1. Research and Development
Visual Guidance
Research and Development
Presented to: 33rd Annual Eastern Region Airport Conference
By: Donald Gallagher, Program Manager
Date: March 2010

2. Airport Safety Technology R&D
Wildlife Hazard Mitigation Program
Hazards Management, Bird Detection Radar
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Program (ARFF)
Agents, Vehicles
New Large Aircraft Program (NLA)
Airport Issues Concerning NLA
Airport Design Program
Airport Design
Airport Planning Program
Terminal Design Guidelines, Multimodal Access
Airport Surface Operations Program
Runway Friction, Soft Ground Arrestor System, Runway Deicing
Visual Guidance Program
Lighting, Marking, Signing

3. Phasing out Incandescent Lamps
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
Begins to phases out incandescent and halogen incandescent lamps in 2012
Department of Energy (DOE) within five years is mandated to create an LED replacement for the PAR Type 38 halogen light
Probably will not be compatible with MALSR voltage levels
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is available at:

5. Issues with Implementing LED Technology
Claim: LEDs can not be seen as well as Incandescent lights in low visibility?
True or False?
FALSE!
Any source with the same Candela value can be seen the same in a given visibility.
Except…

6. Perceived Brightness
There is a quantifiable “Brightness/Luminance” (B/L) conversion factor with LEDs.
Conversion to Incandescent:
Blue B/L = 1.4
White B/L = 1.6
Green B/L = 1.4
However, light scattered by Fog can desaturate LED signal colors reducing or eliminating the brightness advantage.

7. Issues with Implementing LED Technology
Incandescent & LED Lights at same intensity observed from 100 feet.
Observers noted that the Incandescent lost the GREEN appearance early.

8. Issues with Implementing LED Technology
Incandescent & LED Lights at same intensity observed from 100 feet.
LED light still has GREEN appearance.

9. LED Applications Issues
Chromaticity Boundary for Aviation White
Preliminary results for Aviation White Chromaticity Boundary Changes:
Yellow boundary could be moved from x=.540 to .440 which will help limit confusion between white and yellow signal colors.
Blue boundary could be moved from x=.350 to .320 which will allow a more bluish white (CCT up to 6000 Kelvin) while not contributing to confusion between white and blue signal colors.
To match CIE S004 for LED binning:
Green boundary y= x to x.
Purple boundary y= x to x. .

10. Shift
Shift
Shift

11. LED Applications Issues
Does the “narrow spectral band” of LED impact pilots with certain types of color deficient vision?
CIVIL AEROSPACE MEDICAL INSTITUTE (CAMI) and Airport Safety Technology R&D (AJP-6311) are currently conducting an evaluation on this issue sponsored by the Lighting Systems Office, AJW-46 and Office of Airport Safety and Standards, AAS-1

12. Electrical Infrastructure Research Team (EIRT)
A team of FAA and Industry experts formed to design an Airport Lighting Infrastructure to take full advantage of new lighting technologies.

13. Electrical Infrastructure Research Team (EIRT)
Goals
A system that promotes interoperability.
Reduced life cycle cost without dependence upon a single source.
A standards-based, robust architecture airfield lighting system.

14. Electrical Infrastructure Research Team (EIRT)
Held 4TH meeting in Atlantic City Nov
Circuits considered so far:
450 V, AC Parallel Circuit
1.4 Amp, DC Series Circuit
2.8 Amp, AC Series Circuit
PWM, DC Series Circuit

15. Elevated Runway Guard Lights

16. Minimum intensity for Incandescent Runway Guard Lights (RGL)
Prior to 1996, the minimum luminous intensity requirement was 600 cd
Increased to 3000 cd based on results from 1996 study
Flash rate was also increased from 30 cycles per minute to cycles per minute
Study looked at 30, 48 & 60 flashes per minute 16

17. Elevated Runway Guard Light Evaluation (ERGL)
Laboratory study completed 6/08.
Scope:
Min. intensity for Incandescent Lamps and LEDs
Recommendations for flash frequency for LED system
Recommendations for duty cycle for LED system
Impact of waveform profile shape for LED system

18. Findings
It is not recommended that the current incandescent-based ERGL specification be changed.
LED ERGL intensities could be reduced.

