In order to lend some
clarity and background to the on-going media discussion (as a
result of the tragic accident involving SWA 1248 at Chicago's
Midway airport) of the nation's elder airports and shorter runways,
the following FAA Data Sheet on EMAS is presented for your
education...
Background
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires that
commercial airports, regulated under Part 139 safety rules, have a
standard Runway Safety Area (RSA) where possible. At most
commercial airports the standard RSA is 500 feet wide and extends
1000 feet beyond each end of the runway. The FAA has this
requirement in the event that an aircraft overruns, undershoots, or
veers off the side of the runway. The most dangerous of these
incidents are overruns, but since many airports were built before
the 1000-foot extension was adopted some 20 years ago, the area
beyond the end of the runway is where many airports cannot achieve
the full standard RSA. This is due to obstacles such as bodies of
water, highways, railroads and populated areas or severe drop-off
of terrain.
The FAA has a high-priority program to enhance safety by
upgrading the RSAs at commercial airports and provide federal
funding to support those upgrades. However, it still may not be
practical for some airports to achieve the standard RSA. The FAA,
knowing that it would be difficult to achieve a standard RSA at
every airport, began conducting research in the 1990s to determine
how to ensure maximum safety at airports where the full RSA cannot
be obtained. Working in concert with the University of Dayton, the
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and the Engineered
Arresting Systems Corporation (ESCO) of Ashton, PA, a new
technology emerged to provide an added measure of safety. An
Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS) uses materials of
closely controlled strength and density placed at the end of a
runway to stop or greatly slow an aircraft that overruns the
runway. The best material found to date is a lightweight, crushable
concrete. When an aircraft rolls into an EMAS arrestor bed, the
tires of the aircraft sink into the light concrete and the aircraft
is decelerated by having to roll through the material.
Benefits of the EMAS Technology
The EMAS technology
provides safety benefits in cases where land is not available or
where it would be very expensive for the airport sponsor to buy the
land off the end of the runway.
The EMAS technology also provides an added measure of safety at
airports where it is not possible to have the standard 1,000-foot
overrun. This technology is now in place at 14 airports with
installation under contract at four additional airports.
A standard EMAS installation extends 600 feet from the end of
the runway. An EMAS arrestor bed can still be installed to help
slow or stop an aircraft that overruns the runway, even if less
than 600 feet of land is available.
The Office of Airports plans to conclude its RSA inventory of
runways at the approximately 575 commercial airports by the end of
2005. This inventory will allow the agency to determine which
airports can benefit from the EMAS technology and to direct federal
funds to RSA upgrades at those airports.
Presently, the system using crushable concrete is the only
system that meets the FAA standard.
EMAS Arrestments
To date, there have
been three incidents where the technology has worked successfully
to keep aircraft from overrunning the runway and in several cases
has prevented injury to passengers and damage to the aircraft:
- May 1999: A Saab 340 commuter aircraft overran the runway at
JFK
- May 2003: Gemini Cargo MD-11 was safely decelerated at JFK
- January 2005: A Boeing 747 overran the runway at JFK
EMAS Installations
Currently, EMAS is installed at 18 runway ends at 14 airports in
the United States. With plans to install four additional EMAS
systems at four more airports.
Airport Location
|
#of Systems
|
Installation Date
|
JFK International Jamaica, NY
|
1
|
1996
|
Minneapolis St. Paul Minneapolis, MN |
1
|
1999
|
Little Rock Little Rock, AR |
2
|
2000/2003
|
Rochester International Rochester, NY |
1
|
2001
|
Burbank Burbank, CA |
1
|
2002
|
Baton Rouge Metropolitan Baton Rouge, LA |
1
|
2002
|
Greater Binghamton Binghamton, NY |
2
|
2002
|
Greenville Downtown Greensville, SC |
1
|
2003
|
Barnstable Municipal Hyannis, MA |
1
|
2003
|
Roanoke Regional Roanoke, VA |
1
|
2004
|
Ft Lauderdale Int'l Fort Lauderdale, FL |
2
|
2004
|
Dutchess County Poughkeepsie, NY |
1
|
2004
|
LaGuardia Flushing, NY |
2
|
2005
|
Boston Logan Boston, MA |
1
|
2005
|
Additional Projects Currently Under
Contract
|
|
Location
|
# of Systems
|
Expected Installation Date
|
San Diego, CA |
1
|
Spring 2006
|
Charleston, WV |
1
|
Summer 2006
|
Laredo, TX
|
1
|
Spring 2006
|
Cordova, TX |
1
|
Summer 2006
|