and Support Fac i l i t i e s S tudy

The members of the Committee on Airport and Sup- por t Facil i t ies a r e actively engaged in major phases of aviation activities, and the judgments expressed in this repor t a r e based on their background and experience in engineering problems of modern a i rpor ts . Advisers to the committee included exper ts in the fields of a i r t rans- portation, a i rpor t operations, and development of a i rpor t facil i t ies and equipment. In addition, the committee benefited from contributions of authorities in severa l fields serving the a i r transportation industry.

Method of Conducting the Study

The committee held two meetings to discuss the problems of a i rpor t s and support facil i t ies and to draft i t s report . The committee reviewed current studies by other groups, including a special r epor t on a i rpor t s prepared by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astro- nautics a t the request of the ASEB. Fur ther assistance was provided by the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the Institute of Elect r ica l and Electronic Engineers, and the Society of Automotive Engineers.

The committee also took note of other repor ts on the problem of a i rpor t congestion, including a 1961 study of national aviation goals (Project Horizon) conducted under the sponsorship of the Federa l Aviation Agency, and a recent study of civil aviation by the Transportation Work- shop, entitled "Air Transportation 1975 and Beyond."

In i t s deliberations the committee identified some major i s sues and recommended a s e r i e s of actions that should be accomplished by government agencies, with the ass is tance of industry in some instances, to eliminate o r

2 Introduction

minimize the a i rpor t problems that threaten to stifle the growth of civil aviation in this country.

Background

During the ea r ly phases of the ASEB study, the dis- cussions by experts in the various fields of civil aviation and the review of Senate Document No. 90, "Policy Planning for Aeronautical Research and Development," prepared by the staff of the Library of Congress, identified major prob- l ems that a r e ei ther already restr ict ing the growth of civil aviation o r that a r e expected to l imit growth of aviation in the future. Among the problems cited were congestion of the airways and a i rpor t s with related traffic control difficulties, safety, a i r c ra f t noise, and sonic boom associated with supersonic flights. Although attention has been given to these problems, they st i l l remain a potential retarding influence on the growth of civil aviation.

The 1961 Project Horizon study re fe r red to above cited the need for planning and implementing a long-range nationwide system of a i rpor t and terminal development capable of keeping pace with the projected growth of civil aviation. In the opinion of the committee, the require- ment for such a long-range plan for national a i rpor t development remains a key factor in solving the problems facing the nation's a i rpor ts .

Scope of the S tudy

This survey of a i rpor t and support facil i t ies should be read with the recognition that other ASEB ad hoc committees were active in the following areas :

Flight vehicles and airbreathing propulsion Aircraft operations Air traffic control Economics of civil aviation Noise

The study of a i rpor t and support facil i t ies was limited to those problems not directly encompassed by other ad hoc committees. F o r example, two a r e a s that may be considered pa r t of the a i rpor t problem - a i r traffic control and noise - were the subject of study by

Introduction 3

other ASEB ad hoc committees a s noted above and thus were not considered by this committee.

The a r e a of study of the Committee on Airport and Support Facil i t ies was defined a t the outset to include the portion of the a i rpor t complex starting with the landing s t r ip and extending through the main gate of the terminal . The a i rpor t access problem was only touched on in this study because i t i s of such magnitude and complexity that i t would require a comprehensive in-depth study beyond the intended scope of the present ASEB effort.

In many cases, the committee has suggested agencies that i t considered appropriate to c a r r y out the recommended actions o r to participate in such actions. In i t s summary repor t the Board generally chose to omit any such references, thus giving the agencies concerned the option of determining appropriate implementing activities.

As a genera l method of operation, the committee limited i t s recommendations to those specific a r e a s in which i t considered that m o r e p rogress was both possible and necessary to solve the problems. These topics a r e discussed in the following sections of this report .