19. Recommendations LED ERGL Step Current Standard Recommended Value
3000 cd cd
Step 1 (10%)
300 cd cd
These values can be obtained by a combination of a selecting a square wave signal, flash rate, and on-time percentage.
The best flash rates & on-time percentages were:
% or %

20. Field testing to begin Spring 2010.
Moving Forward
Prototype units are be built for field testing with the following features:
A square wave signal.
Selectable flash rates & on-time percentages of % and %.
1,000 candela.
Field testing to begin Spring 2010.

21. Markings

22. Retro-reflective Media for Marking Materials
3 Tasks
Ground based testing of Type I, III, IV approved beads and 2 new beads:
Bead with dry-performing (1.7 IOR) and wet performing (2.3 IOR) microcrystalline ceramic beads embedded on a center core.
Bead with Premium (1.9 IOR) glass beads and a solid glass bead core.
Completed 12/09.

23. Retro-reflective Media for Marking Materials
3 Tasks (con’t)
Airborne test to determine the relative conspicuity of Type I and Type III retro-reflective beads. - Completed 12/09.
Airborne test of Type I and Type III beads installed side by side for direct comparison of conspicuity. Completed 12/09.

24. Retro-reflective Media for Marking Materials
Findings – Ground Based
All retro reflective beads tested proved suitable for use on aged Hot Mix Asphalt and aged Portland Cement Concrete.
Proposed new beads A and B proved suitable on aged Hot Mix Asphalt and aged Portland Cement Concrete.
Paint marking materials and included beads do not perform well on new Hot Mix Asphalt as airports typically can not afford to wait the appropriate curing time.

25. Retro-reflective Media for Marking Materials
Findings – Airborne
The majority of subjects involved in the tests at both ACY and SAV stated they do not use runway markings as a visual cue on approach to the runway at night.
The predominate visual cues they focus on during the approach to a runway are the runway lights.
All but one of the subjects reported no difference in ease of detection between Type I and Type III beaded markings.

26. Automatic Switching technologies for Rwy Centerline Lights in a Displaced Threshold
The FAA Advisory Circular AC 150/ D “Design and Installation details for Airport Visual Aids” states:
“For displaced threshold areas over 700 feet (100m) in length and used for takeoffs, the centerline lights in the displaced area are circuited separately from the centerline lights in the non-displaced runway area to permit turning “off” the centerline lights in the displaced area during landing operations.”
Teterboro Airport has this issue on both ends of runway 1/19.
Air Traffic Control are indisposed to operating the interlock switch that manually controls the centerline lights.

27. Project Objectives
Evaluate and determine the feasibility of using varied surveillance technologies and safety logic to automate the activation/deactivation of Runway Centerline Lighting in a displaced threshold to support takeoff/landing operations.
Install and optimize the preferred technology at Teterboro Airport (TEB)

28. Proposed Solution Architecture
State
Machine
Light Activation
Logic
Surveillance
Device
Evaluation
Display
Field Lighting
System
Surveillance of the area of interest is derived from a surveillance device. Operational state of the traffic is estimated by the state machine. Light activation logic determines if centerline lights should be activated. Traffic and light states are shown on evaluation display. Light commands are sent to field lighting system.

29. General Aviation For non-part 139 airports
Lighting small airports that do not qualify for AIP funds.
“COMMUNITY SERVICE AIRPORT LIGHTING HANDBOOK” posted on Illuminating Engineering Societies Aviation Lighting Committee's (IESALC) web site.

30. Signs

31. Holding Position Signs for Runway Approach Areas
ATO is in the process of revising their current procedure, which does not require pilots to obtain a specific clearance to cross these holding positions.
In the revised procedures Pilots will now be required to obtain specific clearance to pass any holding position.

32. Holding Position Signs for Runway Approach Areas
The RSO has identified a potential risk of runway incursions due to pilot confusion at the holding position marking and signs for a runway approach.
ATO would like to retain their current practice -therefore a different signage and/or marking may be required.

33. Holding Position Signs for Runway Approach Areas

34. Standard Mandatory Sign
When Hold is Required
15 - APCH

35. When Hold is Not Required
Sign changes Color
When Hold is Not Required
15 - APCH

36. Non-Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) Components on Performance of Certified OEM Lighting Systems
Scope of Work:
Purchase certified OEM lighting devices and non-OEM replacement components and subject the devices to certification tests.
Phase I: Individual components replaced. – Completion 3/10.
Phase II: Components replaced in combination. – Completion 7/10.

