The FAA and other members of the aviation community have developed new standards to improve safety at U.S. airports during inclement weather.
On October 1, 2016, U.S. airports, airline flight crews, dispatchers, general aviation pilots, and air traffic controllers will begin using new Takeoff and Landing Performance Assessment (TALPA) standards to reduce the risk of runway overrun accidents and incidents due to runway contamination caused by weather and other factors.
The FAA developed the standards based on the work of the Takeoff and Landing Performance Assessment (TALPA) Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), which was formed after the December 2005 overrun accident at Chicago Midway Airport. In that accident, Southwest Flight 1248 ran off the end of the runway and into a city street after landing during a snowstorm.
Water, snow, ice, and slush on runways and taxiways can create hazardous conditions for aircraft. (FAA photo)
As a result of the committee’s work, the FAA has developed a new method for airports and air traffic controllers to communicate actual runway conditions to the pilots in terms that directly relate to the way a particular aircraft is expected to perform.
TALPA improves the way the aviation community assesses runway conditions, based on contaminant type and depth, which provides a pilot with the information to anticipate airplane braking performance, according to FAA officials.
The Runway Condition Assessment Matrix (RCAM) will categorize runway conditions and pilots will use it to interpret reported runway conditions.
The RCAM is presented in a standardized format, based on airplane performance data supplied by airplane manufacturers, for each of the stated contaminant types and depths.
The RCAM replaces subjective judgments of runway conditions with objective assessments tied directly to contaminant type and depth categories, FAA officials explained.
Photo courtesy FreeImages.com/Cee Lee
For example, using today’s assessment process, a runway that is covered with 2 inches of dry snow would be reported as “FICON 2IN DRY SN OBSERVED AT 1601010139. 1601010151-1601020145” along with Mu values as “TAP MU 29/27/29 OBSERVED AT 1601010139. 1601010151-1601020145.
A Mu number describes a braking co-efficient of friction.
Starting Oct. 1, 2016, the same NOTAM with contaminants would be reported using Runway Conditions Codes as follows:
DEN RWY 17R FICON (5/5/3) 25 PRCT 1/8 IN DRY SN, 25 PRCT 1/8 IN DRY SN, 50 PRCT 2 IN DRY SN OBSERVED AT 1601010139. 1601010151-1601020145
The pilot or dispatcher would then consult the aircraft manufacturer data to determine what kind of stopping performance to expect from the specific airplane they are operating.
The airport operator will assess surfaces, report contaminants present, and determine the numerical Runway Condition Codes (RwyCC) based on the RCAM. The RwyCCs may vary for each third of the runway if different contaminants are present. However, the same RwyCC may be applied when a uniform coverage of contaminants exists.
RwyCCs will replace Mu numbers, which will no longer be published in the FAA’s Notice to Airman (NOTAM) system, according to FAA officials.
Pilot braking action reports will continue to be used to assess braking performance.
Beginning Oct. 1, the terminology “Fair” will be replaced by “Medium.”
It will no longer be acceptable for an airport to report a NIL braking action condition. NIL conditions on any surface require the closure of that surface. These surfaces will not be opened until the airport operator is satisfied that the NIL braking condition no longer exists.
I applaud the FAA for coming up with new runway reporting conditions. Great.
Now just please use plain English on all the reports and skip all the abbreviations.
The old days of the teletype are long gone and we no longer need all those abbreviation’s and contractions, It’s 2016 guys not 1949. Please think about it. It would really make flying safer and landings.
So some hot climate fair weather country based A380 (politically?) reports NIL on the last 1000 feet of a 13,000 runway, …for that portion of the runway, ….which hasn’t even been used in hours by any other jet aircraft, ….and then the local Dash 8s, 737s (or maybe even a C172) that plan to land well with the first 5000 feet of that runway with BAFG, or using reverse thrust, then have to divert, because of some absurd FAA policy, formulated by some FAA and airport specialist, who has likely never even seen a slippery runway up close from the inside of an aircraft, now forcing that policy to be applied to the airport??? This is nuts. FAA has lost it.