Discussion of

Problems and Recommendations

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Since the establishment of the federal a i rpor t pro- g ram in 1946, aviation has grown steadily and rapidly to the point where i t s p rogress has outgrown the facilities that support i t . Even the most moderate projections of civil aviation growth over the next decade indicate that today's a i rpor t problems will be great ly multiplied unless coordinated action i s initiated soon and maintained in the y e a r s ahead.

As another indication of the magnitude of the problem, recent testimony before the Aviation Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Commerce indicated that by the end of 1973 a n additional $3 billion mus t be invested in the national a i rpor t system. Another $3 billion will be required by 1975. This total of $6 billion needed over the next seven yea rs will equal the total amount of money spent during this century for development of the national a i rpor t system. The figure includes funds for terminal a r e a and a i rpor t access needs a s well a s for runway development.

Overall Planning for Airports

An expanded national plan for a i rpor t development emerges a s a major factor in solving the a i rpor t problem. Such a plan would take into account the in teres ts and responsibilities of the federal and state government and the local communities in developing new o r expanded a i r - por ts throughout the country. The proposed national a i r - port plan could be based on the existing Federa l Aid to Airports P rogram, which would be broadened in scope to include an inventory of various categories of a i rpor ts . Under this concept, local a i rpor t s would provide data on the projected need for a modernized o r expanded a i rpor t

Discussion of Problems and Recommendations 5

capability matched against the existing capacity in each case. This planning document would provide factual data for projecting the technical and financial requirements of a national a i rpor t development program geared to the future needs of civil aviation. At the same time, the plan would be an important step in formulating the national transportation system plan, which has been advocated by other sources a s a means of integrating a l l elements of an a i r transportation system to include ground transportation interfaces, local and national economic trends, and applicable new technology. The Department of Transpor- tation (DOT) would appear to be the logical agency within the federal government to develop such a plan.

As a step in the planning process, a study should be made of new a i rc ra f t developments to determine the maxi- mum size, weight, flotation character is t ics , and servicing requirements of future a i rcraf t . This study should involve the Airport Operators Council International (AOCI) with the active participation of airline, a i rcraf t , and en- gine companies. With such information in hand, guidelines can be established to allow for future a i rpor t expansion to achieve required capabilities. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) should translate this information into a i rpor t advisory c i rcu la r s for continuing guidance of a i rpor t opera tors .

Government-industry Airport Steering Group

F o r a national a i rpor t plan to be most effective, i t must provide for participation by representatives of the government and industry groups concerned with the problems of a i rpor ts . Among these a r e the DOT and i t s FAA, the Air Transpor t Association, the AOCI, the Aerospace Industries Association, the American Institute of Architects, the Ame r ican As sociation of Airport Executives, and the American Society of Civil Engineers.

One possibility for achieving joint government- industry participation would be a steering group with rep- resentation from the above organizations and possibly o thers having an in teres t in a i r transportation planning. Such a group would be responsible for reviewing the a i r transportation plans described above and would provide a mechanism for the exchange of information on the

6 Civil Aviation Research & Development

adequacy of the a i r transportation system and the development of coordinated recommendations for improve- ments. The method of operation would be s imi lar to that employed by competent advisory groups in other com- merc ia l a r e a s using a systems approach.

The committee felt that one oi the main obstacles to developing optimum solutions for the a i rpor t and support facilities problem i s the lack of staff attention to the field of civil engineering in t;he government and industrial o r - ganizations that a r e responsible for design and construction of a i rpor ts . Participation of top-level civil engineers with these organizations might make i t possible to shorten dramatically the time from identification of needed a i r - port facilities to completion of the required construction. To date, no in teres t has been shown in tackling this problem on a nationwide bas is ; ra ther each problem i s solved (o r unsolved) by the individual a i rpor t operator using data that a r e sometimes fragmentary and contradictory.