37. Low-Cost Ground Surveillance Specification Development

38. and improving capacity and resource utilization
Mission
To enhance airport operations by improving safety, shared situational awareness & environmental impact, reducing airport operating costs
and improving capacity and resource utilization
The LCGS Project Scope
Develop FAA functional and operational standards for LCGS implementation that would support AIP eligibility for this system.
Provide the foundational capability to support other runway safety improvements (e.g. RWSL, dynamic stop bar automation, …).
Develop a cost-benefits case for the use of Low Cost Ground Surveillance Systems for airport operations.

39. LCGS Challenge
Of over 460 towered airports in the NAS only 35 of the larger airports have or are slated to receive comprehensive surface surveillance systems (i.e. ASDE-X).
Many of the excluded small to mid-sized airports have considerable surveillance needs that are not being met.
Surveillance capacity is limited to voice reporting and field of view
Many of today’s airports struggle with the challenge of improving operational efficiency and maximizing revenue growth opportunities.

40. LCGS High Level Concept
The currently developed LCGS solution is centered on the use of a Surface Movement Radar (SMR) to monitor ground traffic movements.
SMR inherently presents some deficiencies (loss of target due to masking, plot clutter due to rain or grass reflection, flight label overlap, etc.) which renders the surveillance function less effective and could result in a lack of confidence in the system.
SMR technology is characterized by high maintenance and lifecycle costs.

41. LCGS High Level Concept
Researching existing technology the framework recommended for an LCGS system is the coupling of a network of non-cooperative (i.e. optical and thermal devices) sensors and a Mode S multilateration system.
This will provide the most flexible and modular framework for the smaller airports as multilateration systems can be easily adapted to smaller coverage areas with complex layouts and no vertical extension.
This network design would provide several levels of redundancy which would translate into continuous operational availability and coverage.

42. Status
Concluded final preliminary study on strengths, limitations and cost effectiveness of prospective systems.
Conducting site visits to deployment locations of prospective systems.
Work in concert with the Advanced Technologies Development & Prototyping Group (AJP-67) at the three approved test sites of San Jose Airport (SJC), Long Beach Airport (LGB) and Manchester-Boston Regional Airport (MHT).
- Test candidate systems against predefined functional requirements.
- Evaluate operational feasibility of candidate systems.

43. Ground Vehicle Navigation System Specification Development

44. Background
Scope
Evaluate current technology, including by not necessarily limited to, GPS navigation devices for use in preventing runway incursions.

45. Objectives
Provide recommendations for criteria for the design and operation of airport vehicle navigation systems defining both mandatory and optional features.
Provide cost estimates for the procurement of equipment.

47. Visual Display – “Brick”

48. Visual Display - Laptop

49. Group Brainstorm Session
System CAN NOT… Give directions
ATC
Personal Airport Familiarization
Situational Awareness Tool

50. Vertical Flight Current Facility Final Approach & TakeOff (FATO) area
Touchdown & Lift Off (TLOF) area
Final Approach & TakeOff (FATO) area
Heliport Approach Lighting System (HALS) for IMC
Heliport Instrument Landing System (HILS) for IMC
Heliport Approach Path Indicator (CHAPI)
Current Facility

51. Vertical Flight
Conducting photometric tests on products being sold as heliport perimeter lights.
Intensity
Beam spread
Chromaticity
Currently conducting flight test
To determine if a suitable candidate exists.

52. Site Selected Delaware River Bay Authority Cape May County Airport
Cape May County Airport( KWWD)
Cape May County Airport
Delaware River Bay Authority

53. Site Selected Runway 10/28 - 4,998 x 150 ft.
Cape May County Airport( KWWD)
Cape May County Airport( KWWD)

54. New Visual Guidance Technology Test Bed
Will be conducted in three phases funded over a three year period.
Phase 1:
To be Completed:
Layout plan.
Schedule of installation.
Begin refurbishment of unused runway pavement.
Begin electrical infrastructure installation.
Currently developing an MOA with the Delaware River and Bay Authority (DRBA) for the use of Cape May Airport.

55. Questions or Comments? www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov
- Program Manager
- Project Manager
- Project Manager
- Project Manager
FAA Technical Center
Airport Safety Technology R&D Section
AJP-6311, AAR-411, Building 296
Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405