Educational Programs

Another recommended action to ensure the effec- tiveness of a national a i rpor t d e v e l o p ~ e n t plan i s the creation of university programs in local communities to acquaint local officials, industry representatives, and a i rpor t managers and developers with the social, economic, and political fac tors involved in a i rpor t design and location. Such educational courses would provide a forum for the discussion and resolution of i s sues involving federal , state, and local government responsibilities in the establishment of new a i rpor t s o r the expansion of existing facilities.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Moving from broad issues, the committee considered severa l specific i tems that could contribute to the better- ment of present and future a i rpor t operations. Committee recommendations were categorized a s follows: a i rpor t capacity, runway and taxiway capacity, a i rpor t standards, baggage handling, loading bridge s, freight, terminal- ground transportation interface, ground transportation,


and genera l aviation. These categories a r e discussed in the following paragraphs, and actions a r e recommended for appropriate agencies within the government o r industry.

A growing number of a i rpor t s in high-density traffic a r e a s ei ther will soon reach capacity, have attained capacity, o r have already exceeded thei r original l imi ts for a i r c ra f t acceptance and departure ra tes . Recognizing the long lead time necessa ry to design and construct new airports , the committee suggests that i t would be profit- able to examine cri t ical ly severa l major operational a i rpor t s to determine if increased use of existing facili- t ies could be achieved. New technology and techniques a s well a s improved traffic c r i t e r i a and procedures may permit a significant increase in the capabilities of these a i rpor ts .

Airport Capacity

The committee recommends the following: 1. Realistically reappraise spacing of parallel run-

ways, now set a t 5,000 ft, to determine i f this distance can be decreased. The original r e s e a r c h that established this cr i ter ion was performed before modern radar con- t ro l s were being used to establish acceptance rate. It i s possible that newer electronic equipment might make i t possible to r ecas t the dimensional requirements and establish a new acceptance rate. As fa r a s i s known, no studies a r e being made in this a rea . It i s probable that the FAA is best qualified to perform this work.

2 . Determine optimum operational acceptance and departure r a t e s a s a basis for possible revision of the present standards. The following procedure appears feasible:

a . Study a i rpor t s that a r e exceeding their theoretical capacity to see how this i s being accomplished.

b. Study a i rpor t s that a r e not achieving their theo- re t ica l capacity to determine the reasons for the deficiency.

These studies could probably be undertaken by a qualified transportation r e s e a r c h group with direction and support provided by a i rpor t opera tors through the AOCI.


3. Examine taxiway high-speed turnoffs. It i s ap- parent that they a r e not being used a s designed, possibly because the angle i s too g rea t o r because the 60-knot design speed i s unrealist ic. A study should be made by a r esea rch group o r educational institution familiar with the problem, with participation by the FAA, the air l ines, pilot organizations, and the AOCI.

4. Study the rat io of gates to total a i r c ra f t capacity fo r both large and smal l a i rpor ts . The mos t logical way to c a r r y out this investigation would be to update ea r l i e r repor ts on this subject. The study could be ca r r i ed out by a private transportation r e s e a r c h organization, with participation by the AOCI and the air l ines.

5. Study the orientation and location of the a i r terminal a s i t re la tes to runway configurations for both instrument flight ru les (IFR) and visual flight ru les (VFR) and for a i r c ra f t with ver t ica l o r shor t takeoff and landing (V/STOL) capabilities. Poss ible sources of information would be academic institutions having transportat ion departments that could initiate aircraft-ground traffic studies using the techniques developed in ground ve- hicular traffic studies.

Runway and Taxiway Capacity

Within this framework part icular consideration should be given to the following recommendations:

1. F o r a i rpor t runway and taxiway lighting, the FAA should be urged to accelera te i t s r e s e a r c h and development program to avoid delays such a s those that occurred in the approval of the centerline lighting fixtures.

2 . The FAA should speed the program for t ransfer f rom visual aids to electronic aids for landing and taxiing.

3. The FAA should pursue development of an auto- matic taxiway system. It i s possible that existing hardware could be used for an interim solution, thus reducing the time and cost necessary to place the system in operation.

Airport Standards

To maintain the currency of a i rpor t s tandards and to provide proper guidance for a i rpor t opera tors and


use r s , a i rpor t s tandards should be available that reflect the latest information on a l l types of cu r ren t and future aircraft . The standards promulgated by government agencies need to be studied and updated on a cooperative basis with participation by the a i r l ines and the a i rpor t operators.

Baggage Handling

This a r e a appears to be satisfactory with the re - sea rch being done by commercia l organizations supported by the air l ines. Interested government agencies should keep abreas t of developments in this a rea .

Loading Bridqes

Development of bridges for conveying passengers between a i rc ra f t and a i r terminals i s being supported by industry. Work should continue with attention being paid to necessary capacity and to f i r e safety measures . The committee suggests that the National Bureau of Standards of the Department of Commerce o r possibly other gov- ernmental laboratories might be helpful in providing ad- vice on the f i r e resist ivi ty of construction mater ia ls for this purpose.

Recent forecas ts of the growth in the a i r cargo market indicate that over the next fifteen y e a r s the demand for a i r cargo service may greatly increase . F o r the next decade, while passenger a i rc ra f t a r e handling a major portion of a i r freight, i t will be necessary to provide large a i rpor t s with segregated cargo a r e a s with d i rec t truck access independent of the a i rpor t automo- bile roads. This facility should have ready accessibil i ty to passenger loading a r e a s .

For the future, attention should be given to the possibility of providing special freight a i rpor ts , part icularly in hub a reas , a s it appears that the t ime i s rapidly ap- proaching when m o r e freight will be ca r r i ed in special planes. In the foreseeable future, i t i s probable that a considerable amount of freight will s t i l l be ca r r i ed on


passenger planes but large a i r freight shipments, probably in containers, will use al l-cargo planes. This para l le ls mar ine and ra i l procedures in which smal l freight shipments a r e handled in one manner and large containerized shipments in a completely different manner . Studies in this a r e a should involve both a i rpor t opera tors and air l ines, a s well a s government agencies experienced in a i r cargo operations.

Interface Be tween Terminal and Ground Transportation

Ground transportation sys tems represent a major constraint to an effective a i r transportation system. The a i rpor t access problem should be studied using a sys tems approach, recognizing i t a s a pa r t of the total urban problem of moving people and goods. More re - search on various ground transportation sys tems i s necessary to determine the best possible approaches to the urban t rans i t and a i rpor t access problems. The resul ts of these studies would serve to guide local community planners.

Effort should be made to encourage participation of appropriate elements in the DOT, such a s the Bureau of Public Roads, in studying this facet of the a i rpor t problem. Areas of part icular in teres t would be:

1. The capacity of interchanges adjacent to a i rpor t s requiring specialized design.

2. The types of vehicles and character is t ics of t ravel mode used for a i rpor t access . An updating of ea r l i e r studies would be one way of accomplishing this.

3. The a i rpor t parking problem, with part icular attention to parking time s, long- time parking facilities, and facilities for a i r t r ave le r s and a i rpor t visi tors. This work could be undertaken by transportation resea rch organizations o r university transportat ion departments.

4. Airport directional signs. Signing a t mos t a i r - ports i s unsatisfactory and sometimes confusing. It i s suggested that the DOT Bureau of Public Roads could provide advisory ass is tance in this a r e a .


Ground Transportation

It appears that some facets of this problem a r e being overemphasized, while insufficient effort i s being applied to the overa l l problem. Although i t i s agreed that development of advanced ground transportation vehicles should proceed, the committee feels that m o r e effort should be concentrated on analytical studies of a l l modes of local transportation sys tems serving the airport . Transportation r e s e a r c h organizations o r educational institutions having transportat ion departments should be able to conduct such studies.

General Avia t ion

The impact of genera l aviation on a i rpor t facilities i s now considerable and will become an even g rea te r factor if the present forecas ts for the expansion of gen- e r a l aviation a r e correct . At the same time, genera l aviation a i rc ra f t a r e expected to become not only more numerous, but also larger and fas ter . This increasing- ly significant segment of civil aviation mus t be provided with adequate facilities if i t i s to contribute to and not impede the growth of civil aviation.

As the f i r s t s tep in serving this segment of the a i r traffic, consideration should be given to providing gen- e r a l aviation s t r ips that have a traffic pattern different from that used by commercia l aviation.

As traffic increases, specialized a i rpor t s for gen- e r a l aviation must be provided. These a i rpor t s should have all-weather operational capabilities and include such i tems a s weather reporting facilities, passenger lounges, and a suitable interface with ground t ranspor- tation systems. It i s also essential that these a i rpor t s operate on a financially self- sustaining basis, which may necessi tate an evaluation of the a i rpor t charges in line with the facil i t ies provided. A cost-benefit f r ame of reference might be employed to evaluate solutions to this problem, which i s fundamentally one that might be considered by the DOT a s a pa r t of i t s responsibility for a l l transportation in the United States.

Aeronautics and Space

Engineering Board

Appendix I

Aeronautics and Space

Engineering Board

H. Guyford Stever , Cha i rman P r e s i d e n t Carnegie-Mellon Univers i ty

Raymond L. Bisplinghoff, Vice Cha i rman

Dean, School of Engineering Massachuse t t s Institute of Technology

Leo L . Be ranek P r e s i d e n t Bolt Be ranek and Newman Inc.

Wil l is M. Hawkins Vice P r e s i d e n t - Science and Engineering Lockheed A i r c r a f t Corpora t ion

John M. Kyle, J r . Chief Engineer The P o r t of New York Authority

B e r n a r d M. Oliver Vice P r e s ident f o r R e s e a r c h and

Development Hewle t t -Packard Company

P e r r y W. P r a t t Vice P r e s i d e n t and Chief Sc ien t i s t United A i r c r a f t Corpora t ion

Allen E. Pucke t t Execut ive Vice P r e s i d e n t and

Ass i s t an t G e n e r a l Manager Hughes A i r c r a f t Company

16 Appendixe s

George E. Solomon Vice P res iden t and Direc tor ,

Sys tems Labora tor ies TRW Inc.

Edward C. Wells Senior Vice P res iden t The Boeing Company

Car los C. Wood Division Vice P res iden t - Engineering Sikor sky Aircraft , Division of

United Aircraf t Corporat ion

Contr ibu tors 17

Contributors

The Aeronaut ics and Space Engineering Boa rd g r a t e - fully acknowledges the wi l l ingness of the following l e a d e r s f r o m government , industry, and the academic community to s h a r e with the Boa rd t he i r ex tens ive knowledge i n the va r ious f ie lds of c ivi l aviation.

M r . F r e d e r i c k L. Bagby, Manager , Mechanica l En- gineering Depar tment , Ba t te l le M e m o r i a l Inst i tute

M r . W. V. Blockley, P r inc ipa l Assoc ia te and Vice P re s iden t , Webb Assoc i a t e s

M r . R icha rd E . Ca rpen t e r , Senior Special is t , Science and Technology, Science Po l i cy R e s e a r c h Division, Legis - la t ive Reference Service, L i b r a r y of Congre s s

Dr . P a u l W. Cherington, J a m e s J. Hil l P r o f e s s o r of Transpor ta t ion , H a r v a r d Bus ines s School

M r . William M. Cri l ly , Senior Vice P r e s i d e n t f o r Planning, E a s t e r n Ai r l ines , Inc.

Dr . Robe r t C. Duncan, Ass i s t an t D i r e c t o r f o r Sys- t ems , NASA E lec t ron i c s R e s e a r c h Cen te r

M r . A. J. Evans, D i r e c t o r of Aeronaut ica l Vehic les Division, Office of Advanced R e s e a r c h and Technology, National Aeronaut ics and Space Adminis t ra t ion

M r . William C. Fuchs , Ass i s t an t f o r Fede ra l I In t e r - nat ional Aviation Ma t t e r s , Office of the Chief of Naval Operat ions, U.S. Navy

M r . J a m e s J. Gehrig, Staff D i r ec to r , Senate Com- mi t t ee on Aeronaut ica l and Space Sc iences

D r . Nicholas E . Golovin, Office of Science and Tech- nology, Execut ive Office of the P r e s i d e n t

M r . K a r l H a r r , Jr., P re s iden t , Ae rospace Indus t r ies Assoc ia t ion of Amer ica , Inc.

M r . Edward H. Heinemann, Vice P re s iden t , Gene ra l Dynamics Corpora t ion

M r . Richard Hutton, Vice P re s iden t , G r u m m a n Air - c r a f t Engineering Corpora t ion

M r . Howard K i r shne r , Assoc ia te Technica l D i r ec to r , MITRE Division 4, Ai r Traf f ic System, MITRE Corpora t ion

18 Appendixe s

M r . John W. Klotz, Ass i s t an t Di rec tor , Tac t i ca l Con- t r o l and Survei l lance Sys tems , Office of D i r ec to r , Defense R e s e a r c h and Engineering, Depa r tmen t of Defense

M r . F r e d e r i c k A. Koomanoff, Senior Associate , Planning R e s e a r c h Corpora t ion

M r . Edwin A. Link, D i r e c t o r and Consultant, Ocean Sys tems , Inc., G e n e r a l P rec i s ion , Inc.

M r . J a m e s P. Loomis, Columbus Labora to r i e s , Ba t te l le M e m o r i a l Inst i tute

Ma jo r G e n e r a l J. C. Maxwell, USAF, P r o g r a m Di rec - to r , Super sonic T r a n s p o r t P r o g r a m , F e d e r a l Aviation Adminis t ra t ion

M r . Geo rge R. Mell inger , Spec ia l Ass i s tan t , Sys t ems P r o g r a m Management, Nor th Amer i can Rockwell Corpora t ion

Mr . William C. Mentzer , Senior Vice P re s iden t , En- ginee r ing and Maintenance, United A i r Line s, Inc .

M r . T. C. Muse, Ass i s t an t D i r e c t o r (Tac t i ca l Ai r - c r a f t Sys tems) , Office of D i r ec to r , Defense R e s e a r c h and Engineering, Depa r tmen t of Defense

M r . William T. P i p e r , Jr., P re s iden t , P i p e r A i r c r a f t Corpora t ion

M r . Jay W. Rabb, Chief, Sys t ems Division, National A i r space P r o g r a m Office, F e d e r a l Aviation Adminis t ra t ion

Colonel Stephen G. Sal tzman, USAF (Ret.) , Staff Co- ord ina tor , T ranspo r t a t i on Workshop, 1967

M r . David D. Thomas, Deputy Adminis t ra tor , F e d e r a l Aviation Adminis t ra t ion

D r . Edward C. Welsh, Execut ive Sec re t a ry , National Aeronaut ics and Space Council

M r . C h a r l e s A. Zrake t , Vice P re s iden t , Washington Operat ions, MITRE Corpora t ion

Professional Engineering Societies

Contributors

20 Appendixe s

American Insti tute of

Aeronautics and Astronautics

R . Dixon Speas, Chai rman

Ar thur Bil let Cyrus S. Collins

Scott Crossf ie ld

Allen F. Edwards, Jr.

Joseph A. Fos t e r

F r a n c i s T. Fox

Herbe r t C. Godfrey

Vic tor J . Kayne

R. K. Joerger

Cha r l e s 0. Landrum J a m e s T. Py le Leonard H. Quick

Rober t W. Rummel

Howard Salmon

John T. Shannon

Rober t B. Ward

Pres ident , R. Dixon Speas Associates , Inc. Vickers , Inc. Vice Pres ident , Amer ican Airl ines, Inc. Division Vice Pres ident , Fl ight R e s e a r c h and Develop- ment, E a s t e r n Airl ines, Inc. Pres ident , National P i lo ts Associat ion Vice Pres ident , Ai r T ranspor t Associat ion of Ame r i c a Genera l Manager, L o s Angeles Internat ional Airpor t Regional Vice Pres ident , P rope r t i e s , United Air Lines, Inc. Vice Pres ident , A i rc ra f t Owners and P i lo t s Associat ion Pres ident , Leigh F i s h e r Associates , Inc. Landrum & Brown Aviation Development Council Pres ident , Transpor ta t ion Sys tems Corporat ion Vice Pres ident , Planning and Research , T r a n s World Airl ines, Inc. Amer ican Bosch Arma Corporat ion Senior Vice Pres ident , Operat ions, P a n Amer ican World Airways, Inc. Executive Di rec to r and Secre- tary, National Bus iness Air- c r a f t Association

Contributors 2 1

Mart in A. Warskow Airborne Ins t rument Labora tory John R. Wiley Direc tor , Aviation Department ,

The P o r t of New York Authority

Rush Ziengenfelder Pa r sons , Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas

American Society of Civil Engineers.

Richard H. Tatlow, I11 Pres ident , Abbot, Merkt, and Company, and Pres ident , ASCE

H. C. Lamberton, Jr . P a r t n e r , Howard, Needles, T a m m e n and Bergendoff

Arnold W. Thompson Consulting Engineer , Arnold W. Thompson Associa tes

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

John deS. Coutinho

R. C. Hornburg

C. M. Stark

Kenneth M. F o r e m a n Geoas t rophys ics Group, Re- s e a r c h Section, Grumman Ai rc ra f t Engineering Corpora- tion, and Liaison Repre senta- tive, ASME Special Ass is tan t to the Vice Pres ident , Lunar Excurs ion Module of Apollo, Grumman Ai rc ra f t Engineering Corporat ion P r o j e c t Engineer , McDonnell Douglas Corporat ion Supervisor , Maintainability, AiResearch Division, G a r r e t t Corporat ion

22 Appendixe s

Institute of

Electrical and Electronic Engineers

W. K. MacAdam

S. W. Herwald

D. G. Fink R. M. Emberson

J. S. Young

Vice Pres ident , Engineering, New York Telephone Company, and Immediate P a s t Pres ident , IEEE Group Vice Pres ident , Westing- house E lec t r i c Corporation, and Pres ident , IEEE Genera l Manager, IEEE Direc tor , Technical Services, IEEE Senior Engineer , Scientist, McDonnell Douglas Corpora- tion, and Chairman, Aero- space Support Sys tems Com- mit tee, Group on Aerospace and Elec t ronic Systems, IEEE

Society of Automotive Engineers

R. H. Isbrandt

C. G. Pa t t a r in i

Vice Pres ident , Auto Engi- neering and Research , Auto Division, Amer ican Motors Corporat ion, and Pres ident , SAE The P o r t of New York Authority; Member, SAE Aerospace Council

Bibliography

Appendix II

Bibliography A. Airport and Support Fac i l i t i e s

1. "V/STOL P o r t s and Short-Haul Air Transportat ion," George P. Bates, J r . , FAA, and Joan B. Barr iage , FAA, Technical Information Service A 67-39381.

2. "The Transpor ta t ion Bog - A Challenge for New Yorkers ," Harold E. Gray, Pres ident , P a n Amer ican World Airways, Congressional Record, November 2, 1967, p. H 14508.

3. "The Airpor t and I t s Neighbors," the r e p o r t of the P r e s i d e n t ' s Airpor t Commission, May 16, 1952.

4. "Air Transpor ta t ion 1975 and Beyond, A Sys tems Approach," r e p o r t of the Transpor ta t ion Workshop, Be rna rd A. Schriever and William W. Seifert, co-chairman, 1967.

5. "Some Views on Civil Aeronautical Resea rch and Development," a spec ia l AIAA r e p o r t consisting of working pape r s developed for the use of the ASEB, F e b r u a r y 1, 1968.

B . General

1. "The Jumbo Je t and Public Safety, J e rome Lede re r , Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Apr i l 1968.

2 . "Global Air T ranspor t Accident Stat is t ics ," A. M. Les t e r , ICAO Bulletin, J anua ry 1967.

3. "Unresolved Civil Aeronautics P rob lems , " Walter Tye, Journal of the Aerospace Sciences.

4. FAA Air T ra f f i c Activity, Calendar Year 1967, pub- l ished by the Depar tment of Transportat ion, F e d e r a l Avia- tion Administration, F e b r u a r y 1968.

2 6 Appendixe s

5. ItHow the Airplane Designer Can Help the People in the Cockpit," George S. Schai rer , p resented to the Society of Automotive Engineers , New York, Apri l 26, 1967.

6. "Flight Safety in the New J e t E r a , " Norber t E. Rowe, Astronautics and Aeronautics, September 1966.

7. "Annual Review of U.S. Gene ra l Aviation Accidents," National Transpor ta t ion Safety Board, Depar tment of T rans - portation, November 1967.

8. "How Safe is Air T r a v e l ? " F r a n k Leary, Space/ Aeronautics , May 1968.

9. "Survival in the Air Age," a r e p o r t by the P r e s i - den t ' s Air Policy Commission, January 1, 1948.

10. "Long Range Planning for the Air Traff ic System," Radio Technical Commiss ion for Aeronautics, M a r c h 17, 1967, DO 135.

11. "The United States Supersonic Transpor t - A P r o g r e s s Report ," John M. Swihart, The Boeing Company, AIAA paper No. 67- 750.

12. "Kelly Johnson on the Future ," Technical Informa- tion Service, AIAA.

13. RTCA Annual Report, 1967.

14. RTCA - Air Traff ic System - Cur ren t Air Traff ic Control P r o b l e m s and Recommended Improvement P r o g r a m , June 1963, 54-63/DO 120.

15. "Policy Planning fo r Aeronautical Re s e a r c h and Development," a staff r epo r t by the Legislat ive Reference Service, L i b r a r y of Congress, fo r the Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, May 19, 1966, Doc. No. 90.

16. "Aeronautical R e s e a r c h and Development Policy, I t

hear ings before the Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, January 25 - 26, F e b r u a r y 27, 1967.

Bibliography 27

17. "Science, Technology, and Publ ic Pol icy During the 89th Congress ," a r e p o r t of the Subcommittee on Science, Resea rch , and Development of the House Com- mi t t ee on Science and Astronautics , 90th Congress , Serial G.

18. "Technology Assessment , " a s ta tement by Emi l io Q. Daddario, Chai rman of Subcommittee on Science, Re- s ea rch , and Development of the House Commit tee on Science and Astronautics , 90th Congress , Se r i a l I.

19. S ta t i s t ica l Handbook of Aviation, FAA, 1966.

20. Gene ra l Aviation, A Study and F o r e c a s t of the F l e e t and I t s Use in 1975, FAA, Ju ly 1966.

21. Aviation Fo recas t s , F i s c a l Y e a r s 1967-1977, FAA, January 1967.

22. Aviation Demand and Ai rpo r t Fac i l i ty Requi rement F o r e c a s t s fo r L a r g e Ai r Transpor ta t ion Hubs Through 1980, FAA, August 1967. -

23. "Transpor ta t ion F a c t s and Trends ," Transpor ta t ion Associat ion of Amer ica , F i f th Edition, Apr i l 1968.

24. A i r T r a n s p o r t F a c t s and F igu re s , 1967, Air T ranspor t Associat ion.

25. "Maintenance of an Adequate A i rpo r t System," hear ings before the Aviation Subcommittee, Senate Com- mi t t ee on Commerce , 90th Congress , August 28-31, 1967.

26. The National A i rpo r t System, In te r im Report , Aviation Subcommittee, Senate Committee on Commerce , January 23, 1967.

27. "Aeronautical R e s e a r c h and Development Policy," r e p o r t of the Committee on Aeronaut ica l and Space Sciences, United S ta tes Senate, J anua ry 31, 1968.

Documents

Civil Aviation Research Development · civil aviation, including systems and the specific areas of flight vehicles, aircraft operations, air traffic control, airport and support facilities,